pager, thank you. it is remarkable, the home of a former president searched last night by fbi agents. we're going to have continuing coverage of this all day on msnbc and certainly on "morning joe" coming right up. thanks for getting up with us "way too early" on this tuesday morning. "morning joe" right now. i have never been a quitter, to leave office before my term is completed is abhorrent to every instinct in my body. but as president, i must put the interests of america first. therefore, i shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. the vice president will be sworn in at that hour in this office. >> august 8th, 1974, remembered as the day richard nixon resigned from office. now, 48 years later, donald trump becomes the first

ex-president to have the fbi execute a search warrant on his home. trump posted just before 7:00 p.m. last night that mar-a-lago was, quote, currently under siege, raided and occupied by a large group of fbi agents. adding, quote, they even broke into my safe. a source familiar with the search tells nbc news the investigation is related to the transfer of classified government documents from the white house to mar-a-lago. the national archives reported in february that 15 boxes of documents were improperly taken to the president's florida estate when he left office. at the time, the agency said it had asked the justice department to investigate. a source familiar with the situation tells nbc news, boxes of documents were seized during yesterday's fbi search. trump's attorney released a statement claiming the former president and his legal team have been cooperative with the

fbi and doj, quote, every step of the way. trump slammed the search as, quote, prosecutorial misconduct, the weaponization of the justice system, and an attack by radical left democrats who desperately don't want me to run for president in 2024. >> actually, they do. because if you run, democrats know they'll win. so you have that wrong, too. i'm sorry, mika. go ahead. >> the former president was in new york city at the time of the search as he prepares to be deposed in the state's civil case against the trump organization. he left trump tower last night without commenting. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is tuesday, august 9th. joe, want to hear your thoughts off the bat, but keeping in mind, i believe, the head of the fbi was appointed by trump. >> yeah, called him a great guy. a man of the highest integrity.

just like all these people that are testifying against donald trump in the january 6th hearings, they're all trumpers. the guy running the fbi, a trumper, appointed bid donald trump. these aren't left wing democrats. it's interesting, vladimir putin, he doesn't believe in the rule of law. xi doesn't, you know, laughs at the idea of the rule of law. orban, the hero of right-wing freaks in america, he doesn't believe in the rule of law. they all systematically work to break down the rule of law, just like donald trump. the only problem is that we americans, we still believe that no man is above the law. we still believe in the rule of law. that's why donald trump is under investigation right now in georgia for trying to steal an

election. it's why the doj is investigating donald trump for leading a failed -- of course failed, because you'll notice i used the words "donald trump" at the beginning of the sentence. donald trump is under investigation for leading a failed, fascist coup against the united states on january 6th. he is also under investigation for seizing classified documents from the white house after he left and taking them down to mar-a-lago. which is very rich, the irony of it all. the "lock her up" chants because of some emails that may have been classified later. but donald trump, he grabbed classified documents, put them in boxes, and fled for mar-a-lago. the ones he didn't tear up and flush down toilets. the ones he didn't tear up and destroy and throw in garbage cans. the evidence he didn't destroy. you see, yesterday, it was that

last possible crime that donald trump committed that brought the fbi lawfully and legally to donald trump's front doors, as they tried to find those documents, tried to get to the bottom of all of this, with legal search warrants. again, legal search warrants, that's what's so fascinating here. you had people last night screeching on other networks, these other networks that have been attacking our men and women in uniform, that have been attacking the fbi since donald trump came to office. they love the fbi until, well, they started supporting a man who broke laws, who has contempt for the law, who believes he is above the law. well, this morning, august 9th, 2022, we are reminded again

that, in america, no man is above the law. we're going to break down all the angles to this story, the political implications with former rnc chairman michael steele and national affairs analyst john heilemann. the historical significance with mike barnicle and historian michael beschloss. michael barnacle was in the gallery, by the way, during the andrew johnson -- attempted andrew johnson impeachment. >> correct. >> yup. >> the latest on the investigation itself with official chuck rosenberg. also congressional investigations reporter for "the washington post," jackie alemany. first, let's go to palm beach florida. we have correspondent kerry sanders. what can you tell us this morning? >> reporter: good morning. right now, everything is dark.

you can see over my shoulder mar mar-a-lago. few lights on. the secret service, which is on the property now, was also on the property yesterday, and they were notified before the fbi arrived. the fbi arrived with a -- well, as it was described, as a raid. that was described by the former president himself. the fbi agents arriving in the morning and spending much of the day there. now, it is important to note that this was a search warrant, but that search warrant has not been made public yet. we don't know which judge signed the search warrant. typically, what would happen is, attempts back and forth to get access to information and documents would have reached a critical level to get to the point of a search warrant. the judge would have had good, probable cause to believe that the fbi agents could go on the property and find specific things that they are looking for.

apparently, looking for documents that the national archives says are missing and that they know should be returned. when the fbi arrived and during the search, there were representatives from the trump lawyers representing trump that were there monitoring all of this. typically, in a situation like this, especially because this is so unprecedented and historic, the fbi would have been likely videotaping, taing pictures to document what they were doing. at the same time, there was a security system there, so there will be video that the mar-a-lago security system has. none of that has been released. the department of justice would very unlikely release any video. what the ex-president would do here, what the former president might do here, very different. now, as this is all taking place, there is a big question. what's in that search warrant? we may, assuming it's not under seal, we may get some

information today when the courts open up today and we can go look at that public document. but it is important to note here that, as far back as february, when the 15 boxes of documents were returned to the national archives, that there was a sort of destruction. in some cases, the destruction talked able what was there. inok inknock louse inoculus things like menus and things, but others were top secret nature, because to even describe it would reveal the nature of the top secret documents. what the grand jury has been looking into, from what we understand here, is that there are these documents that should have been returned and have not been returned. as you can imagine, overnight, there was a group of trump

supporters who gathered out here to show their support, waving some trump flags with their show of support. no real problems associated with that, just a general sense that they believe this has all become a result of some sort of political agenda by democrats. now, the reason we know about this raid is because the former president sent out a note advising what had taken place. it was 340 words. it was put on his save america pac. here's some of the things he had to say. it is prosecutorial misconduct, the weaponization of the justice system, and an attack by radical left democrats who desperately don't want me to run for president in 2024. he went on to say, "what is the difference between this and watergate, where operatives broke into the democratic national committee? here in reverse, democrats broke into the home of the 45th

president of the united states. such an assault could only take place in broken third-world countries." i'll sort of leave it at this point. one thing he said was, "they even broke into my safe." guys? >> heartbreaking. nbc's kerry sanders, thank you so much. greatly appreciate it. by the way, it wasn't democrats who broke in, it was the fbi. the same fbi who probably handed donald trump the presidency with their investigation of hillary clinton's emails, press conferences where they said that she was politically guilty but probably not legally guilty, reopening investigations ten days before. yeah, it's that same fbi that even donald trump would say helped him get elected president of the united states. chuck rosenberg, let's not be distracted by, well, the lies that donald trump and his supporters are spreading right now. let's just talk about the law. what's it mean?

if you have the fbi going in and searching the home and the business of a former president, how serious is this? >> yeah, let's not be distracted, joe. it is very serious. first of all, let me point out, two branches of government are involved in this decision, right? you wouldn't let a pitcher call balls and strikes. it wouldn't make sense. so the justice department here, its prosecutors and fbi agents, go to the judicial branch of government, to what the supreme court called a neutral and detached magistrate, and ask her to review the search warrant and sign it. once she does, you are lawfully permitted into someone's home, into their business, into their hotel room, wherever the search warrant might permit you to enter. so it's all legal. it's all lawful. it's not a raid. they didn't -- they're not there improperly or unlawfully. is it a big deal in of course

it is a big deal. we don't know it'll result in charges or if anyone will be convicted as a result, but this is unprecedented. we've never searched the home of a former president. we only did it because we had probable cause to believe a crime had been committed. this is the fourth amendment standard, and probably cause to believe you're going to find stuff related to that crime, evidence, in the place you've asked to search. very big deal, unprecedented, but done lawfully and properly through a neutral and detached judge in another branch of government. this is not the fbi on its own deciding where to go and what to do. >> chuck, i understand that the level, the degree of seriousness higher, the standard is higher for federal courts when they issue these sort of search warrants in a lot of state courts, is that true? >> well, the fourth amendment applies to state and federal courts, joe, right? fourth amendment is the fourth amendment is the fourth amendment. it is based on probable cause.

i can tell you this, this would have been the most fly-spec avid affidavit in the department of justice. it will have been reviewed over and over. you have to convince a federal judge you have probable cause. in this case, it was a federal judge in federal court authorizing a federal search warrant. whether you're in state or federal court, it's the same fourth amendment and the same probable cause standard. >> michael beschloss, we spent the last five, six years talking about all of the historic moments that have happened, most of them negative. talking about how constitutional norms have been breached, how laws have likely being breached, how a president who lost his election for the first time calls the secretary of state and gives the secretary of state the number of votes that he needs stolen for him so he can win the state of georgia. we can go on and on and on. yesterday, though, another

first. of course, we've been -- we got a tip of the hand maybe from merrick garland who, a few weeks ago, got quite frustrated with reporters, saying, no man is above the law. doesn't matter whether he is a former president or not. i don't know how many times i have to tell you that. i'm curious, your thoughts as a historian, seeing this take place, especially on the anniversary of richard nixon's resignation. >> well, that anniversary, of course, is just as ironic as it could be, but you can almost hear donald trump in his bedroom this morning, pounding on the bedroom door, screaming, "unfair." it's not unfair. mar-a-lago was a probable crime scene. just as chuck was saying, you know, those fbi agents didn't go there because they wanted to swim in the pool. they were doing it because there is something serious happening -- that may have happened there, that may have damaged the security of all of us and our families.

let's say it was violating the presidential records act, as it may have been. security classified documents brought to mar-a-lago that should not have been brought there. this is not like a fine for an overdue library book. this is not just making sure there is a menu of some dinners so historians like me can write about this years from now. this is all of our security. you know, i'm trying to imagine what it might have been, but if we're not even told what these documents were, they could be a document that has information on our nuclear codes, or another document that might list the names of cia agents in another country, or a document that shows how the federal government is going after organized crime organizations, and it's not for donald trump to sell these things, to share these things with others. if he does, it puts all of us in jeopardy. the other thing, you were talking about richard nixon. presidential records act was

passed in 1978. that was in response to nixon. as, you know, you and mika -- as i'm sure mika does from studying ancient history, and you do, too, joe -- that in nixon's case, nixon made a deal with gerald ford, who had good intentions but was a little clueless about how diabolical nixon could be. the deal was that nixon's famous tapes and papers would be flown to california, put in a vault, the archives would get a key and nixon could get a key and destroy embarrassing or incriminating evidence that was in the vault. congress found out about those things. in those days, congress knew the difference between right and wrong. even republicans said, this is a terrible thing. no president should do this, especially the president of watergate. they passed this presidential records law to say that no

future president can just decide, you know, i'll take some documents out if i feel like it. >> yeah, i mean, speaking of congress, leaders in congress, back when actually the truth mattered, the law mattered, john heilemann, you had kevin mccarthy saying they were going to conduct their investigations and they better preserve their documents. this coming from a guy who sat by silently as the secret service destroyed their documents on january 5th and january 6th. the d.o.d. and trump administration destroyed their documents. you talk about orwellian. i would say orwellian for kevin mccarthy, but he thinks zorwel is a shortstop for the angels, so we'll move on. talk, john, about your thoughts about the raid, the historic nature of it and the political impact of it. >> well, you know, i can't be

more on point than michael beschloss is about this, about the historic nature of it. it is obviously one of those things that is, you know, like so many things in the era of trump, joe, shocking but not surprising. you heard this news last night, and, you know, can barely believe it, then as soon as you thought about it, you thought, okay, this isn't just -- it wasn't just inevitable on some level, but it's probably the beginning of a sequence of things like this, right? we know -- you went through in your opening read the number of places in which donald trump is under investigation, criminal liability in various jurisdictions and various venues. he's got headquarters in residence or business operations in a number of places, new york city, new jersey, in addition to mar-a-lago. you know, this was, in some ways, of all the things we think he is under investigation for, may have been the one that was the least likely in your mind,

if you heard trump had been raided. raid is obviously the wrong word here, but a search warrant had been executed and the fbi has shown up to look for evidence of a crime. on the list of things you think donald trump may have committed a crime on, this is one that might not have been at the top of your mind. >> john, that's a great point. >> how many more of these are -- >> great point. let me follow up on that. because records. this would be on one of the lowest levels when you have the doj obviously investigating an attempted fascist coup. >> right. >> does it suggest, perhaps, that the doj is just rounding everything up and getting their ducks in a row before they file charges against this guy? >> well, it may very well suggest that, joe. i'm not -- there are probably people with the background of working within the doj who have a better insight into that than i do. i certainly think it suggests

that, number one, it suggests that one question we now know the answer to, is merrick garland willing to go across the rubicon without regard to the rage of donald trump, without regard to the way in which the far right and trump's troops on the far right, who are screaming bloody murder on social media right now. we know last night that proud boys, oath keepers, others on the maga right are openly now talking on social media in their channels about not just the insurrection we saw on january 6th but about armed revolt, about civil war, about trying to take the country by force. we have no idea at this moment how seriously to take all of that, although i'd suggest we should take it very seriously, in the sense that we've already crossed a lot of lines in the world of political violence in the trump movement. so, you know, merrick garland, looking at all of that and the potential political consequences, which we don't

know, will this energize the right in the midterms? will it energize the part of the republican party that wants to be rid of donald trump? will it energize the left when they see kevin mccarthy previewing the kind of warfare that he's -- unprincipled, hypocritical, baseless warfare he is going to engage in if republicans take control of the house? the attorney general of the united states said, i don't care. i think there is probable cause of a crime here, and i'll go to a court and ask a court, as chuck laid out, to approve this warrant. i think that bodes very ill for donald trump. because anybody who thinks that -- now who thinks that merrick garland doesn't have the stomach for this fight, i think this is -- it's not prima fascia evidence he'll file charges against donald trump, but it is prima fascia evidence he will focus on the law. he said all along he will prosecute anybody involved in

the january 6th insurrection at any level. this is a smaller thing, yet he is willing to incur the political consequences and all that wrath. if i am donald trump, i am getting ready for raids at other locations, and i'm getting ready for a very rapid progress of the chain re -- not chain reaction, but you can imagine things happening very fast on a lot of fronts right now if this is the attitude merrick garland has toward this case. >> i think that is really great insight in terms of, like, this is just the beginning, and it's going to be -- they're going to be going over this with a fine-tooth comb. jckie alemany, you've been covering january 6th, and many people have already gone to jail due to what happened on january 6th at the capitol. what are your thought on this, given all of your knowledge of the investigation on the january 6th insurrection?

>> yeah, mika, well, it is something that sort of took us all by surprise. although, we have known for quite some time now, since we first broke the story in february, of the former president's improper handling of his presidential records, that there was a grand jury convened and the fbi was investigating it. that being said, they have since then kept this investigation under very, very tight wraps. so much so that we don't even know the federal judge that signed and executed and is overseeing this investigation and signed off on this search warrant. but this could have just as serious legal repercussions. as michael beschloss touched on briefly, even if there is just one portion or one page of classified information that was improperly handled, it could

cost the american government hundreds and millions of dollars, american lives, entire military operation. of course, it's still extremely unclear what exactly the fbi was looking for when they searched the former president's home yesterday, but what we know so far is that, based on the boxes that were already retrieved from mar-a-lago earlier this year, that, first of all, the former president was extremely hesitant to give the information up. there was extended back and forth between the national archives and trump's counsel about handing them over. and when an inventory was done, as we reported last night, there was over a 100-page inventory that details the unclassified information that was given over. if that inventory was done in the same manner for the classified information, we've been told it is around three pages of the unclassified

inventory of the classified information. because, of course, sometimes things are so classified that they need to be unclassified to be able to even just be described. >> all right. >> michael steele -- sorry, mika. michael steele, listening to this conversation this morning and surfing through the news last night and absorbing what happened yesterday in mar-a-lago, i'm wondering about the search warrant. first of all, when a search warrant is issued, it is my understanding, a federal search warrant, the items they're looking for have to be listed on the search warrant. it'll be interesting to get a peek at that, if and when they do release the search warrant. the second element is the anniversary of richard nixon's resignation from the presidency. epic moment in american history,

no doubt. the important point now that become, i think, more important with today's reality is that richard nixon, despite what he had done, despite his criminality, he left office. we are now in the middle of an extended administration, a forever administration, if you will. it will not go away. it does not go away. it's bbolstered, in part, by yor former party, joe's former party, the republican party. the rhetoric issued today, and as john heilemann pointed out, on social media, kevin mccarthy and a lot of other republicans indicting the justice department rather than focusing on the criminality of a former president of the united states. i'm wondering what you absorbed from yesterday. >> you know, the shock and awe of all of this doesn't really impact on me the way it has some

who are, you know, profoundly moved by the historic moment of it. certainly, it is important. what it says to me is -- and you really put your finger on several aspects of this, mike -- and one of them is how a party so craven and beholden, so out of step with reality and the american people, still clings desperately to a former, twice-impeached president of the united states who has been and continues to be under criminal investigation for his acts, his acts. we are here because donald trump has brought us here. yet, you have kevin mccarthy and others tripping over themselves to get in front of cameras to go after the justice department, the legal system. you have his minions out there

declaring, as our colleague and friend ben collins from nbc news is reporting, the dangerous rhetoric that is being fermented because of this, because of how trump talks about a raid on his home. no, man, it was no raid on your home. you were asked to deliver documents that didn't belong to you. they belong to the people of the united states through the federal government. you refused to turn those documents over. a duly developed and executed warrant was put in place, and agents came to your home to retrieve the documents. it's not complicated. because anybody on this set had done the same thing, the exact same result would have occurred. kevin mccarthy would not be in front of a -- you know, would not be putting out tweets and putting out papers talking, telling the justice department, you know, "get your act together, clear your calendar, we're going to investigate you,"

for doing their job. >> yeah. >> that part of this, for me, mike and joe and mika, are an essential element here. we've got to figure out how to work around it. because this thing that this gop represents under its current leadership is now increasingly more dangerous than it has ever been. that is profoundly important to understand right now. >> you know why, because they're fascists. like people that are making the threats, the people that helped donald trump on january 6th, the people that were talking about coming to d.c., that it was going to be crazy, that it was going to be wild, they were going to charge the capitol, they're fascists. so they're making fascist threats, and we need to do what the united states has always done, we need to confront fascism and defeat it. so everybody that's freaking out over fascists being fascists,

well, guess what? that's what fascists do. that's why we have law enforcement, to actually bring fascists to justice. so, please, don't run around with your hair on fire and say, "oh, my god, we can't actually enforce the laws of our land. we can't actually protect classified documents," because fascists may get upset on a tv show. it's what they do. it is interesting, michael steel, just like a week or two ago, because the attacks from the republicans on the fbi had stopped for a little while, i actually wrote something, thanking the fbi for their service to america and expressing shock that my former party had spent the past five years, after being staunch defenders of the fbi my entire adult life, trashing the fbi because they nominated somebody

who had so little respect for the rule of law. but here we are again. we've got republicans again slandering the fbi, just like we have republicans who claimed to support the blue. we fly flags supporting the blue and, yet, they trash capitol hill cops, accuse them of being actors, of being drama queens, when they almost died. several of them almost died, and a couple actually did die after january 6th. their families certainly think it's related. they attack cops on capitol hill when a fascist attempt to take over the capitol fails. they attack military heros, and they have for the past several years. they've attacked military heros and the head of america's military for not being sufficiently loyal to the fascist president in his attempt to launch a fascist takeover of american democracy.

fox news, my god, they even say -- fox news actually says that the united states military was going to bring helicopters from afghanistan, that they used on terrorists in afghanistan, to attack americans who voted for donald trump. this is where they are. >> yup. >> and the fact that people -- weak people are running around going, "what are we going to do? they're saying ugly things on fox news," what do you expect? like, this guy is going to be brought to justice. he has broken the law. everybody knows that. so why are they freaking out? i don't come from the obi-won kenobi school of political theory. strike trump down. if you break the law, you go to jail. >> yup. >> let me say it. in america, in america, and our

former republican brothers and sisters need to understand this, in america, even in the age of trump, no man is above the law. michael steele. >> amen, brother. i can't say it better than that. and i just put a cota on that, joe. this is the question for kevin mccarthy. so what is your response to the trump influencers, the trump acolytes, and the trump supporters out there who are tweeting, "tomorrow is war. sleep well"? if somebody comes on the heels of this, mr. mccarthy, because you've now tried to indict the fbi through your particular postings, telling them to get their -- you know, clear their calendars and keep all documents, well, they do. because unlike trump, they know what the law requires them to

do. they're not going to try to put this warrant in a box and a closet somewhere for no one to see. what is going to be your response if these idiots go out and start showing their behind and acting up in a violent manner? are you going to take responsibility then from your tweets and your posture? because that's what joe is talking about. because when you think you are above the law, or more importantly, support someone you believe to be above the law, this is the consequence and the result. so you don't get to walk away from this just because you put out a press release. you have maga world, "oh, great, wonderful, kevin. thank you, kevin." no, you are in leadership, dually elected, and you are responsible for the actions that come on the heels of your rhetoric, your actions, and trump and his supporters. you ready for that? because that's the america you're signing up for.

tomorrow is war. sleep well. >> wow. >> hey, michael beschloss, heilemann here. i'm thinking about all the things that joe and michael steele are talking about and looking for some historic precedent. because with respect to the republican party, right, i'm thinking about, you know, we've seen the ways -- i've been hesitant throughout the last months to talk about a gop civil war. it doesn't seem to me like, so far, we've seen a civil war. we've seen some fractures in donald trump's -- in the loyal to donald trump. we've certainly seen some parts of the republican party wanting to move on from donald trump. i do think that the more these kinds of things take place, the signs of trump's criminality become clearer, that, as joe says, if he has broken the law, we think probably he has, that consequences will be weeded out. as he stirs up and kevin mccarthy stirs up some of that kind of insurrectionist, violent

rhetoric we're seeing right now, there is going to be this pressure building on the republican coalition, those republicans who are, you know -- they might say they like donald trump, like what he did. they want to give him a gold watch, but they don't think he is the future of the party. there are those. we've seen that rising part of the party in recent months. that part is going to get more and more eager to move on, maybe without denouncing donald trump, but they want to move on to something else. then this other part of the party, this militant part of the party that really is talking about, you know, civil war and going and fightfighting, the fas who want to fight until the last dog dies for donald trump. historically, michael, talk about how parties break apart in these moments. what is it that pushes the -- how a party gets pushed past the breaking point and splinters, and what happens then? because i think, in some ways,

that is where we are inevitably going. i don't know exactly when, but it seems to be the trajectory that we're on, especially if donald trump's legal circumstances get worse, as it looks like they will. >> agreed. as you know, john, in 1974, richard nixon quit, to a great extent, because three republican leaders, goldwater, john rhodes, scott, went to the white house and said, "if there is a senate trial for your impeachment, you're not going to get more than 10 or 15 votes." his party leaders said, "party is not as important as the rule of law, richard nixon." what will probably divide republicans if this comes to past, there already traditional republicans who revere the rule of law, who are real conservatives, want to preserve our constitutions, and there are others who are radicals, like kevin mccarthy, who is behaving

like donald trump's ventriloquist's dummy, blessing anything he does and criticiing the government for carrying out the rule of law. conceivably, in two years, liz cheney could be the theodore roosevelt of 1912. run as an independent. divide republicans between those who say the rule of law is less important to me as donald trump and those who say the opposite. >> all right. chuck rosenberg, as we close out here, before we get to the news, i just want your final thoughts on where this stands right now and where you think this may proceed in the near future. obviously, we're waiting to see who the judge was and what, perhaps, the reasoning was for this. >> sure. that will be interesting. at some point, mika, the search warrant will be unsealed, and the inventory of what was taken will be filed in open court. we should look for that. here, i think, is an important thing to consider.

it's really easy, and somewhat cowardly, to attack a search warrant and the fbi on social media. if mr. trump and his minions think there is some flaw in the search warrant or flaw in the process, or the affidavit was improvidently granted, you know what they can do? go to court and challenge it. let's see if they actually go to court and challenge it. let me take that a step further. let's say they go to court, actually challenge it and prevail. because other than doing that, it's all just words. there is a place for redress. it's united states district court, federal court. if they think there is really a problem, that's where you articulate the problem and challenge the warrant. my guess is that they will not challenge it in court. if they do, my guess is they will not prevail. this was the most carefully drafted search warrant, i suppose, in department of justice history. and attacking it on social media is very different than attacking it in federal court. let's see what they do next.

>> you know, it's interesting, mika, this conversation is fascinating in many ways. one thing, as we look at mar-a-lago from overhead, what is so incredible is that you have all of these news organizations and politicians who understand that, right now, america is pouring over things that were said before january 6th. irresponsible, reckless statements that were made by political leaders, that were made by podcasters, that were made by cable news hosts, that were made by administration officials, that led to a fascist riot and an attempt to take over the united states of america. here you have, in the middle of all this, knowing how the story

ends, you once again have political leaders, cable news hosts, and people online who are fomenting violence. who are talking about civil war. who are talking about the possibility of an armed insurrection starting. it's from the usual suspects. they're at it again, despite the fact that one after another after another fascist, who tried to lead an insurrection or run an insurrection on january 6th, are spending time in jail. when will they ever learn? i guess never. i'm just curious, are you going to have, i don't know, media outlets who are already facing exposure, billion dollar exposure for spreading lies about the election and allowing

lies to be spread on their network about the insurrection, who are trying to brush off any responsibility for the fascist right on january 6th, are they really walking into yet another fascist trap? are they really enabling, once again? how will facebook react? how will twitter react? how will fox news react? how will other pro-trump tv channels react? how will other pro-trump podcasts react? are they going to speak out against these calls for civil war and violence, or are they going to find themselves in more legal trouble as we move forward? we'll see. but it doesn't appear they're very quick on the uptake. >> definitely does not. chuck rosenberg, thank you so much for coming on this morning. the same to michael beschloss, thank you. jackie alemany, we always appreciate your coverage. thank you, all of you. before we go to break, some of the other stories making headlines this morning. the u.s. is sending an

additional $1 billion in military aid to ukraine. the pentagon announced yesterday the new shipment includes tens of thousandsexplosives, the largest such package since russia invaded ukraine in february. severe weather and staff shortages are hampering u.s. flights this week. another 500 canceled flights yesterday, following more than 1,500 cancellations this past weekend. the majority impacted hubs in new york and chicago. demand for air travel has returned to pre-pandemic levels, while airlines struggle with staffing shortages, among other issues. and voters head to the polls today in the battleground state of wisconsin, where the republican gubernatorial primary has become a political proxy contest between former president trump and former vice president mike pence. businessman tim michaels has trump's endorsement, while

former lieutenant governor, rebecca kleefisch, has the backing of pence. a poll showed the two candidates in a statistical tie. we will be covering that. still ahead on "morning joe," we have much more on the fbi's search of former president trump's home in florida, including the possible punishment if he was holding on to classified documents. plus, a look at the response from some of trump's most radical supporters. many of them are online, talking about getting, quote, locked and loaded. really? >> hey, hey, fbi, take a look at these people who are talking about civil war. i mean, we've got to be very aggressive against people who are fomenting political violence, talking about political violence. we've seen what happens when our law enforcement agencies sit back and do nothing. and what happened happened on january 6th because of it.

also ahead this morning, we'll be joined by house speaker nancy pelosi, who is fresh off her trip to taiwan. obviously, we'll ask her about that, and the inflation reduction act that's headed to the house floor. also, the latest breaking news overnight. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. which side are you on?

americans who believe liberty and justice are for all, or traitors inciting violence against our country and trying to take away our freedoms? which side are you on? people who work for a living and care for our families, or the trump republicans who block everything our families need? this november, it's time to show which side you're on. vote for democrats. ff pac is responsible for the content of this ad. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein.

new projects means new project managers. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today. it's time for the biggest sale of the year, on the sleep number 360 smart bed.

it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. our smart sleepers get 28 minutes more restful sleep per night. all smart beds are on sale. save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. only for a limited time.

lily! welcome to our third bark-ery. oh, i can tell business is going through the “woof”. but seriously we need a reliable way to help keep everyone connected from wherever we go. well at at&t we'll help you find the right wireless plan for you. so, you can stay connected to all your drivers and stores on america's most reliable 5g network. that sounds just paw-fect. terrier-iffic i labra-dore you round of a-paws at&t 5g is fast, reliable and secure for your business. city as the sun comes up over the big apple. a lot of news to cover today. tensions between china and taiwan are escalated as china continues military drills for a sixth day near the self-governed island of taiwan. beijing began the drills last thursday after promising taiwan

would pay a price for hosting u.s. house speaker nancy pelosi. when asked if he was worried about china's response to pelosi's visit, president biden said he was not. >> i'm not worried, but i am concerned that they're moving as much as they are. but i don't think they're going to do anything more. >> joining us now, the president of the council on foreign relations, richard haass. he is the author of the forthcoming book, "the bill of obligations: the ten habits of good citizens," which i just love. we'll get to that in a moment. richard, first, your questions about nancy pelosi's trip to taiwan. do you think she should have done it? what are the considerations? >> mika, i think it is a fair question, whether her trip was, quote, unquote, worth it or warranted, but it was nothing new. it wasn't a fundamental departure. newt gingrich went when he was speaker of the house. cabinet members have gone. i think the real question, the

real conversation, to move from the speaker to china. this is an enormous reaction. this was planned for months, if not years. it's far, far out of proportion to anything that nancy pelosi did. so what we ought to be talking about is what is china doing, why, i think, and in so small part, it is what is a deterioration of the chinese company. it is a distraction, as xi jinping tries to get an unprecedented third term. i think it's meant to intimidate taiwan, the united states, japan, and others. now, we ought to be talking about, what do we do about it? what china has done is they've established a new baseline. they have basically put into -- right now, they have these exercises, which look an awful lot like a blockade. not quite a blockade, which would be an act of war. what they're telling taiwan is the old red lines, we're crossing them. we are in position to essentially put a blockade or, even worse, to use force against you, and this is meant to

intimidate them, to intimidate us. we ought to be having a serious reaction. are we prepared to let china do this, or do we need to start taking steps now so china will not have this option, or at least will be deterred from taking this option? this is a big, big development, which far transcends anything nancy pelosi did. >> i was going to say, of course, gingrich went there. i went there with a lot of members of congress. no big deal at all. nobody mentioned it. as nancy ple pelosi said, maybe it's because she is a woman, and the chinese are especially offended by that. xi can be distracting from the weak economy, a crazy covid policy, from screwing up horribly when it comes to hong kong being the vibrant, economic center of asia. one political setback across the world after another. richard, all that being said, china has shown its hand a bit,

have they not? what can we learn from what china has done, by showing their hand to us and the rest of the world? >> i think we learned two things, joe. one is that i actually think the chinese have given up on the idea of peaceful reunification. this has been their mantra for decades. the gap between taiwan and the mainland has grown. china is more repressive. i think what the chinese on the mainland concluded, whether they admit it or not, their only way forward is through coercion. they no longer can lure taiwan there. indeed, that's also the lesson of hong kong. the idea you can have one country and two systems co-exist inside china, it's dead. china is on a different

trajectory now, and we better take it seriously. we also learned about their military capability, which have grown. i don't think we should exaggerate them. china has no experience fighting a modern war. not one general in china -- think about it -- has fought a war. we don't know what their capabilities are, but we ought to be prepared. invasion of taiwan, amphibious, which would be difficult to mount, and it ought to be a learning experience. are we prepared to not just learn but act? that's up to us, to taiwan, and to japan. >> richard, before we close here, i'd love to hear a little about the book. it's forthcoming, but it sounds like something we need during these times. >> thanks, mika. yeah, so much of the conversation in this country is about rights. obviously, rights are central to

the american life. there's the bill of rights. we also have what we owe to one another, what we owe to the government. look at your news story today, the obligations we have as citizens, among other things, to put the country first. among other things, not to turn to violence when we don't get our way politically. what worries me, in our conversation, i don't hear anything talking about obligations. we have to rebalance american democracy between rights and obligations. if we don't, i'm worried american democracy will not survive in any recognizable form. if it doesn't, our ability to play any role on the world stage will disappear. i actually think the stakes are enormous, and i think the next couple of years will truly be among the most critical in american history. >> the forthcoming book is "the bill of obligations: the ten habits of good citizens." richard haass, thank you. congratulations on this. we really look forward to it. still ahead, more on the implications of the fbi's search of donald trump's mar-a-lago

estate. plus, the former president's alleged mishandling of white house records has also been part of the case being laid out by the january 6th committee. a member of the panel, congressman jamie rasraskin, jo the conversation. also ahead, we'll go live to wisconsin, where voters today will choose a republican nominee for governor who could reshape how elections are conducted in the marquee battleground state. "morning joe" will be right back. t, at upwork, we found her. she's in austin between a fresh bowl of matcha and a fresh batch of wireframes. and you can find her, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com

that little leaf brought this old photo to life, i can finally put some names to those faces... it's like i'm back there at 39 elmhurst with all these folks. ancestry can guide you to family discoveries in the 1950 census. a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose. or... his nose. ♪ so i climbed into the cab, and then i settled down inside ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man ♪ ♪ of travel i've had my share, man ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere ♪ ♪♪ bubbles bubbles bubbles bubbles there are bubbles everywhere! as an expedia member you earn points on top of your airline miles. so you can go see even more of all the world's bubbles.

millions have made the switch from the big three to xfinity mobile. on top of your airline miles. that means millions are saving hundreds a year on their wireless bill. and all of those millions are on the nation's most reliable 5g network, with the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction. that's a whole lot of happy campers out there. and it's never too late to join them. get unlimited data with 5g included for just $30 a line per month when you get 4 lines. switch to xfinity mobile today.

live look at capitol hill, a beautiful day in washington. welcome back to "morning joe." it is tuesday, august 9th. we begin this hour with one word, unprecedented. the fbi executes a search warrant on the south florida home of donald trump. connected to classified

documents taken from the white house to mar-a-lago when trump left office. it is unclear exactly what agents were looking for, but a source tells nbc news, the fbi left with the -- left the property with documents. trump called the search a, quote, raid, but officials say no doors were knocked down, and that the fbi notified the secret service before the breach. trump slammed the search as prosecutorial misconduct, but many have pointed out, search warrants are signed by judges after being presented with evidence of a potential crime. mike barnicle and john heilemann are still with us. joining the conversation, we have pulitzer prize winning columnist and associate editor of "the washington post," eugene robinson. joe, a ton of questions this morning. >> john heilemann, as you said time and again throughout the trump administration, we have

something that is both shocking and, yet, not surprising. talk about it. >> well, you know, joe, we went through this in the last hour, and i think it's the kind of thing that bares repeating. when you heard this happened last night, it was surprising. no one -- a lot of cases, when you have raids -- this is obviously not a raid, technically speaking -- but something that comes as a surprise to the news media, at least, you'll often have indication a thing like this is going to happen. the press was not tipped on this at all, although, as mika just said, it's the case that the fbi had been in contact with secret service at mar-a-lago. donald trump was not surprised by it. it is also the case there was something stunning about the notion that trump -- the way that trump tweeted it out, or notified people through whatever social channel he now has still available to him because he can't be on twitter. he said they were currently at mar-a-lago, which is a dramatic

notion that he was basically live messaging about the fbi being there. it wasn't, in fact, true. they'd already left by the time he started notifying everybody and the public. i guess people were stunned by the notion this thing was happening. once you started to think about it, given the number of venues and areas and legal venues in which donald trump is in legal trouble, cases in which he has potential criminal liability, the notion that, at some point, it would come to this isn't at all really surprising. it is shocking when it is in front of you but not surprising in the long run. i think, in some ways, maybe the most surprising thing is of all the areas where trump is being investigated, where he has legal liability, where he might face criminal charges, that this is the one on the question of documents and whether he has violated rules about recordkeeping. partly because, you know, we saw that there was -- you know, over the course of the time the story

has been covered, there was some kind of a negotiated settlement. some records came from mar-a-lago. this sort of seemed to be in the rear-view mirror, that trump had done something wrong, but a deal had been struck and the records eventually got to where they needed to be with the january 6th committee. the notion they are still holding on to these records, and not only that a federal judge had signed off on a warrant saying that there was probable cause a crime had been committed, but basically indicating that there was no way to solve this without a warrant, that kind of the implication of this is that the time for talking was over. there had been discussions back and forth between the doj, between the government and the trump -- and donald trump and his people. and they'd reached the point where a warrant was necessary, not just because it indicated probable cause a crime had been committed, but there was no other way to obtain those documents. and the implicit suggestion trump might have still be in position to destroy them.

i think all of that is genuinely surprising. the last thing i'll say is, i think it tells you, given everything else, this will not be the last time we see news like this. i would not be surprised if we see it again in the coming weeks at other properties of donald trump's, in new york or new jersey or elsewhere, maybe back at mar-a-lago again on other legal fronts. i think that's the future right now. merrick garland is clearly ready to play. >> what is fascinating, again, you have in georgia donald trump on tape talking to the secretary of state, trying to steal enough votes to rig that election and win the state of georgia. you have testimony from donald trump's own people, with the january 6th committee, and so much evidence that donald trump was at the center of leading a fascist coup against the united states of america. so i do find it fascinating that

this search for classified documents is actually the first thing that brings fbi agents knocking on donald trump's door. it seems to be the least significant of all the crimes that he seemingly has committed. of course, in america, because we here on this show believe, unlike, well, other people on other shows, we believe that no man is above the law. we believe in the rule of law. we believe that all are innocent until proven guilty. we don't know for sure whether donald trump is guilty or not, but, mika, this does seem to be the least serious charge facing donald trump right now. but it was the first charge that got the fbi knocking on his door. i'm sure prosecutors will have their opinions on exactly what that means for donald trump's future legal jeopardy. >> yeah, what the strategy may

be, we don't know. the search is prompting these reactions from some of trump's fiercest supporters. house minority leader kevin mccarthy is accusing the doj of becoming politicized and vows to investigat attorney general merrick garland. tweeting -- and this is the delicious part -- merrick garland, preserve your documents and clear your calendar. that's interesting. that's interesting, because the secret service did not preserve their documents surrounding january 6th. it appears the members of the department of defense did not preserve their documents. the whole point of what happened at mar-a-lago yesterday was about documents, but okay. similarly, texas senator ted cruz is blasting the biden administration for using the fbi to target their political enemies. former white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders, who is now running for arkansas governor, all writes,

quote, if you're not yet appalled by the total abuse of power from democrats in washington, you're not paying attention. >> wait, wait, wait. >> or, perhaps, sarah huckabee sanders is not paying attention, because the person at the very top of the fbi, sarah huck key huckabee sanders, was put in there by trump. i'm confused. go ahead, joe. >> those people didn't take issue with the fbi when they were investigaing somebody they claimed to be a political enemy, hillary clinton. october 2016, 11 days before the presidential election, then fbi director james comey announced he was going to reopen an investigation into emails sent by hillary clinton using a private server, over this classified document issue. >> fantastic. >> kevin mccarthy, at that time, attacked hillary clinton for her, quote, lack of judgment and

disregard for protecting our nation's secrets. you know, he didn't criticize the fbi. cruz also railed against clinton. writing things like, elected officials should be held accountable for criminal conduct, no matter how high their position. of course, there couldn't be greater hypocrisy, i don't think, that's sarah sanders, who in 2016 -- and i know you remember this hit, mika -- she wrote, "when you're attacking the fbi agents because you're under criminal investigation, you're losing." gene robinson -- >> wow. >> -- of course, the hypocrisy is just laughable, how hypocritical these people are. >> yeah, it is as if they're trying to outdo themselves with hypocrisy every day. we shouldn't be surprised at this great leap they are taking, you know, after her emails

and -- look, this is, in many ways -- i was thinking about what john heilemann just said. in many ways, this is the simplest of the legal -- potential legal cases against donald trump. because it is a matter of stolen property. the presidential documents belong to me, they belong to you, belong to mika, to the american people. they do not belong to the former president. what the fbi did after trying to get the stolen property back over a period of months is go into mar-a-lago to retrieve stolen property. property belongs to us and not to him. it's pretty simple in terms of what actually happened. the second thing is we don't know how serious the potential breach of classification is. we don't know what is in these documents and, you know, are

these top, top secret documents? are they potentially jeopardizing national security? we don't know that. we assume -- i would assume, at least, if a judge is willing to sign off on this search warrant, it's pretty serious. if merrick garland is willing to sign off on it, it is pretty serious. we have to wait and see on all of that. it's basically simple at its base. he stole this stuff, and the fbi went to get it back. >> sometimes the simpler cases are the most revealing. trump was in new york city at the time of the search. he's expected to be deposed by new york state any day now in its case against the trump organization. he left trump tower last night without commenting. he released a statement saying, in part, what is the difference

between this and watergate? okay. where operatives broke into the democratic national committee? here in reverse, democrats -- no -- broke into the home of the 45th president of the united states. no, actually, no, donald trump. joining us now, state attorney for palm beach county, florida, dave aronberg. and lecturer at yale university's jackson institute for foreign affairs, a former fbi agent specializing in counterintelligence investigations. mike barnicle has the first question. mike? >> dave, a federal search warrant was issued and acted upon yesterday at mar-a-lago, an area you are familiar with. tell us about the federal search warrants. do they not have to list up front exactly what they're looking for, and at the conclusion of the search warrant, why they want those items, in order for a judge to

sign off on it? the mechanics of it, talk about that, please. >> yeah, mike, this had to go through a lot of vetting. first off, it goes to the fbi. there are many layers involved here because this is not an ordinary situation. it must be signed off by the head of the fbi, a trump appointee. then it goes to a separate branch of government. it goes to a judge. the judge reviews the request for a search warrant. you've got to show that you have probable cause that a crime exists and that mar-a-lago contains evidence of that crime. you've got to set forth what you're looking for. that's why it is tough to go beyond that. if you find other evidence outside of the four corners of that search warrant, you may not be able to use it. it depends what the search warrant says. that's why, sometimes, if you find other evidence, you will then go back to the judge and say, "hey, can we get another search warrant?" while mar-a-lago is still being locked down, the fbi is sure to cross every t and dot every i. in this case, the judge, i'm sure, scrutinized the search warrant request more than any rr

received because this is unprecedented. this search warrant, in my mind, would never have been issued if it was merely about removing government documents, if it was merely about that trump kept keepsakes from kim jong-un. this most likely, in my mind, involved a destruction or removal of classified documents that could jeopardize national security. >> let's go to gene robinson. i want your thoughts on this, gene. also, i have been sort of monitoring other networks, so to speak. it is a completely different story that is void of facts at times. the reason i bring it up is there are many people who get whipped up by this rhetoric. it some s whipped up by this rhetoric. iteems bad timing to be jumping to trump's defense when there are a lot of questions

that are left open right now. >> it is bad timing because there is so much we don't know. the idea of purported conservatives, purported proponents of law and order, now being totally anti the fbi, anti federal law enforcement is just ridiculous. but, again, they outdo themselves with the hypocrisy in order to remain in donald trump's favor. to curry favor with him and his base. also, i suspect, to try to energize or reenergize the republican base in the face of a lot of political success that democrats have been having recently. i think one reason it is such a sharp reaction is that republicans are kind of losing. they're partying with viktor orban while the democrats are

getting stuff done for the american people. but i have a question for asha. what happens next? when are we likely to learn more about the underlying facts here, what was in these documents? do you expect that we'll hear something from the justice department or from the fbi today or in the near future? >> so i think that that really depends on what violations they are actually investigating. you know, i think it is important to remember that, because these involve classified documents, this is a national security investigation. i think the kind of classified information that would be in the white house, that trump would have access to, these aren't going to be low-level, diplomatic cables. these are high-level, national security documents. i think part of the urgency here is trump has very poor counterintelligence hygiene. he blabs secrets all the time.

he is not careful about this kind of information. we also know mar-a-lago has been a target for foreign governments trying to get access to information. there was a trespasser several years ago who was arrested there, who was believed to be linked to the chinese intelligence service. so i think that they want to make sure that they get these out of an unsecure location and out of potential hands that shouldn't have it. and because it is likely a classified information -- or classified investigation, i'm not sure that we're going to get statements from the fbi or the department of justice any time soon. you know, i think that we just need to wait and see what they're doing. but i agree with dave, that this wouldn't be just about removal. there was the urgency there. i think that trump's unwillingness to hand this over, to john's earlier point, that, you know, they had to get a subpoena for this also goes to his intent of this being a

willful retention. concealment of documents and records that belong to the government. they met a higher standard, even in terms of crimes that require a higher level of intent. >> dave aronberg, we'd hear that donald trump had been working, his lawyers had been working to -- with fbi, going through these documents. i'm just curious, what would make them trigger a search if they'd been talking with the lawyers for quite some time? then, i guess what i'm asking is, how big does this have to be, for a former president's residence and business to be searched? i'm just curious, how high was that bar in the doj, to allow this to move forward?

>> it's got to be really high, joe. this goes to the top levels. merrick garland had to sign off on this. the alternative would have been issue a subpoena. they could have done that. but they did not trust donald trump to turn the documents over. they obviously thought documents would be destroyed or hidden, so they went in to get them. i know donald trump is saying that this is a raid, but that's a gross exaggeration. first off, my office and local law enforcement, they were not informed in advance about this search warrant, but that's not unusual. because this is a sensitive matter. it's the first time in history this has ever happened. you can understand why the fbi kept this close to the vest. but they went in apparently with plain clothes and with the secret service, who walked them around. according to what i heard, it was a very orderly, smooth process. quite different than a siege on the property. but trump benefits from calling it a raid or a siege, because then he gets to be the maga martyr. that's the role he enjoys the most.

it gets him to be at the top of the conversation for president again in 2024, pushing aside florida governor ron desantis. it makes it more likely he'll run for president in 2024. because, after all, who needs ideas when you've got grievances to run on? >> yeah. then the ultimate protection of the presidency. makes a lot of sense. state attorney for palm beach county, florida, dave aronberg, thank you very much. former fbi agent asha r easha, you, as well. nancy pelosi will be here to react to the fbi's search of former president trump's mar-a-lago home. plus, if she thinks her trip to taiwan did any damage to the u.s. relationship with china. later, it is primary day in four states today. we'll go live to wisconsin as, once again, a pence-backed candidate is going head-to-head with a trump pick. but up next, ken dilanian is

here with the latest reporting about what we know about last night's search. don't go anywhere. there's so much more news when "morning joe" returns. hi, i'm debra. i'm from colorado. i've been married to my high school sweetheart for 35 years. i'm a mother of four-- always busy. i was starting to feel a little foggy. just didn't feel like things were as sharp as i knew they once were. i heard about prevagen and then i started taking it about two years now. started noticing things a little sharper, a little clearer. i feel like it's kept me on my game. i'm able to remember things. i'd say give it a try. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

vo: as families struggle with inflation... congress and president biden are doing something about it. the inflation reduction act will reduce costs for millions of families. it lowers the cost of drugs and ramps up production of american-made clean energy. that means lower energy bills for families, jobs for our communities, and the boldest plan to take on climate change we've ever seen. the inflation reduction act will “bring relief to millions of people” congress: let's pass it. finding the perfect designer isn't easy.

but, at upwork, we found her. she's in austin between a fresh bowl of matcha and a fresh batch of wireframes. and you can find her, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com ♪♪ actress and grammy award winning singer olivia newton john, known for her iconic role as sandy in the beloved musical "grease" has died after repeated treatments for cancer. she was 73 years old. nbc news senior national correspondent tom llamas has more. ♪ summer days drifting away ♪ >> reporter: when "grease" hit the big screen, danny zuko and

america all fell for sandy. ♪ those summer ♪ >> reporter: the aussie good girl became an instant star. dancing and singing beside john travolta. a child star whose voice and talent swept the '70s into the '80s. when the good girl tried a different look. her streamy "physical" topped the charts for ten weeks. >> it was so naughty in its time and so nothing now. >> reporter: in 1992, newton john was diagnosed with breast cancer. after chemotherapy, and a partial mastectomy, she recovered. her goal became fighting cancer. ♪ every obstacle is a tool ♪ >> reporter: raising money and openingcancer and wellness center in australia. >> giving inspiration to fight

the fight. >> reporter: in 2017, she halted her tour when her cancer returned, this time to her lower spine. newton-john leaves behind her husband, john easterling, and her daughter chloe from her first marriage. travolta posting, in part, yours from the first moment i saw you and forever. your danny, your john. ♪ i'm hopelessly devoted to you ♪ >> reporter: after a five decade career, a legacy as timeless as her songs. >> joe, what a beautiful voice and impact that she had. i mean, her angelic voice went far beyond the movie "grease." but the movie "grease" is where my mom took me and tween friends for a birthday party. like many other young girls growing up in that age -- i'm 55 now -- she was it. she was really the most ultimate

sort of example or whatever, and her voice and her songs, me and many of my friends knew every word. but we would watch her sing them because her voice was truly so beautiful. >> yeah, extraordinary. you told me yesterday, it's funny you told me yesterday that when you were young, after seeing "grease," you actually -- >> uh-oh. >> -- went as bad sandy to halloween, to halloween after seeing "grease." i just read that mariah carey had done the same thing. >> oh, great. >> one of the thrills of her career was singing "homelessly devoted" on stage with olivia newton-john. she was a massive star in the 1970s. yes, "grease" was the zenith of her superstardom, but she was a star before. she had a massive hit with "i honestly love you," in 1974. "have you never been mellow" a year later. she also had a hit with a bee

gees song called "come on over." ton of hits. after "grease," as tom had said, her biggest hit was actually "physical." john heilemann, it is fascinating. of course, we're about the same age. of course, while we enjoyed "grease," i'm sure i speak for you, we are a little too school for school. that's what the girls in middle school loved. but mika and i were watching it, for some reason, a couple weeks ago, it showed up on tv somewhere, and i was struck by the timelessness of that movie, and that it looked every bit as much of a classic as the 1950s disney movie, in large part because of olivia newton-john and, of course, john travolta. timeless. it will be timeless. those two will forever be at the

center of american popular culture as people look back to our time when we were growing up. >> yeah. it's funny, joe, you think about that period. you know, the period where we were in that age of, you know, high school. the fetization of the '50s. "happy days" was primetime. "grease" was part of that. "american graffiti" earlier than that. the nostalgia for the '50s. post '60s, some people wanted to erase the '60s, radicalism and remember what the "50s was like, that happy period. at the time, it seemed totally uncool. i know you and i were like, you know, we're listening to elvis and thinking, this isn't the stuff we want to watch. i agree, now, we have some distance. not just because we're older but

because the context of trying to relive the '50s isn't -- doesn't feel as sort of uncool as it did in 1979, 1978, '80 and '81. now, it is so far in the past, you look at some of those things and you can just be focused on what a great piece of popular entertainment "grease" was and how incredibly magnetic travolta in his prime in that movie, the middle of that incredible run. and the incredible chemistry between the two of them. travolta in that period of "saturday night fever," "grease," and "urban cowboy," was as compelling a young male star as there ever had been. they found the perfect pairing for him in olivia newton-john. >> yeah. >> they were just an absolutely riveting couple. she was the biggest billboard chart performer of the '80s. there was the hit you mentioned,

"physical" was the big one. "you have to believe we are magic," her second biggest hit in 1980. she had a bunch of -- in the early '80s, she was dominant on the pop charts. she traversed the late 'p 70s and early '80s. 90% of the girls at the time we knew, women now mika's age, all look back with some degree of fondness of olivia newton-john as the good sandy, bad sandy, and sometimes both. they saw something in olivia newton-john to look up to. >> absolutely. >> so many just watched "grease" on a loop. you know, maybe i've seen "field of dreams" 100 times. mika has probably seen "grease" 100 times. i will say, though, mika, the end of the day, quality always wins. always wins out. what john was saying, we were -- so many of us were too cool to really like "grease." i'm talking about mainly guys,

to like "grease" in the 1970s and even into the '80s. but it's like the carpenters. at some point in the 1990s, the carpenters became cool. i loved the carpenters all along secretly. oh, the carpenters were terrible. suddenly, somebody realized 20 years later, oh, my god, this is music that's classic and will last forever. well, that's olivia newton-john. of course, john travolta and "grease." incredible collection of work that stays with us as we remember this morning, sadly, the passing of olivia newton-john. still ahead, speaker of the house nancy pelosi will join us on everything from the fbi search of trump's mar-a-lago home to democratic hopes of keeping the house in november. plus, her trip to taiwan. don't go anywhere. "morning joe" will be right

back. finding the perfect developer isn't easy. but, at upwork, we found her. she's in prague, between the perfect cup of coffee and her museum of personal computers. and you can find her, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers.

mayo clinic. you know where to go. i'm a fancy exercise bike noobie. and i've gone from zero to obsessed in like... three days. instructor: come on milwaukee! i see you! after riding twelve miles to nowhere, i'm taking a detour. and if you don't have the right home insurance coverage, you could be working out a way to pay for this yourself. get allstate and be better protected from mayhem for a whole lot less. meet ron. that man is always on. and he's on it with jardiance for type 2 diabetes. his underhand sky serve? on fire. his grilling game? on point. and his a1c? ron is on it. with the once-daily pill, jardiance. jardiance not only lowers a1c... it goes beyond to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults with type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. and jardiance may help you lose some weight.

jardiance may cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration that can lead to sudden worsening of kidney function, and genital yeast or urinary tract infections. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction, and don't take it if you're on dialysis. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. a once-daily pill that goes beyond lowering a1c? on it with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪♪ it was time for a nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once monthly add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma that can mean less oral steroids. not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue.

ask your asthma specialist about a nunormal with nucala. in order for small businesses to thrive, back pain, and fatigue. they need to be smart. efficient. agile. and that's never been more important than it is right now. so for a limited time, comcast business is introducing small business savings. call now to get powerful internet for just 39 dollars a month. with no contract. and a money back guarantee. all on the largest, fastest reliable network. from the company that powers more businesses than anyone else. call and start saving today. comcast business. powering possibilities. this is xfinity rewards. our way of showing our appreciation. with rewards of all shapes and sizes. [ cheers ] are we actually going? yes!! and once in a lifetime moments. two tickets to nascar! yes! find rewards like these and so many more in the xfinity app.

37 past the hour. welcome back to "morning joe." the escalation in donald trump's legal problems after the fbi searched his mar-a-lago home in south florida. the former president said in a statement last night that his home was, quote, occupied by a large group of fbi agents. adding, quote, they even broke into my safe. a source familiar with the search tells nbc news, it involved the transfer of government documents from the white house to trump's south florida estate. it comes months after the national archives reported that 15 boxes of government documents were improperly taken to mar-a-lago when trump left office and asked the justice department to investigate.

joining us, intelligence correspondent ken dilanian. ken, explain how the fbi got this search warrant, if you know. how did they get a judge on board? and what do we know about how important these documents are? >> good morning, mika. well, the affidavit to justify the search warrant is sealed, so we don't know what is in it, but we do know the fbi would have had to convince a federal judge there was probable cause to believe that there was evidence of a crime at that location, inside mar-a-lago, and that this search was the only way they could have gotten it. that's what is so interesting about this. when you think about it, it is conceivable that any president could accidentally take home some documents he shouldn't have had. what would the government do? simply ask for them back, right? maybe there would be a dispute about it, and maybe, god forbid, it'd get to the issue of a subpoena. well, in this case, if that happened, something broke down here. the fbi became convinced that a subpoena wasn't going to cut it.

the demand for the documents wasn't producing the documents, so they had to conduct this search. yeah, trump is describing it as a raid. you know, officials i'm talking to are pushing back on that. first of all, the fbi notified the secret service, which is guarding mar-a-lago, that they were coming, hours before the raid. they didn't break down the door. it was all very orderly. but it is a dramatic, dramatic step, suggesting something that went very wrong in the negotiations between the government and donald trump over the documents. and suggesting these documents are very sensitive. we know the national archives already said that they were classified documents at mar-a-lago. this move suggests there may have been some very important information contained in those documents, mika. >> ken, i wanted to press a little bit more on that very point. we know these documents were essentially stolen, right? they belong to the american people. they don't belong to former president trump. and he took them, and they

couldn't get them back by any other means, which is extraordinary. but must these not be extremely sensitive? what would justice have been so worried about, that they would leak to other people, to foreign actors, that trump would use these documents in some untoward way? what could have been the fear that would justify this big a step? >> well, look, i mean, we all know that trump has this extraordinary history of being loosey-goosey with classified information. we remember when he provided, he gave classified information to the russians in the oval office. he has a history with not handling secret documents well. but the difference is when he is president, there are no repercussions for that because he has absolute declassification authority. so he can take any document out of the white house when he was president and give it to, you

know, his son or whoever, and there was nothing anybody could do about it. now that he is not the president anymore, the rules have changed completely. so it could be, you're absolutely right, gene, could be that there is some specific information that the government is worried about in terms of a security risk. mar-a-lago has been targeted by foreign intelligence agencies. it could be the principle of the thing, you can't improperly store government documents in your house. officials have gone to prison over the years for that. if you're convicted of it, you can't hold office for life. it may not survive, but it is out there. there are repercussions for doing this. >> ken dilanian, thank you very, very much. up next, house speaker nancy pelosi is standing by. we've got a lot to cover with her. her trip to taiwan, the inflation reduction act, and, of course, the fbi's search of mar-a-lago. plus, four states hold primary elections today. we'll get a live report from

wisconsin. trump and pence backed candidates are running for governor. "morning joe" will be right back.

republicans in congress call them "entitlements." a "ponzi scheme." the women and men i served with in combat, we earned our benefits. just like people earned their social security and medicare benefits. but republicans in congress have a plan to end so-called "entitlements" in just five years. social security, medicare, even veterans benefits. go online and read the republican plan for yourself. joe biden is fighting to protect social security, medicare and veterans benefits. call joe biden and tell him to keep fighting for our benefits. i look back with great satisfaction medicare and veterans benefits. on my 32 years of active duty. i understand the veteran mentality. these are people who have served,

they'e been in leadership positions, they're willing to put their life on the line if necessary and they come to us and they say, "i need some financial help at this point in time." they're not looking for a hand out, they're looking for a little hand up. my team at newday usa is going to do everything we possibly can to make sure that veteran gets that loan. finding the perfect project manager isn't easy. but, at upwork, we found him. he's in adelaide between his daily lunch delivery and an 8:15 call with san francisco. and you can find him, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. lily! welcome to our third bark-ery. oh, i can tell business is going through the “woof”.

but seriously we need a reliable way to help keep everyone connected from wherever we go. well at at&t we'll help you find the right wireless plan for you. so, you can stay connected to all your drivers and stores on america's most reliable 5g network. that sounds just paw-fect. terrier-iffic i labra-dore you round of a-paws at&t 5g is fast, reliable and secure for your business.

live look at the white house. beautiful day in washington. president biden yesterday discussed the reaction to house speaker nancy pelosi's visit to taiwan last week. >> mr. president, how worried are you about the situation in taiwan? because china is -- they're kind of keeping a bit of a grip around the whole island now. >> i amworried, but i'm concerned they're moving as much as they are.

but i don't think they're going to do anything more. >> was it a mistake for the speaker to go to taiwan? >> it was her decision. >> tensions between china and its island neighbor escalated in recent days, with china announcing it would extend military drills in the region. and the house speaker joins us now. we'll get to the very important questions surrounding what's happening in taiwan in just a moment. but first, good morning. we would like very much to get your reaction, madame speaker, to the search of former president trump's estate, mar-a-lago down in florida. >> good morning. i have -- all i know about that is what is in the public domain. i was surprised that it flashed on my phone last evening. i don't really have too much to say, except that to have a visit like that, you need a warrant. to have a warrant, you need

justification. and it says that no one is above the law, not even a former president of the united states. but all of this will, i'm sure, be made known to us over time, but i have no knowledge of it. i do know that there has been chatter, more than chatter, about the presidential -- president's documents and how they must be preserved for history. we'll see what the justification was for the raid. i just don't know. i think everybody was surprised by it. >> yeah, yeah. madame speaker, it's fascinating, i went to taiwan with a group of members of congress to see the inauguration of president lee back in the 1990s. of course, another house speaker went to taiwan. nobody really said much about it at all. ambassadors go to taiwan. americans go to taiwan. i would love to know, what is

the difference when i do it, when gingrich does it, when ambassadors do it, and then suddenly when you do it? suddenly, this is like a world crisis. what is the difference well, it morning, joe. i might even add that, just a short while ago, a number of senators, bipartisan group of senators went, including the chair of the foreign relations committee, mr. menendez. did anybody make a fuss? i don't think the president of china should control the schedules of members of congress, or anyone else who wants to visit taiwan. he's trying to isolate taiwan. you know, they can't join w.h.o. or they could make a valuable contribution in terms of global health or other organizations. he may try to keep them from attending meetings. but he's not going to keep

members of congress from visiting taiwan. we will not be accomplices to his isolation of taiwan. >> what do we learn from china over the past several days? obviously, president xi has taken the country in an even more autocratic direction over the past several years. >> yes. >> what have you learned by his overreaction to a member of congress' visit to taiwan? >> well, i think that he is in a fragile place. his problems with his economy. he is acting like a scared bully. and this is what -- before the meeting where he will want to be re-elected. we didn't go there to talk about china. we went there to talk about taiwan. we went there, the bigger picture, taiwan eclipsed everything else that we did. the president has initiated an asia pacific policy. he has instituted the

indo-pacific economic framework. we wanted to hear from the leaders of the those countries accepting their invitations to visit. again, emphasizing parliament -- inter-parliamentary interactions important in our relationship. we went with humility to learn what they are thinking so they aren't thinking, here is what we want to do and you follow us. no. let's do this working together. again, just in some other issues, talked to them all -- and thanked them for their strong positions they took against russia for the invasion of ukraine. we thanked those on the asean, south asian countries of singapore and malaysia for the actions they took against burma for what burma has done, executing advocates for democracy in burma. so we -- our purpose always,

when we go on a trip, is security, economics and -- the economy and governance. in terms of security, we had good chats, listening to them about how we work together for global security. in terms of economy, i mentioned the president's indo-pacific economic framework and listening to how they thought we could work together. they are urging us to do another trade bill. we will see how we can work together. i will talk to my friends in labor and my colleagues about that. third, in terms of governance, important to talk about what i said, whether it's covid, whether it's climate change, whether it's human rights, as they have reacted to what is happening in burma. so it was a very productive trip. again, emphasizing our inter -- we met with heads of state or had discussed with them, we met with every speaker in all five

countries and their members of parliament. it was very productive. in terms of taiwan, we were not going to take taiwan off our list because of the president has invited us, the president of china does not do our schedule. >> there you go. madam speaker, i would love to ask you about the inflation reduction act. the politics of it -- will this be a component of the dems' messaging leading up to the mid-terms? president biden struggling with low approval ratings. will this valley support and votes for democrats leading up to the mid-terms? what do you think? >> you have to see it in the context of what this president has accomplished in the year and a half or little more than a year and a half he has been president. we did the rescue package, money in people's pockets, vaccinations in their arms, children back to school, people safely back to work.

the infrastructure bill to build, build, build america in a way that has equity and fairness and protects the environment. then today we will go to the white house for signing the chips and science bill which will make american more self-reliant in terms of supply chain and the rest. that will help bring down the cost of things, it's also helpful in fighting inflation. now this legislation -- i like to talk about it starting at america's kitchen table. lower health care costs with the subsidies. lowering the cost of prescription drugs, which is historic. this is the first time that we have been able to have a secretary -- we have been working on this for decades. first time to have the secretary negotiate for lower prices. this is a blow to the pharmaceutical companies. they have said the democrats are going to pay a price for doing this. for lowering the cost to

americans for prescription drugs. this is about a fuller agenda of health care, making health care more affordable, making jobs -- higher wages and good-paying jobs as well as saving and protecting our environment. it's pretty exciting. when you see it in the context of all the other legislation and tomorrow signing the act to protect our veterans, it has an integrity to it. yes, it is about meeting the needs of america's working families, for the people, not politics. that's what we will be talking about in the election. >> and yet republicans actually want pharmaceutical companies to be able to continue price gouging. insulin patients, it's remarkable, stunning. i wanted to ask you about getting this deal done. we have been watching progressives and moderates debating each other in front of

cameras for a year and a half. i know it's probably driven you and a lot of other professionals crazy. it's like, come on. joe manchin and others say they have been quietly talking to you for -- throughout the entire process. i just want to talk about how messy it can be at times. but ask, how did we get to where we got? this is, by any standard -- ideology aside, in a 50/50 split senate, a closely divided house, this is a remarkable political achievement. how did it happen? >> well, we have our differences in our party. god bless us all for the exuberances we bring to the table. but what unifies is we are there to work for america's working families. when it comes to reducing their health care costs or creating better paying jobs, again,

having clean, safe places for our children and saving the planet for the future, we are united on all of that. but legislation, as you know, as a former legislator, is -- it's difficult. we all want everything. as i say do members, you cannot judge a bill for what it does not do. you respect it for what it does do and what this bill does do is quite remarkable. did we want more? of course. but we continue to work for more, of course. but we cannot -- we have to show our unity to the american people, which we did last week on the chips bill. i was very proud. there was not any no vote on the democratic side, even though the republicans were whipping across -- against the chips and science bill. when they saw that we had one no vote, then some of them came around and joined us in defiance of their leadership. again, it's a slim majority. we hope to increase it.

that's the plan. hopefully, get two more senators. because if we can do that, two who would be willing to pull back the filibuster, then we can get much more done in the united states senate with our voting rights act and voting protections and the list goes on, a woman's right to choose and the rest. we're optimistic. we have always been ready for victory. now things have turned our way. the leadership of our president has been tremendous to get these bills done. they are historic in their nature. they will make us more competitive in the world. our pre-eminence will be even more clear to the world. we thank joe biden for his leadership. >> house speaker nancy pelosi, thank you for being on the show this morning. so much to talk about. we appreciate it. it is the top of the hour. the third hour of "morning joe" on this thursday, august 9th. we begin with a lot of news.

with that fbi search of donald trump's home in south florida yesterday. the former president posted just before 7:00 p.m. last night that mar-a-lago was, quote, currently under siege, raided and occupied by a large group of fbi agents. adding, quote, they even broke into a safe. might have been a slight exaggeration on his part. a judge signed off on a search warrant after being presented with evidence of a potential crime. in this case, it deals with violations of the presidential records act, connecting to classified documents taken from the trump white house to mar-a-lago when they should have been sent to the national archives. it's not just a museum. it's unclear what the fbi was looking for. a source tells nbc news, documents were seized from the property. joining the conversation, we have the host of "way too early" and white house bureau chief at

politico, jonathan lemire, professor of history at tulane university, walter isaacson and former assistant director for counterintelligence at the fbi, frank figueroa. so many questions but also questions that we will wait for the answers for. like, who the judge was, exactly why they searched the house, the information will be forthcoming at some point. >> yeah. one thing we don't have to wait to be able to pass a verdict on is whether donald trump's statement is truthful or not. it's packed with lies. that's not a surprise. it wasn't a raid on his house. no doors were kicked down. the fbi notified the secret service saying, we're coming over and we're going to do a search. it's a legal search. i know donald trump doesn't give a damn about the rule of law.

he doesn't give a damn about the constitutional norms. it takes two branchs to do this. you had the doj going to the judiciary and getting a judge to sign off on a warrant to try to get these classified documents back. the irony is so thick. republicans running around, many of them who went to jail, republicans running around saying, lock her up, when hillary clinton had emails that they thought may have been classified. here you have donald trump taking boxes of documents from the white house after he lost, down to mar-a-lago. you have the doj that's been talking with him, trying to get those documents back. finally, decided they had no other choice but to go in there. what is so fascinating though about this is, this was the first move by the fbi and the doj against donald trump.

when you look at all of the challenges that are -- the legal challenges facing donald trump, look at why he is in new york city at the civil lawsuit, look what's happening in georgia. we have him on tape talking to the secretary of state, telling him that he wants him to steal enough votes to rig the election in georgia so he can win. that's on tape. the grand jury in georgia is hearing that. the legal consequences for donald trump there, not going to be positive, i suspect. you also have, of course, the doj rightly looking at the fact that donald trump helped lead a fascist overthrow -- an attempted fascist overthrow of the united states government. tried to undermine american democracy and toss out an elected president of the united states. of course, because donald trump

was involved in this fascist attempt, it failed. you have all of these issues coming. and yet, jonathan lemire, it was actually over a box of classified documents that the doj was trying to get back that led to the fbi going in to mar-a-lago. what can you tell us this morning? >> joe, the very latest is, indeed, the search, which was indeed -- secret service was given a heads up when the fbi came to mar-a-lago, trump's south florida resort. he was in new york city. looking for these boxes of documents. at least 15 boxes were improperly taken from the white house to palm beach after trump lost and left office in the wake of january 6. back in january 2021. we don't know precisely yet what

documents they were looking for. we do know that many were classified. many of them described as so sensitive that we can't be told of their contents. they can't even be described in a generic ballpark way. they are that important to national security. that in itself is a risk. that is a crime. we have discussion about presidents and their powers of declassification. well, you lose that power once you are a private citizen. that would not be a defense trump would seem to be able to have. the agents we know spent hours on the property yesterday, removed some of the contents. of course, politics play a role. republicans rushing to trump's defense. white house making clear they have nothing to do with this. they were not given a heads up, as i broke the news last night, that the doj was moving here, the fbi was moving forward. for a measure this big and important, merrick garland certainly signed off on it. they kept a barrier between the

justice and the white house. a matter of days if not weeks before we learn more about the contents and what they discovered and what next steps might be. this is an unprecedented step. no former president has been the subject of a search like this. the political ramifications -- the aftershocks will be felt for months to come. >> you know, walter isaacson, this is -- this is shocking but not surprising it was going to happen. with donald trump, you have somebody that has had very little respect, no respect for the rule of law, contempt for constitutional norms. interesting that his first brush with the fbi coming to his place of residence or business came on an issue that helped propel him to power, the alleged mishandling of classified

documents. the very people who were attacking the fbi now, like sara huckabee sanders, for their abuse of power, are the same ones who in 2016 were saying of hillary clinton, if you are attacking the fbi, because you are under investigation, you are losing. >> yeah. this is a very unsettling and unnerving development. it is hoped there's a lot behind it that can explain it. i can see why people on trump's side are very unnerved at the notion that the fbi comes into your home and we say it's because he mishandled classified documents. i really hope that we are shown that this was absolutely necessary. because this is polarizing the country. we're in an echo chamber sometimes up here. but boy, this is really frightening, this notion you go

into a home. i don't think there was any politics involved. i think the right -- kevin mccarthy's statement was creepy because it's not the democrats using the justice department this way. but i hope that merrick garland and the very non-political people running that department have a pretty good notion of how much this has unnerved the country. >> walter, how important is it for the doj to get information out to explain why the raid took place, to actually show the search warrant, to tell us who the judge was? >> i think this is crucial. this is something everybody can relate to. this is something that in the bill of rights and everything else, the sanctity of your home. yes, there are safeguards that allow in terms for people to come into your home, especially with a search warrant, when somebody from the executive

branch and somebody from the judicial branch agree. but it's deeply rooted in our traditions that our home is our castle. in this case, it looks too much like a castle. i think they need to come out and explain exactly why this reached such a level that they had to go into the house. who were the people, what was the judge? we do know the head of the fbi, the person who did this, was a trump appointee. we know this isn't just a pure partisan thing. but i worry if they don't explain this better quickly. >> that's what i want to ask frank. also, by the way, we are keeping tabs on the fallout from the search online. including growing concerns over the reaction from possible right wing extremists. nbc news senior reporter ben collins pointed out the top comment on a key forum called the donald last night,

specifically the phrase, lock and load. disturbing references to civil war. trump supporters are also posting upside down flags across social media to signal a distress call, including this post from a sitting republican congresswoman in georgia. it's putrid what there's people are doing. but not whatever. because we all saw what happened on january 6th. for trump to come out and say he was sieged and make it sound like doors were broken down, he is rallying the base. he is being the martyr. he is making himself the victim. when he is not the victim. putting that all aside, frank, how important might it be, what the fbi was looking for, for them to actually walk on the grounds of mar-a-lago, peacefully, they did call the

secret service who has to protect donald trump, and let them know they were coming. it was peaceful. but it was an fbi search and documents were removed. how important do you think this must be to investigations surrounding donald trump for them to make this move on a former president? >> it's a great question. i don't think this department of justice is going to do something like this symbolically or simply to send a message. that might be understandable. but let's break down what's required for that search warrant. as you have been talking about, not only do you need the evidence that a crime has or is being committed, but you need to know that the evidence of the crime is in the location you wish to search. i think we are glossing over that in terms of significance. it means there's an ongoing crime. it means that a magistrate is unlikely to sit there and say to the agents, is this all about what happened a year and a half

ago and you got some stuff back, right? is that all we're doing is retroactive cleanup? i would believe the agents would have to say, no, your honor, we still have very important documents in that residence that we need back. you remember, early reporting on this was that some of the documents were classified at the top secret level. let me explain the significance of that. top secret means sources and methods could be revealed by simply reading the document. that means somebody could die. the united states government could lose a human source or a singular technical source and location somewhere around the world that provides critical intelligence. something happened in the last year and a half -- i want to keep saying, a year and a half of unsuccessful negotiations. right? at some point, you've got to realize that documents you are squirrelling away don't belong to you. they need to go back to the u.s. government to whom they belong. the time for talking was over in

doj's mind. very significant. national security repercussions. evidence of an ongoing crime, enough to convince a judge that they have got to go in there now. >> the possibility of a crime, probable cause, in fact. jim, i'm curious if you share walter isaacson's concern about this being politically divisive and about the need for the justice department to get information out quickly on why they launched this raid or this thing that trump called a raid, that his supporters are calling a raid, but this search warrant yesterday. >> i do. i think an extraordinary move like this probably requires an extraordinary explanation. i can't think of a historical parallel to having a sitting president, having his doj allow for this -- whatever you want to call it, a raid, going into

mar-a-lago, of his predecessor in potential 2024, a competitor. that's extraordinary. there's no doubt it's going to be radically politicized. they better have the goods. right sfl? if it turns out they did go to mar-a-lago and there aren't charges, imagine the backlash. you see what they are doing in terms of saying he is the victim of overreach of the federal government. at some point, i do think soon, the justice department, garland, somebody has to say why they took such an extraordinary move. i agree with walter that this is something that people can touch and feel and understand. the sanctity of your home. it takes a huge high threshold in any case, whether it's a former president or not, to get a search warrant and to go in to somebody's home. go through their personal belongings and try to find something. hopefully, we will know relatively soon. i think in this environment, we

should all be worried. i think those message boards that you were pointing to from your reporter, ben collins, earlier, you are going to see a lot of that. you saw the goofy thing the congresswoman post on twitter. we have seen a massive spike in the amount of violence in politics and threats against members of congress and some really extraordinarily awful things happening to politicians. in this environment, i would imagine the justice department will be under a lot of pressure from democrats, too, and president biden. i think they're very aware of this. i think there's a reason the biden white house is saying, we knew nothing about this. i'm sure they want an explanation. they understand the consequences. >> all right. joining us now, white house bureau chief, ashley parker. she has been covering donald trump's handling of classified documents long before the fbi search of his florida home. ashley, i want to point to the

stupid reaction by some republicans. kevin mccarthy sending out -- i think it was a tweet or a statement telling everybody involved to secure their documents because there will be hearings and throwing threats out. i have seen enough, the doj has reached an intolerable state of weaponized poe lit politicalization. i'm looking at your articles over the past many months of the boxes of documents that donald trump took out of the white house and brought to mar-a-lago. what do you make of the fbi stepping in to get some of these documents? they must have felt that there was no other way. >> that's right. this is an issue that "the washington post" has been

covering for months. it has been a drip, drip, drip of revelations that former president trump, he left white house, unsurprisingly, in an incredibly chaotic fashion. sort of things were getting boxed up and thrown together and brought down to mar-a-lago. so when the national archives went looking for things that they would have expected to have and they realized they didn't have them, that was their first inkling they had improperly been brought to mar-a-lago. this ranges from souvenirs, a mock little statue of the air force one that he was making a letter with kim jong-un to things that we then later reported were classified, including marked top secret. when the national archives began to get some -- it's clear obviously not all of the boxes and records back, some had been torn up, shredded, taped back

together, which was trump's want when he was president. we talked to a number of aides and allies said this was a typical behavior. he would rip things up when he was done with them. he would throw them on the floor. one person we talked to said they noticed him slip something into a breast pocket of a suit one time. they said they didn't know if it was nenefarious. it did seem to show he differentiated with documents he felt comfortable throwing on the floor and those he wanted to keep to himself. there's a sense among everyone, democrats and republicans, that if the fbi was going to go in to mar-a-lago and look for things, they probably have reason to believe -- politically, they need to have reason to believe that it's more than just a souvenir dinner menu from a state dinner or a letter with kim jong-un. >> all right. ashley parker, thank you very much. we appreciate you being on this

morning. jonathan lemire, at this point, i know the white house probably will have no comment and nothing to say about this. but republicans are speaking out. they are incensed by this, many of them trump supporters, making statements that perhaps this was a breach by the fbi, they crossed the rubicon is a line i watched a lot of times. i watched fox news yesterday. would you have thought trump was robbed instead of had a polite search conducted at his mar-a-lago home. >> i checked on fox news last night as well. it was striking the emotion that was there, this idea this was a persecution, no president had ever been treated like this before. a couple of things here. first of all, you are right, the white house is sending all sorts

of signals they won't talk about this. president biden has an event later today signing stuff into law. i doubt he takes any questions. they are trying to say there's a line between what they are doing and anything that's happening at doj. i think we're going to hear a lot from republicans. it was previewed last night. you mentioned about kevin mccarthy. trump allies up and down condemning what happened and also doing something else. urging donald trump soon, maybe even today, to declare his candidacy for president. we have been talking about that a lot on this show, how most republicans have not -- don't want him to do that any time soon. they think he will drown out the midterms, a distraction and hurt their chances. those closest to the president have believed it's not just one thing that he is a former president, but ifs a candidate again and a favorite to be the

2024 gop nominee, that might make prosecution harder, political. watch for growing cries there, more republicans trying to urge him to do so, to further muck up the proceedings. >> what a stupid move that would be. >> it could happen. >> obviously, merrick garland and the doj is holding information that republicans don't know about. they can go and spout off. they understand that donald trump is corrupt. they understand he has no respect for the rule of law. they saw what happened on january 6th. they heard him try to pressure his attorney general to arrest his political opponent, joe biden, two weeks before the presidential election. they play stupid on tv. they're not dumb. they know exactly what's going on. if donald trump were to go out on the end of that branch and try to get to get republicans to go after him, it would be a

disaster for republicans, because the other shoe is yet to drop. walter, you have talked about what the doj needs to do. i agree with you. jim agrees with you as well. i'm curious, how important is it to send a message that in america, no man, even a former president, is above the law? >> that's definitely true. that's definitely what you want to send. my worry is that if this is a case of mishandling of classified documents, that's an important case. but this is going to stir up something grander than that. as you say, it's going to rally a lot of republicans. we have seen it in the past 12 hours. to have trump run for president. it's going to make it harder to challenge trump. it's going to rile up a large number of americans for whom the 4th amendment, the notion of

search and seizure in our homes, they will be debating, was this reasonable, was this unreasonable? i just think this is a really bad day for the growing partisanship and divide in america. >> all right. walter, thank you very much. frank figliuzzi, thank you. jim, thank you. still ahead, there is so much more to dig into on the fbi search of mar-a-lago. a member of the january 6th investigation, congressman jamie raskin joins us on what it means for their investigation. later, he is a twice elected state attorney suspended by governor ron desantis for refusing to enforce florida's abortion ban and signing a letter in support of transgender people. andrew warren will join us in the fourth hour of "morning joe." up next, chuck rosenberg explains why we can be assured

there's no mistakes in the search warrant executed at trump's florida home. trump's florida home which side are you on? americans who believe liberty and justice are for all, or traitors inciting violence against our country and trying to take away our freedoms? which side are you on? people who work for a living and care for our families, or the trump republicans who block everything our families need? this november, it's time to show which side you're on. vote for democrats. ff pac is responsible for the content of this ad.

finding the perfect designer isn't easy. but, at upwork, we found her. she's in austin between a fresh bowl of matcha and a fresh batch of wireframes. and you can find her, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com [♪♪]

talented pros, right now for comfortable underwear that also helps provide protection from bladder leaks... try depend silhouette. designed with depend's smoothest fabric, the unique shapewear technology adapts to your body, providing invisible comfort and unbeatable protection. try depend.

chuck rosenberg, let's not be distracted, well, the lies that donald trump and his supporters are spreading right now. let's talk about the law. what's it mean if you have the fbi going in and searching the home and the business of a former president? how serious is this? >> let's not be distracted, joe. it's very serious. first of all, let me point out, two branchs of government are involved in this decision. i mean, you won't let a pitcher

call balls and strikes. it wouldn't make sense. the justice department here, its prosecutors and its fbi agents, go to the judicial branch of government to what the supreme court has called a neutral and detached magistrate and ask her to review the search warrant and to sign it. once she does, you are lawfully permitted into someone's home, into their business, into their hotel room, wherever the search warrant might permit you to enter. it's all legal. it's all lawful. it's not a raid. they didn't -- they are not there improperly or unlawfully. is it a big deal? of course it's a big deal. we don't know it will result in charges. we don't know anyone will be convicted as a result. but this is literally unprecedented. it hasn't happened. we have never searched the home of a former president. we only did it because we had probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed. this is the fourth amendment standard. and probable cause to believe you are going to find stuff

related to that crime, evidence in the place you asked to search. very big deal. unprecedented. but done lawfully and properly through a neutral and detached judge in another branch of government. this is not the fbi on its own deciding where to go and what to do. >> yeah, chuck, i understand the level -- the degree of seriousness, higher -- the standard is higher for federal courts when they issue these sort of search warrants than state courts. is that true? >> the fourth amendment applies to state and federal courts, joe. right? fourth amendment is the fourth amendment. it's based on probable cause. i can tell you this, this would have been the most -- it would have been reviewed at the high he have level and multiple times. there are not going to be mistakes. they will be extraordinarily careful. in addition to that, you have to convince a federal judge you have probable cause. in this case, it was a federal

judge in federal court authorizing a federal search warrant. whether you are in state or federal court, it's the same fourth amendment and same probable cause standard. . it's primary day in wisconsin. we will get a live report from that battleground state. "morning joe" is coming right back. republicans in congress call them "entitlements." a "ponzi scheme." the women and men i served with in combat, we earned our benefits. just like people earned their social security and medicare benefits. but republicans in congress have a plan to end so-called "entitlements" in just five years. social security, medicare, even veterans benefits. go online and read the republican plan for yourself. joe biden is fighting to protect social security, medicare and veterans benefits.

call joe biden and tell him to keep fighting for our benefits. finding the perfect developer isn't easy. but, at upwork, we found her. she's in prague, between the perfect cup of coffee and her museum of personal computers. and you can find her, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com only two things are forever: love and liberty mutual customizing your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. if anyone objects to this marriage... (emu squawks) kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

pool floaties are like whooping cough. amusement parks are like whooping cough. even ice cream is like whooping cough,

it's not just for kids. whooping cough is highly contagious for people of any age. and it can cause violent uncontrollable coughing fits. sometimes followed by vomiting and exhaustion. ask your doctor or pharmacist about whooping cough vaccination because whooping cough isn't just for kids. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. wanna help kids get their homework done? boowell, an internetalso connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.

every search you make, every click you take, every move you make, every step you take, i'll be watching you. the internet doesn't have to be duckduckgo is a free all in one privacy app with a built in search engine, web browser, one click data clearing and more stop companies like google from watching you, by downloading the app today. duckduckgo: privacy, simplified. michael, we have spent the past five, six years talking about all of the historic moments that have happened. most of them negative. talking about how constitutional norms have been breached, how laws have likely been breached, how a president who loses an

election for the first time calls the secretary of state and gives the secretary of state the number of votes that he needs stolen for him so he can win the state of georgia. we can go on and on and on. yesterday though, another first. of course, we have been -- got a tip of the hand maybe from merrick garland who a few weeks ago got quite frustrated with reporters saying, no man is above the law, doesn't matter whether he is a former president or not. i don't know how many time iz i have to tell you that. i'm curious your thoughts seeing this take place, especially on the anniversary of richard nixon's resignation. >> that anniversary, of course, is just as ironic as it could be. you could almost hear donald trump in his bedroom this morning pounding on his door screaming, unfair. it's not unfair. mar-a-lago is a probable crime scene, just as chuck was saying. those fbi agents didn't go there

because they wanted to swim in the pool. they were doing it because there is something serious happening -- that may have happened there, that may have damaged the security of all of us and our families. let's say it was violating the presidential records act as it may have been. security classified documents brought to mar-a-lago that should not have been brought there. this is not like a fine for an overdue library book. this is not just making sure there's a menu of some dinner so that historians like me can write about this years from now. this is all of our security. i'm trying to imagine what it might have been. if we're not even told what these documents were, they could be a document that has information on our nuclear codes or another document that might list the names of cia agents in another country or a document that shows how the federal government is going after

organized crime organizations. it's not for donald trump to share these things with others. if he does, it puts all of us in jeopardy. the other thing, you were talking about richard nixon. presidential records act was passed in 1978. that was in response to nixon. i'm sure that in nixon's case, nixon made a deal with gerald ford who had good intentions but was a little clueless about how dyeabolical nixon could be. the deal was that nixon's famous tapes and papers would be flown to california, put in a vault, the archives would get one key to the vault, nixon would have another key and nixon could legally destroy incriminating or embarrassing evidence that was in that vault. congress found out about this

thing. in those days, congress knew the difference between right and wrong. even republicans said, this is a terrible thing. no president should do this, especially the president of watergate. they passed this presidential records law to say no future president can just decide, i will take documents out if i feel like it. >> coming up, the house select committee investigating john 6th may have wrapped up its summer hearings, but the panel's work, far from complete. we will be joined by congressman and committee member jamie raskin ahead on "morning joe." we'll be right back. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients

for immune support. boost® high protein. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire it's time for the biggest sale of the year, on the sleep number 360 smart bed. it's temperature balancing, so you both say cool. our smart sleepers get 28 minutes more matching your job description. restful sleep per night. all smart beds are on sale. save 50% on the sleep number 360

limited edition smart bed. only for a limited time. vo: hi. we're zerowater. and we believe everyone deserves the purest tasting water. that's why we strive for zero. you see, to some it means nothing. but to us, it means everything. here, take a look. this meter showing triple zeros means our five-stage filter did its job. and that virtually all dissolved solids, or tds, have been removed. and all that's left is the purest tasting water. let's compare. a two-stage brita filter stops here. but our five-stage filter doesn't quit.

zero water. we strive for zero.

large out-of-state corporations have set their sights on california. they've written prop 27, to allow online sports betting. they tell us it will fund programs for the homeless. but read prop 27's fine print. 90% of profits go to out-of-state corporations, leaving almost nothing for the homeless. no real jobs are created here. but the promise between our state and our sovereign tribes would be broken forever. these out-of-state corporations don't care about california. but we do. stand with us.

michael steele, listening to this conversation this morning, and surfing through the news last night and absorbing what happened last night in mar-a-lago, i'm wondering about the search warrant. first of all, when a search warrant is issued, it's my understanding a federal search warrant, the items that they are looking for have to be listed on the search warrant. it will be interesting to look at that. the second element is the anniversary of richard nixon's resignation. an epic moment. the important point that becomes more important with today's reality is that richard nixon, despite what he had done, his criminality, he left office. we are now in the middle of an extended administration, a forever administration, if you

will, it will not go away, it does not go away. it is bolstered in part by your former party, joe's former party, the republican party. especially the rhetoric issued last night and all day today and on social media, kevin mccarthy and a lot of other republicans indicting the justice department rather than focusing on the criminality of a former president of the united states. i'm wondering what you absorbed from yesterday. >> you know, the shock and awe doesn't really impact on me the way it has been some who are profoundly moved by the historic moment of it. certainly, it is important. what it says to me is -- you really put your finger on several aspects of this, mike. one of them is how a party so

craven and beholden, so out of step with reality and the american people, still clings desperately to a former twice impeached president of the united states who has been and continues to be under criminal investigation for his acts, his acts. we are here because donald trump has brought us here. and yet, you have kevin mccarthy and others tripping over themselves to get in front of cameras to go after the justice department, the legal system. you have his minions out there declaring, as our colleague and friend ben collins from nbc news is reporting, the dangerous rhetoric that is being fomented because of trump talks about a

raid on his home. there was no raid on your home. you were asked to deliver documents that didn't belong to you. they belong to the people of the united states. through the federal government. you refused to turn those documents over. a warrant was put in place. agents came to your home to retrieve the documents. it's not complicated. because anybody on this set had done the same thing, the exact same result would have occurred. kevin mccarthy would not be in front of --putting out tweets and papers telling the justice department, get your act together, clear your calendar, we're going to investigate you for doing their job. that part of this, for me, mike and joe and meeka, are an essential element here that we have to figure out how to work around, because this thing that

this gop represents under its current leadership is now increasingly more dangerous than it has ever been. that is profoundly important to understand right now. >> you know why? because they are fascists, like people that are making the threats, the people that helped donald trump on january 6th, the people that were talking about coming to d.c., it was going to be crazy, going to be wild, they were going to -- they are fascists. they are making fascist threats. we need to do what the united states has always done, we need to confront it and defeat it. everybody freaking out over fascists being fascists, that's what fascists do. that's why we have law enforcement to actually bring fascists to justice. please, don't run around with your hair on fire and say, my

god, we can't actually enforce the laws of our land, we can't actually protect classified documents, because fascists may get upset on the tv show. it's what they do. coming up, former president trump was in new york city while the fbi searched his mar-a-lago home. a live report from outside trump tower ahead on "morning joe."

it's the all-new subway series menu! 12 irresistible new subs... ...like #3 the monster. juicy steak, bacon... double monterey cheddar it's a beast of a feast. so "that's" why it's the monster. you catch on quick, marshawn. it's subway's biggest refresh yet. it's time for the biggest sale of the year, on the sleep number 360 smart bed. snoring? it can gently raise your partner's head to help. our smart sleepers get 28 minutes more restful sleep per night. all smart beds are on sale. save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. only for a limited time.

only at vanguard, you're more than just an investor you're an owner. that means that your goals are ours too. and vanguard retirement tools and advice can help you get there. that's the value of ownership. finding the perfect project manager isn't easy. but, at upwork, we found him. he's in adelaide between his daily lunch delivery and an 8:15 call with san francisco. and you can find him, and millions of other talented pros, right now on upwork.com age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein.

boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. 53 past the hour, it is set to be a busy day on capitol hill along with the fallout of the fbi search of former president trump's mar-a-lago estate. there is new movement from the house select committee veefing

the january 6 attack on the capitol. they are expected to meet with election denier doug mastriano and they are now in possession of all of conspiracy theorist alex jones' text messages as well. joining us now to discuss that and a lot more, a member of over sight and select committee investigating january 6, jamie raskin. let's start to the alex jones text messages. what of interest is in there. >> well, good morning. you know, we're not commenting on specific evidence that we've received and what role it might play in our investigation. but obviously we are interested in receiving all evidence that will shed light on the plan to destabilize and over throw the 2020 presidential election and so that is why we're following

all leads to put the evidence together and make a complete report to congress and to the country and that process continues and we're using our time in august to explore further leads that came out in the first part of our investigation. >> given that you've been so closely looking at and monitoring not just the president's behavior but those around him leading up to and on january 6, i'm just curious, you're reaction, i know you condition say much to the fbi search and the removal of documents from mar-a-lago over the past 24 hours. >> yeah, i mean, the great thing about the separation of powers is we knew nothing about that. i know only what i've been able to see for a couple of minutes this morning on tv. so, we just, we don't know whether that is something related to what we're working on or not and we're conducting our own independent investigation.

obviously everybody in america and speaking as citizens, we all have an interest in the rule of law in the country, and respect for the rule of law. and resistance to the lawlessness that seems to be, you know, always out there now, and i would hope that everybody would respect the rule of law in the country. >> congressman raskin, good morning. jonathan lemire. wanted to ask you while this is all going on, congress still has business at hand including the reconciliation package which passed this weekend in a senate, in a marathon vote and heads to the house this week. friday in fact. give us your sense of it. do you have any concerns that it will pass there and in particular will colleagues of yours persist on some sort of changes that might slow the process down? >> well, there is heavy pen up

demand for movement on climb change which is obviously the overarching civilization crisis of our time. and also in the house i know that there is sweeping support, certainly on the democratic side, through giving the government the power to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices in the medicare program. which is a power that the government has got in the v.a. program and it is got in medicaid, but because of a special interest writer was slipped in many years ago, it is been costing the american people 30 or $35 billion a year in extra prices. so we know that that is in there. so we support the essential major features of what came out of the senate and i think a lot of us have the attitude we're not going to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good because we know the senate is on a razor's edge with the 50/50 split. so, i believe that there is a

steam in the house for the legislation that is come out. and not everybody has had the chance to study every part of it and we will do that. but i'm hopeful that there be movement this week on it. >> and let me connect the two threads here. both the investigation into january 6 and also this piece of legislation. i know democrats are very bullish that if they get the reconciliation through, that it will be a strong platform for which to run this november. as trying to control the house and the senate also important state officials, how much added emphasis, or added weight is there for democrats to do so well considering so many republican opponents are election deniers. we saw them do well in michigan and arizona last week. and doug mastriano speaking in front of your committee. >> well, you know, obviously that is built into the american system.

there is always another election around the corner and i think that is what creates the incentive for us to act quickly on these major overdue questions like climate change. so we can actually make the investments we need in renewable energy, systems and solar and wind and break from the carbon systems that are a major peril to the survival of our species. and it is the same thing on health care. we worked to deliver on that. and dawning my partisan hat, not ome do we have the right program for the country, we are the only one that has a program for the country. we're not consumed with yesterday's battles or trying to overthrow the constitutional order, we're not trying to attack the electoral system. we're trying to defend the democracy and then make democracy deliver for the people. so, that is the basic message that i've been taking out to my

constituents and on the road. >> yeah. i know there is going to be more to come from the january 6 committee. congressman jamie raskin, thank you very much for being on this morning. >> thanks so much for having me. >> take care. it is just about 9:00 a.m. in the east coast, 6:00 a.m. out west as we embark on the fourth hour of "morning joe." the top story from coast to coast this morning, the fbi search of former donald j. trump's home. part of an investigation into whether he took classified documents from the white house. we have all of the angles covered and we'll get the latest from trump tower in new york city. jonathan lemire is still with us, best-selling author and joining the conversation former acting solicitor general and msnbc analyst neal katyal and legal analyst joyce vance, member of the "new york times" editorial board mara