The Briefing With Jen Psaki 7/22/26 | 🅼🆂🅽️🅲 Breaking News Today July 22, 2026

[00:00:00]Hey, Jen.

[00:00:01]>> Hi, Jacob. Um, I feel like J uh John Oav had quite a day uh questioning Pete Hegsth uh yesterday. Was that yesterday?

[00:00:10]Every day is coming together for me. And we're going to talk to him about that.

[00:00:14]But also, Trump was in Georgia today and seemed to have a new nickname for him, Pee-Wee Herman. Pinky Herman. He couldn't get it quite right. Lots of more important things to ask him about, including the war, but we'll talk to him about that, too. and he's going to join me as my first guest.

[00:00:30]>> Both last week uh and this week, John Osaf has held a an absolute freaking master class in how to question witnesses um that come before the Senate. He speaks so slowly. I could learn a lesson from him. So slowly, slow deliber deliberately. Um and he just he gets the people flop sweating um the second they sit down in front of him. I cannot wait um to watch that conversation. He has been he has been really incredible.

[00:00:54]>> He makes them a little nervous. That's clear. Um, Jacob, uh, have a great night. I'll be watching you this weekend.

[00:01:01]>> You, too. Thanks, Jen.

[00:01:03]>> Okay. Have you ever been one of those in one of those situations where a friend starts to embarrass themselves? You know, maybe they had a little too much to drink. Maybe they said something they shouldn't have said, maybe they just seem to be having a hard time keeping it all together. And you have to kind of gently cajol cajol them into taking a little break. We've all been there at some point. And right now, that is exactly what it must feel like for MAGA Republicans trying to deal with Donald Trump and the war in Iran he started. I mean, here was longtime Trump supporter and MAGA darling Bill O'Reilly on his podcast just yesterday.

[00:01:43]So my advice to uh Donald Trump is to take the next month off if you can get into an environment where you like golf and um relax a little bit. You got to deal with Iran. I understand that. Everybody understands it. But you can do that on the phone and you can do that with your people coming. But need a breather.

[00:02:10]You need a breather, Trump. Don't you worry about all that business of governing? Go relax, play some golf.

[00:02:18]Now, was Bill O'Reilly making that suggestion because he is genuinely concerned Trump is not okay? Maybe. Was he making it because he thinks this disastrous war will be easier to bring to an end if Trump isn't sitting in the Oval Office every day? Possibly. Or a combination of the two. It's really hard to know. But regardless of the reason, there's no question it's a bad sign for Trump that one of his biggest supporters is telling him to just take a month off from his duties as president of the United States. But that is where we are at at this point amidst the growing backlash to Trump's war in Iran. And the thing is, Bill O'Reilly may have actually been speaking for a much larther larger swath of Trump supporters. A new political poll out today finds that the number of self-identified MAGA supporters who think Trump's war is worth the economic costs has dropped 13% in just the last two months. And a majority of MAGA supporters, 57%, blame Trump's war for the high cost of gas. And we're seeing that same sentiment on the ground in key battleground states. Our very own MS Now's uh Alex Tabet recently spoke with several three-time Trump voters at a gas station in North Carolina about Trump's war in Iran. Here's what they had to say.

[00:03:32]>> This war has been uh it's been taxing on everyone and I'm I'm on a fixed income and and so it it's a you know other ones that on fixed income are I mean really feeling it. If >> you could talk directly to the president, we know he likes to watch TV.

[00:03:47]What would you tell him about this war?

[00:03:50]President Trump, you shouldn't have got us in this war and was going to end it fast soon and now you're starting all over again.

[00:03:59]>> Has the war helped your life at all?

[00:04:03]>> No. For one thing, it causes me angst.

[00:04:07]Makes me angry.

[00:04:09]And as I said, I'm very disillusioned.

[00:04:11]My entire family is disillusioned.

[00:04:16]And we are and were Trump supporters.

[00:04:19]But this is to me he's drawn a line in the sand and that's how I feel. That's how we all feel.

[00:04:31]That's how we all feel. Again, those were threetime Trump voters.

[00:04:36]Donald Trump is losing support for this war even among his core base. But if you ask the president, he says everybody loves the war. I mean, here he was just this morning making that very same claim again.

[00:04:51]>> Well, Americans aren't against the war.

[00:04:53]The a poll a poll just came out.

[00:04:56]Americans don't want to high gasoline prices, but they're not against the war.

[00:05:00]That just came out loud and clear in a poll.

[00:05:03]>> Trump says Americans aren't against the war. That's what he claims. He says that just came out loud and clear in a poll.

[00:05:09]That's what he just said.

[00:05:12]But here's the latest Washington Post Ipsos poll on support for Trump's war.

[00:05:16]It finds that more than twothirds of the country, 68% do not think Trump's war is worth fighting. Only 28% of Americans think this war is worth it. Donald Trump is obviously in a bind. He started a war without a clear objective and with no clear plans for ending it. And so here we are 145 days into that war and the president is once again going back to his same bag of tricks of making big sweeping threats. This morning he issued a new threat to Iran, saying from this point forward, anytime the Islamic Republic of Iran shoots at a ship in the street of Hormuz, whether it be by missile, rocket, drone, or any other device or weapon, the United States will bomb and destroy one bridge or power plant, including those located next to or in the capital city of Tran. Now, to be clear, that's the president threatening to commit potential war crimes by targeting civilian infrastructure, which would be very big news if this was the first time we heard Trump make exactly that kind of a threat. But it's not. And on top of that, there are other signs that Trump may be feeling cornered and quite desperate. Because today, the Trump administration announced an agreement to provide the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with its own civilian nuclear program. And that's something that the Saudis have wanted for years. And while it has been on the table in the past and under discussion, including the Biden administration, the United States has always wanted a concession for that in return for agreeing to it. Now, we don't know what, if any, concessions Trump may have extracted from the Saudis in exchange. And let's be honest, it's Donald Trump. So, there's always a possibility that this is about enriching himself and his family, which certainly the Saudis have done plenty of. But at the same time knowing that Saudi Arabia was a key partner at the start of Trump's war and we also know that this their support for the war has waned in recent months leading to clashes between Trump and the Saudi crown prince. And now all of a sudden Trump is offering the Saudis a major gift. And you have to wonder if that is Trump's way of trying to salvage his fracturing coalition in this increasingly unpopular war. All while increasing the potential for for increased nuclear volatility in the Middle East. Because if Saudi Arabia has a civilian nuclear program, other countries in the region are going to want one, too. And is that the kind of step that is going to deescalate the war that is already underway with Iran? The answer to that is no. Just tonight, for the 12th day in a row, the US launched more strikes against Iran. Trump knows this war is a liability for him, but he doesn't know how to get out of it, and he doesn't know how to maintain support for it. and he is doing nothing to help himself on that front. I mean, just yesterday, he posted this chart, you can see on your screen, to his social media account, comparing the American death toll from his war to other major conflicts, seemingly in an effort to minimize the loss of those fallen service members. And he did that full well knowing that this morning he was going to attend the dignified transfer for four more service members who have now lost their lives because of this war. Then just today, Trump held a rally in the critical swing state of Georgia.

[00:08:18]And even in front of a crowd of some of his most enthusiastic supporters, he went into some version of delusional spin mode.

[00:08:28]>> I call it a skirmish.

[00:08:31]This is with this skirmish we have with the Islamic Republic of Iran. And I call it that because let me tell you, they're getting hit so hard and they want to make a deal. But I say they're not ready to make a deal because every time they make a deal, they want to change it and everything.

[00:08:50]They're not ready. They'll be ready very soon. We don't need straits. We don't need anything.

[00:08:57]We don't need the hormone street, but we do it because we have to do it.

[00:09:02]>> Trump says we don't need the straight of hormuz or the harmo street or whatever he just called it, even as gas prices continue to rise. He says Iran wants to make a deal, even though he was saying the exact opposite just two weeks ago when he walked away from the negotiating table. He's on the stump in a state Republicans desperately need to win this November. And all he can muster are the same tired lines that didn't convince anyone before and aren't going to convince anyone now. Maybe he should start listening to his own crumbling eco chamber. And you know, as Bill O'Reilly says, just take a breather. Joining me now is Democratic senator is the Democratic senator from Georgia, John Oaf. Senator Assaf, good to see you.

[00:09:38]>> Thank you. Great to be here.

[00:09:40]>> Okay, I just talked about how Trump is losing support across the board. We've seen um polls that among his MAGA base, he's losing support around the Iran war, I should say. I also just played a couple of people uh one of our reporters spoke with at a gas station in North Carolina, three-time Trump supporters, who said they basically feel deceived by what they're seeing in the with the Iran war. You you have been campaigning your heart out in Georgia. What what are you hearing from people who may have voted for Trump in the past about the war?

[00:10:08]>> People are furious because he has plunged the nation recklessly into war despite one of the core promises of his candidacy being that he would extract the nation from those kinds of foreign entanglements and avoid unnecessary war.

[00:10:24]And he clearly did so a on false pretenses. Remember that it was last year administration officials, including Secretary Pete Hegsath, were claiming that their air strikes had, and this was Hegsath's quote, obliterated Iran's ability to create a nuclear weapon. That was last year. And then earlier this year, the White House was putting out statements claiming there was an imminent nuclear threat, even though we know based on public testimony from Tulsi Gabbard that US intelligence had not found that Iran was moving back toward the creation of a nuclear weapon.

[00:10:57]So, we entered this war on false pretenses. Sound familiar? Not the first time the United States has been dragged into a quagmire in the Middle East on false pretenses about weapons of mass destruction. And now we've seen from the very moment the war began that the president, the secretary of defense have lied and lied and lied about the progress of the war, about the duration of the war, and about the purpose of the war. And meanwhile, my constituents are paying more for everything. And it's not just gas because this energy crisis in the Middle East is driving up prices across the board.

[00:11:31]>> You had this quite a moment of questioning of Secretary Hegsth. I think you made him a little nervous to be honest. Um but you were asking him, I think what so many people are wondering, why have you declared victory in this war so many times? It leads many in the American public to think the war is over. The president just went to do and and received four bodies today. What do you think those declarations are about?

[00:11:57]Do you think it is arrogance? Do you think it is incompetence? Do you think it is underestimation? Or a combination of all of them?

[00:12:05]>> I think that uh the culture of this administration is that arrogance and deceit are virtues and it has so damage their credibility.

[00:12:20]Because you heard the president's own supporters talking to your reporter right out in the real world. People have heard from day one. The administration claiming that the war was just about won, just a few days longer, just a few days longer. Declarations of victory, the objectives constantly a moving target. And meanwhile, we see that hundreds of Americans have been wounded, more Americans are being killed, and folks across the country are paying the economic price. Now, the the reason that um that Hegath was there, that Secretary Hegsath was there was to ask for more money for this war, of course, which is why he received so much tough questioning. The H House Republicans today approved nearly $73 billion in additioning additional funding for the war, as well as 10 billion for Trump's election restriction measures. I would note your Senate opponent Mike Collins was missed Trump's rally in Georgia because he was there to vote for that funding. What happens now in the Senate with this funding? I don't think there is bipartisan support to give Pete Hegsth additional slush fund money for misadventures overseas and this administration's failed foreign policy.

[00:13:27]And his testimony yesterday lacked credibility and was not persuasive to anybody. I I do want to note you mentioned that Mike Collins was not present for the president's rally in Georgia today and the conservative paper, the Washington Examiner uh was uh writing that this actually gave Donald Trump cover to avoid having to address Mike Collins scandals because we've learned in recent weeks that Mike Collins office was briefing Nick Fuentes and other prominent white supremacists on its efforts on behalf of a prominent and Holocaust denier and that Mike Collins has had a neo-Nazi propagandist based on his property. And still now, a week after that CNN reporting, refuses to answer whether he or his business or his campaign or his office have paid this neo-Nazi propagandist. Mike Collins needs to come out and hold a press conference tomorrow. He needs to address the press and the public in the state of Georgia, and he needs to come clean. And it's a question that Georgians deserve an answer to. Has he been paying this neo-Nazi propagandist? And is this neo-Nazi propagandist still based on Mike Collins property? When you're giving when you're giving Donald Trump cover, you may have to reexamine your priorities and and clearly is not doing that. Let me ask you about I mentioned this reporting uh about Saudi Arabia and civil nuclear capabilities technology.

[00:14:54]This is something they've wanted for some time. This is something that was under discussion in the Biden administration. though in the past it's been under discussion with getting some concession in return and under the Biden administration it was normalization of relations with Israel. What do you think? I mean obviously the Trump family has benefited financially a great deal from the Saudis. Obviously the Saudis were early supporters of uh the Iran war and now they've kind of backed off of that according to reporting. What do you think should be dug into about this? Do what questions do you have about it?

[00:15:23]Look, my my default position is to be skeptical and to distrust any business that this White House is doing in the Middle East right now. We already saw this windfall for the president's cryptocurrency business, all of this Emirati money that went in right around the time that the administration was approving the export of our most advanced and sensitive chips to the United Arab Emirates. And I just say to folks, aren't we all tired of living under an administration where we know we have to ask about every single thing whether the first family is getting paid and lining their own pockets? And I would just say to folks who are sick of living under an administration that is so corrupt and so full of graft and selfdeing that this Senate race in Georgia is the most important Senate race in the country.

[00:16:17]And the president, his allies are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars attacking me. And if folks want to help me get out the vote and win this race and rebuke these abuses and this corruption, it's electjo.com.

[00:16:29]electjn.com.

[00:16:32]>> Senator John Oaf, thank you as always for being here.

[00:16:34]>> Thank you.

[00:16:35]>> Okay, don't go anywhere because we have some big breaking news to get to tonight. House Republicans have just taken a drastic step to try and punish one of Trump's favorite targets, former special counsel Jack Smith. It's the latest salvo in the campaign to weaponize the legal system against Trump's enemies. We're working on getting all the details. We're going to be combing through it during the break.

[00:16:55]We'll be right back and talk about it all next.

[00:17:04]For a year and a half now, we have seen Trump's allies grasp at straws in their attempts to go after Trump's perceived enemies. They raided a man's house in the middle of the night, publicly accused him of being part of the deep state, and charged him with felony assault. All because he threw a Subway sandwich at a federal agent. Remember that? I mean, that's obviously hardly a deadly weapon. Prosecutors tried to claim that the agent could feel the impact of the sandwich through his bulletproof vest. They indicted former FBI Director James Comey on charges of threatening the president's life just because Comey posted a photo of seashells on Instagram. They've accused a whole list of Trump's perceived enemies of mortgage fraud for doing something multiple of Trump's own cabinet members have done themselves and which Trump has done himself. If it weren't so serious, it would all be pretty freaking laughable. And now tonight, Trump's allies are yet again grasping at straws. This time in an attempt to jin up something they could try to use against former special counsel Jack Smith. Because tonight, and as I noted, this literally just broke.

[00:18:08]The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee filed a formal criminal referral, the letter right here, asking acting attorney general Todd Blanch to prosecute Jack Smith on the very flawed premise that he lied to Congress. That was first reported by Fox News because, well, of course it was.

[00:18:25]But we here at MS Now have now obtained the referral ourselves. And the logic undergirling this referral doesn't actually make much sense. It's weedy and technical and confusing. And that might be the point because if all you know is that a member of Congress is saying Jack Smith lied to them, that certainly sounds bad. But when you look at the details here, they don't really seem to add up. And luckily for us, Republican Senator Josh Holly explained the GOP's logic on all this just last week when he was trying to get Blanch to prosecute Jack Smith for it. Now, just to show you how ridiculous this all is, how much this is yet again the GOP grasping its straws, let me just break down what Holly's argument was. For almost a year now, Republicans have been trying to say that Jack Smith broke the law by obtaining the phone records of members of Congress while he was investigating January 6th. In reality, all Smith did was subpoena what are known as toll records, which are essentially logs showing when calls were made, but not their content. It's kind of like your phone bill. just shows who you called and and when. We've talked about this, by the way, on this show before because this is so absurd. So, he subpoenaed the toll records of lawmakers who interacted with Trump around the time of January 6, 2021 because wouldn't you want to know that information if you're overseeing an investigation, but he couldn't see what they were saying in those communications. He just knew who called who when. Now, Republicans are trying to conflate those subpoenaed toll records of members of Congress with this.

[00:19:56]Because last week, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley released documents showing that Jack Smith January 6 investigation had also obtained text messages from 44 lawmakers. Republicans have been trying to act like that is a huge scandal. But here's the thing.

[00:20:12]Smith obtained those texts because he asked the National Archives for records from the White House from around the time of January 6th. Again, if you're investigating this, wouldn't you want to have those? And it turns out a lot of people in the White House were texting with members of Congress. So Republicans are trying to conflate the toll records and these texts from the White House obtained from the National Archives to try to try to pretend that Jack Smith lied to Congress to try to prosecute Jack Smith for lying to Congress. And again, here was Senator Holly last week trying to show what he asserted was a moment in which Jack Smith lied.

[00:20:50]>> Here is a record. I'm going to read it to you. record of Jack Smith's responses under oath now to members of Congress.

[00:20:57]He has asked question as it relates to members and their staffs and senators.

[00:21:03]It's just the toll records as far as you remember. Smith, that is my recollection.

[00:21:11]>> Now, the gotcha that Holly is going for here is that he is trying to say that Jack Smith lied to Congress by saying that the only communications of members of Congress he subpoenaed were the toll records.

[00:21:22]But that is the truth. He didn't subpoena any text messages from any member of Congress. He got texts of White House officials from the National Archives. And surprise, surprise everyone, people in the White House text people in Congress.

[00:21:35]Now, the biggest reach they are making is that they are conveniently ignoring the full text of what Jack Smith actually told them in his deposition.

[00:21:43]They are just trying to twist his words so it seems like he is lying when he isn't. I mean, here was the section of Jack Smith's deposition that Holly presented last week like it was some sort of a smoking gun. To make it clear as day, we are going to put the actual text of what Jack Smith said in his deposition up next to Holly so you can just see what he left out. Watch as he just conveniently skips over the fact that Smith was answering a question specifically just about the toll records.

[00:22:14]>> Question. Did the records that you requested include the content of text messages? Smith answer. No.

[00:22:24]Now, maybe there's some nuance I'm missing here.

[00:22:29]>> Actually, I think there is quite a bit of nuance you were missing there, Senator Holly. And while Jim Jordan's new criminal referral gives the actual full quote of what Smith said, this is still spin. It's still grasping at straws. Jordan writes tonight that they believe Smith's answer to Congress were quote halftruths. I'd say that the real halftruth appears to be this criminal referral itself. In a statement tonight reacting to Jim Jordan's flimsy criminal referral, representatives for former special counsel Jack Smith said, quote, "The referral is made not because Mr. Smith made a false statement, which the letter concedes, but because he did not proactively disclose information that was not responsive to a question asked."

[00:23:09]This referral reflects a chilling eagerness to weaponize the justice system by attacking a career nonpartisan public servant who faithfully and fearlessly performed his duties by following the facts and the law. Joining me now is MS Now justice and intelligence correspondent Kendallian.

[00:23:26]And again, we just got this letter.

[00:23:28]Ken's very smart. He's been reading over it. Let me just start by asking you, Ken. We tried to do our best summary there. What do you make of what Jordan is alleging in this referral?

[00:23:40]Look, and this is not a partisan statement. I'm a reporter, Jen. This doesn't pass the laugh test. This is such a stretching of the facts here. Uh, let me just read you a response that I got from Jamie Raskin, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. He says in part, "This referral, if ever brought by a judge, will get laughed out of court. But success on the merits is not the goal. It is meant to harass Jack Smith. It's meant to please their Fox News viewership. It's meant to whitewash their own participation in a scheme to overthrow our elections. Look, the bottom line is you can't charge somebody for lying because they weren't asked the right question. Now, maybe we all wish, maybe Jack Smith wishes that he had amended or added to his answer about the toll records. And by the way, I'm not saying that we didn't obtain any text messages throughout the investigation relating to members of Congress. And maybe he didn't even remember because this was not a significant part of the investigation. As you said, this was a subpoena to the National Archives for White House records. And in those White House records were contained text messages from members of Congress. And there's a whole procedure that prosecutors have to go through when they're figuring out whether they can review any records related to Congress because there is a legislative privilege. There's a speech and debate clause. And the Smith team went through all of that. Uh they Jack Smith talked about that under oath. Um he said he followed all the Justice Department guidelines related to that. And you can argue about whether they went too far, whether they played fast and loose, but the idea that Jack Smith intentionally lied under oath based on this set of facts is just ridiculous. And I Jamie, you're asking is right. This will get laughed out of court. Now, the thing we have to be concerned about here is we've seen this movie before. The Justice Department has charged James Comey with lying in a very similar set of circumstances for statements that don't really track a question that was was rather confusing. And so it would not surprise me actually if this Justice Department ended up charging Jack Smith.

[00:25:37]But if they do, that will be uh that will be a ridiculous uh moment in our in American history. Jack.

[00:25:43]>> Yeah. I wanted to ask you about in terms of kind of what happens here. I mean, this to me feels like a big PR play. Um right. It's you know, they want to get attention. They want to throw in some credibility. Jack Smith just did an hourlong interview with our colleague Nicole Wallace a few weeks ago. Doesn't seem like a coincidence to me. Who knows? I would also know that one of the documents that Senator Chuck Grassley released last week showed that Smith's team discussing discuss sending discussing sending the lawmakers texts they got from the White House and National Archives to Trump's defense attorneys years ago. As in Chuck Grassley released documents acknowledging that this wasn't a secret.

[00:26:15]This was known just like the toll records were known because they were literally in the report that was released by Jack Smith. Maybe people didn't read the report. But what do you think this is all about? I mean, is it a PR game? Is it more than that? Is it trying to take Jack Smith off the board?

[00:26:30]What is it about?

[00:26:32]>> It's certainly a PR game. And it certainly is an effort to silence and intimidate Jack Smith. I mean, he's been very clear about the pressure that he feels he's under. And people who work for him have been fired and purged from the Justice Department. I just fear that it could be more than that, that we could actually see a criminal case arise from this. Uh because we've seen that kind of thing before. Uh this Justice Department has proven itself capable of contorting itself to file criminal charges against the president's enemies.

[00:27:01]And there's no greater enemy, let's face it, uh in Donald Trump's mind than Jack Smith, the man who did try to put him in prison. That was Jack Smith's intention.

[00:27:09]Let's not, you know, make no bones about it. He filed very serious criminal charges and he has said publicly since then that he believes Donald Trump was guilty of those charges. He could have proven those charges in court and and they likely they very possibly could have resulted in a prison sentence for Donald Trump. So, uh yeah, I mean I fear that it's more than a PR campaign. And to to your earlier point, you're absolutely right. Of course, this was disclosed to Donald Trump's lawyers in discovery. All the relevant documents in a criminal investigation have to be turned over to to the defense. That's part of our system. So the idea that they're just discovering this now, the Republicans and and make and that it's a this grave scandal, um, you know, it just doesn't it doesn't seem logical to >> and Senator Grassly released some of it.

[00:27:49]Okay. So So talk to release some of the correspondents about it. Talk to us about what happens next here. What are you you you have many stories you're covering in this Justice Department, but what are you watching for? What are the things that could happen next year?

[00:28:03]Well, we'll watch for signs of a grand jury investigating this matter. And you know, grand juries are secret. So, we're reading tea leaves and we may hear from people inside the Justice Department who are very concerned about these kinds of political cases. Uh, you know, we we some that sometimes we learn about these kinds of things from people that are very upset about them. And so, that's what we'll do. we'll we'll use we'll we'll report it out and we'll look for any signs that they are actually conducting a criminal investigation that could result in charges against Jack Smith. Jack Smith's lawyers may hear about it. They may be there may be witnesses brought in. Uh that those are the kinds of things that we'll watch for. Uh because again, this is going on all the time. They're all there all manner of people that that came into Donald Trump's crosshairs that he views as a political enemy who are being investigated at at this moment by the Justice Department.

[00:28:57]>> Kendallian, thank you as always for your tireless reporting and being able to consume and digest things so quickly. We appreciate it.

[00:29:05]>> You bet.

[00:29:06]>> Okay, we're going to stay on top of this story tonight. We'll let you know if more information develops this hour. In the meantime, up next here, two people were killed by ICE officers within the span of just six days this month.

[00:29:16]Neither officer was wearing a body camera despite the record funding that ICE has received from Congress.

[00:29:22]Democrats press for answers on that and more in a closed door briefing today.

[00:29:25]Congresswoman Lam Monica Macgyver, who was there and has been at the front edge of this uh she's going to join me next.

[00:29:31]We're going to talk all about it.

[00:29:39]For over two weeks now, ever since we learned of the tragic killings of two immigrants at the hands of ICE agents in Texas and Maine, the outrage, protests, and calls for accountability have only grown. While at the same time, key questions related to the shootings remain unanswered. What we do know is that both of the shootings happened during traffic stops, that the victims were not ISIS's intended targets, and that the ICE agents themselves were not wearing body cameras. That's despite the fact that the Republican controlled Congress gave ICE an outrageous $75 billion in Trump's big ugly bill a year ago. And then an additional $20 million in funding specifically for body cameras. So what has happened to that money? Why weren't those agents equipped with those vital tools? Why weren't they wearing them? Why aren't they always on?

[00:30:26]Well, according to the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, ICE officials now say that body cameras will be rolled out over the next 60 days. So, I guess they still need another two months while they've had a year to do it with all this money. Now, that timeline came out during a closed door briefing today where Democratic members of the House Homeland Security Committee reportedly pressed ICE on their use of force. Congressman Seth Magaziner told the Associated Press that ICE revealed that there have been 56 complaints of excessive force against ICE officers and of those complaints, 32 were cleared and one was referred for disciplinary action. Now, my next guest was also there behind those closed doors. She is someone who since day one has been out front trying to get more answers from ICE demanding transparency and was even indicted on felony charges in her efforts to do so. Joining me now is Congresswoman Lam Monica McGyver, member of the House Homeland Security Committee. It's great to see you. Thank you for being here.

[00:31:20]>> Let me start by just asking you about um what your biggest takeaway was from this closed door hearing this morning. Well, I mean, look, we've been dealing with ICE for a long time now, especially with the, you know, unprofessional ineffectiveness of this department, the cruelty and chaos. And so, I went into it as this is another show for them, you know, coming to try to cover their behinds, but at the same time, we know what is really happening. Um, I will say this was the first time we actually had a a decent and kind conversation with representatives from ICE. you know, back last May, my first interaction with them was, you know, screw you. I don't need to answer any questions um to you or, you know, respond to you. And so today, it was a decent dialogue, but at the same time, we found out one, folks are not wearing a body cam. They have money for body cams, but haven't rolled it out. How' they explain that?

[00:32:12]>> Basically, they didn't. They just said that, "Look, we're going to get everyone to have a body cam in 60 days." I'm like, well, you were supposed to Ben had body cams, so what is going on? But no real true, you know, information for us on both sides of the aisle that we're asking these questions about why all ICE agents aren't wearing body cams already.

[00:32:31]I know in New Jersey, some are wearing body cams and maybe in others, but most of these states, they are operating without any accountability, basically not wearing body cams, which is a problem. Obviously, >> I think for most people watching who have sat in horror and watched as we have reported and others have reported on hearing your story, the conditions in these ICE facilities, what's happening also at at traffic stops and and knowing how much money think it is absolutely insane that they're not wearing body cameras and that is not demanded. What can happen to make that the case? Like what needs to happen for people out there?

[00:33:04]>> Well, first of all, number one, I think people should be outraged about what is happening, right? We have seen American citizens murdered in broad daylight in front of our faces. And thank God for people's actual cameras, their iPhone cameras or whatever kind of phone they had taping these encounters. But at the end of the day, there's no excuse why every ICE agent operating the way that they've been operating, all of the complaints that we've get that we've gotten that they should be operating without body cams, especially after Congress, Republicans gave them this extra slush fund of money to be able to do so. and they're not even using the money the way that they should be using the money. Uh so it's very problematic and once again we can't trust them as we see you know to behave properly. So we need these body cams.

[00:33:50]>> One of the other details I just mentioned that came out of the meeting was how 53 report there have there have been 53 reports of excessive force by ICE only one has been referred to disciplinary action. When do you think the 53 reports is an under reportport?

[00:34:05]And what should people know about why only one has been referred for disciplinary action?

[00:34:10]>> Honestly, Jen, it's hard to believe. I mean, are we serious? First of all, we have four people killed by ICE already.

[00:34:17]Um, uh, Ale, uh, Bnee Good, Alex Prey, where those investigations at? What I find crazy to me is they're operating, you know, of standard operations, you know, their procedures, their processes.

[00:34:29]It's so different from regular law enforcement, from you know, municipal police departments, county police. The way they operate is just it's crazy to me. Like they don't have to respond.

[00:34:41]They don't have to answer to anyone. You know, they claim they don't have to share anything with the public, which was throwing us all for a loop because we know that a municipality, police departments, they have to report out about these matters. Well, they said they didn't have to tell us anything. It was, "Oh, I can't discuss this. I can't discuss this." Members asked over and over again. And I asked for a copy of the policies, the procedures, what happens. I mean, and to me, it was just not concrete on how they are operating, which is truly concerning. Let me ask you before I let you go. I know this news just broke and hopefully you've had a chance to review it, but Jim Jordan referred Jack Smith to the Department of Justice and accused him of perjury. I just did my best in partnership with Kendallian and our amazing producers there to kind of walk through why this is complete BS. But what what's your reaction to that letter?

[00:35:29]>> It's just another crazy thing coming out of Republicans.

[00:35:34]You know, first of all, the fact that they're focused on Jack Smith writing this letter, they're putting more energy in that than they did of folks that should be being prosecuted in the Epstein files. Literally, they are more focused on that. that it's just Jack Smith on, you know, another person on Trump's list that they want to try to go after. And at the end of the day, any, you know, jury, any court is going to look at it and laugh. But at the same time, it's really bigger than that. Jen, I've talked with you about this before.

[00:36:01]It's about the cruelty, the punishment, them putting Jack Smith through all of this, just like I'm being put through my own situation. This is what they get a kick out of, and this is what they want to see happen. And so, it's just another thing that they're focused on that they should not be focused on. They should be focused on the American people and delivering for them, not going after Jack Smith.

[00:36:20]>> Well, I mean, you are a proud, bold, courageous person who continues to speak out. Um, thank you for being here and and sharing more about the meeting this morning. Appreciate it. Okay, up next, the Trump administration has already taken a hatchet to diversity, equity, inclusion efforts in the federal workforce. They're obsessed, but they have plans for the private sector, too.

[00:36:41]And this week they took a big step to erode protections in your workplace.

[00:36:45]We're going to talk about that coming up next.