JEFFREY GOLDBERG: In a frenetic week meant to overwhelm the cognitive capabilities of critics, the media, and the average citizen, President Donald Trump upended norms and policies across the government.

But the presidentús most dramatic move took even some of his allies by surprise.

Tonight, weúll try to make sense of the tumultuous first week of Donald Trumpús second term, next.

Good evening and welcome to Washington Week.

Four years ago, thousands of Donald Trump supporters marched on the Capitol in order to prevent the ratification of Joe Bidenús presidential victory.

They beat police officers, destroyed property, threatened to kill the vice president and the speaker of the House.

Many were arrested and prosecuted for their crimes.

Trump himself was excoriated by leaders of his party for inciting the mob.

Of course, you know the rest of the story.

Earlier this week, Trump now, the most consequential American political leader of the 21st century, pardoned most of the rioters and commuted the sentences of many of the rest.

Many of them are demanding that Trump avenge their prosecutions.

I am your retribution, he said in 2023.

And we would be naive to believe that he doesnút mean it.

So much has happened since inauguration on Monday that itús hard to keep up on issues ranging from DEI to immigration.

Weúll try to unpack the week tonight, and weúll try to understand the possible consequences of the release of more than 1,500 rioters from prison.

Joining me tonight to discuss all this, Laura Barron-Lopez is the White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour, Leigh Ann Caldwell is the chief Washington correspondent at Puck, Ashley Parker is my colleague and a staff writer at The Atlantic, and Charlie Savage is a Washington correspondent for The New York Times.

Thank you all for being here.

We are not lacking in topics.

I want to start with January 6th because itús -- nothingús really surprising, but this is a borderline surprise in the depth of the pardoning and the commutation.

I mean, and, you know, and itús I guess itús just me, but I find it odd that men who assaulted police officers had their sentences commuted by or outright pardoned by a Republican president.

No Democratic president I think would do it, but no Republican president to date would do such a thing.

I want to show you one clip just to introduce this topic.

So, the man in the video with the pole is named Scott Miller, and he was one of those pardoned.

He was beating a police officer in that video.

And, you know, I just am so surprised, I think itús the only thing that maybe surprised me this week, that this would happen.

Ashley, can you explain the new reality to us?

ASHLEY PARKER, Staff Writer, The Atlantic: Well, first, youúre not the only one whoús surprised.

I mean, there were Republicans who, including his own vice president, who previously got out in front and said, of course, heús not going to pardon the people who committed the actual violence.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Just you mean J.D.

Vance, his vice president, not the old vice president who they threatened?

Yes.

Okay.

No, I just want to make sure.

J.D.

Vance said ten days ago or so.

ASHLEY PARKER: Yes.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes.

ASHLEY PARKER: Basically, he did not expect that the people who committed acts of violence against the police officers would be pardoned.

That was the view of a lot of Republicans.

Thatús the first thing.

But the new reality in many ways is the old reality, which is that sort of almost immediately with Trump, almost immediately after January 6th happened, there was this whitewashing process to tell the public that what they saw, that clip you just showed, what people saw when they were in the Capitol, what these Republican lawmakers experienced when they were running for their lives, in many cases, what people watched on their T.V.

screens, hadnút really happened or wasnút as bad as they thought it was.

And that is the reality Trump has -- the false reality, but it is the reality he has been trying to push that was part of his political comeback, really, since that deadly attack on the Capitol.

And so by that logic, you can see why Trump, by sort of pardoning and exonerating all of these people, these were the people who he urged to go march on the Capitol.

In some ways he seems to be trying to exonerate himself in part in his own behavior from that day.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: He called it a day of love.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Leigh Ann, you watched the Republican caucus carefully and you were also, I should note, in the Capitol on January 6th.

You experienced this directly.

What are you hearing from Republican leaders this week about the pardons.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL, Chief Washington Correspondent, Puck: So, Republicans are -- well, publicly theyúre not saying that much about it.

Privately, Republicans are uneasy about it.

Theyúre queasy.

They think that he went too far.

They were not, as Ashley said, expecting the ones who actively beat police or charged and convicted of serious crimes to also be pardoned as well.

Itús not even just the more centrist, moderate Republicans who are saying that, but even those who are more in Donald Trumpús corner, and privately though.

But thereús also a caveat to that.

They are trying to justify it at the same time by pointing to President Bidenús just, you know, a couple days prior pre-pardons of his family.

Theyúre pointing to the pardon or commutation, I canút remember which, of Leonard Peltier, who was convicted decades ago of killing two FBI officers.

So, thereús a lot of both sideisms as well.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

I want to talk about the Biden pardon, which came minutes before he gave up the presidency, had to leave the presidency in a moment, but just coming back to this, these are -- I mean, and I was there too, we all reported on this in one way or another, these are Republicans who were at the time appalled, first of all, fearful, scared.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: They ran for their lives.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: And they ran.

They ran for their lives.

Thatús a literal truth.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Yes.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Anybody to your knowledge of the Republicans in the Senate and the House, anybody say anything publicly saying this is a bad thing and we shouldnút let these guys out of jail?

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Not forcefully that Iúm aware of.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ, White House Correspondent, PBS NewsHour: Lisa Murkowski did put out a statement saying and condemning.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: And Susan Collins.

And I think Thom Tillis put out a statement.

And Thom Tillis was saying thatús something he didnút agree with.

But, look, these are the people who -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Weúre used to them.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Yes, we are used to them.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: And so -- you know, but the fact that there was -- these people who, after the day, after the night of January 6th, they were done with Trump, they thought that this was the worst attack on democracy.

They thought that this was a major threat to democracy.

And it wasnút until, as Ashley pointed out, this years-long attempt to change the narrative from making these people criminals to victims.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Go ahead, Laura.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: I mean, itús revisionist history, and I wasnút necessarily that surprised, only because Donald Trump had been saying almost the entire campaign, I am your retribution, as you said, I want revenge, he called them hostages.

He never said explicitly that he was only going to pardon a certain amount.

He talked about them in big groups, and as though they were all being treated poorly, and that they were all being held in horrible conditions and that they didnút deserve the justice that was served to them.

So -- CHARLIE SAVAGE, White House Correspondent, The New York Times: Hostages.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Yes, hostages.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Well, thereús an amazing moment LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: (INAUDIBLE) over and over again.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: There was an amazing moment in all of this when he equated, he was meeting with the families of Israeli hostages of Hamas and he equated those hostages seized from their homes by a terrorist organization and held for a year-and-a-half to people who were convicted in American civilian courts of violent crimes, and said hostages are hostages are hostages.

ASHLEY PARKER: People who were sometimes turned in by their family members who were so appalled at what they saw.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: But I think whatús so stunning about what happened was that, yes, and 1,500 total, the fact that the leader of the Proud Boys, the leader of the Oath Keepers were released, and that now they are emboldened and they are essentially looking to rebuild their far right extremist groups.

Theyúre looking to recruit, you know, the former law enforcement that Iúve spoken to, including ones DHS under the first Trump administration, are incredibly -- yes, are incredibly concerned about the threats of potential violence, that these actors will go out on their own or inspire people to go out on their own with their tough talk to then carry out their own acts of violence.

CHARLIE SAVAGE: You know, if I could build off that, thereús a way in which this was a huge risk for Trump.

Weúve seen from the right that of the millions of people in the United States, if one undocumented migrant in some random town commits a crime, it becomes a cause celebre and everyone, it becomes famous and notorious, and everyone keeps talking about it, even in a vast country when thereús always something going on.

Thereús now 1,500-plus people who have shown themselves to have extraordinarily poor judgment, letús say, at a minimum.

Plenty of people didnút like the outcome of that election and didnút go beat up cops and stormed the Capitol that day.

These people did.

As you say, theyúre now emboldened.

And any acts of violence or crimes that these people, you know, just one or two of them commit, Trump is going to own.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Well, you know, itús interesting, the so-called shaman, the famous - - the horn guy, he was pardoned and the first thing he said was that he was going to go out and buy some guns.

I mean, so the emboldening is there.

To be fair to the shaman, he also said that he was going to go buy some weed, which militates against taking action in a gun store, takes or militates against taking action or anything.

But, nevertheless, they know that theyúre operating under essentially the protection.

Because if you could get a pardon now, why canút you get a pardon three years from now, something you havenút done yet, as long as Trump is president?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: And Donald Trump also said earlier this week, which I think was kind of, again, with all the news, gets buried, but he said he suggested that maybe there is a place in politics for the Proud Boys, that thereús a place in politics for -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Stand back and stand by, I think, was the expression.

Charlie, let me ask you this, the subject of the Biden pardon came up.

Very few people liked that pardon.

Very few liked the Biden pardons, including in the Democratic Party, but especially this very last-minute pre-pardon of family members.

Do you think that that itús connected in any way to the subsequent January 6th pardons?

In other words, that was the permission structure changing, well, if Biden is going to do it, Iúm going to go even further?

CHARLIE SAVAGE: I mean, it certainly provided a what about excuse, as we were hearing from the Hill.

But, honestly, I think Trump was going to do what he was going to do regardless.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Itús -- yes.

What are the consequences -- I donút want to talk to you about rule of law generally, but what are the consequences of that Biden pardon, that last-minute pardon, for the idea that no one is above the law in America?

CHARLIE SAVAGE: I mean, a pre-pardon for people who have not been charged with a crime yet and not even suspected of a crime, I mean, it depends on how we think about it.

If we put this in the category of Trump is coming, he is going to weaponize DOJ, as heús promised to do, and, you know, bring charges against his political enemies as a matter of just grievance score settling, and even when thereús not really a crime there, a basis for opening an investigation, then this was an extraordinary, but, you know, sadly weird, unique to this moment in time thing.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

CHARLIE SAVAGE: But if you think that those guys really was something there, and to have a blanket pardon for anything that happened going back ten years, in the case of Hunter Biden, for example, really, you know, thereús no limits the Constitution puts on a presidentús clemency powers.

And itús just -- itús one of those powers thatús just ripe for abuse because of that.

And, you know, weúre just seeing norms of self-restraint melting away.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Thereús also a political element to this, too, even though Trumpús not going to be running for reelection, we think.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: So you say.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Not only did he campaign on this, but also Democrats partially also campaigned on January 6th, and this was a closing argument of Kamala Harrisú campaign and it didnút work.

And so there is an acknowledgement for Trump that this is something that is politically viable in this moment.

ASHLEY PARKER: And, lastly, on the pardons on the Democratic side also, thereús a lot of frustration from Democrats who sort of felt like, you know, they believed that Democrats were better than this, and a lot of Bidenús closing argument was also sort of upholding standards and norms of democracy, and they believe those pardons undermine that.

And then thereús another sense of frustration from Democrats, which you see publicly and privately that he did that last batch of pardons, but it was quite small and thereús a lot of other people, if you believe, as Charlie said, that Trump is going to keep his promise to weaponize the Department of Justice and go after people.

Why limit it to such a small group?

Thereús a lot of other people, Cassidy Hutchinson, Olivia Troye.

Thereús any number of people who do not necessarily have the financial means or the connections the way, say, a General Milley or an Anthony Fauci does to protect themselves.

If youúre going to do it, if youúre going to violate these precedents that you said you were not going to violate, why not just protect everyone is another thing Iúve heard.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes, go ahead.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: If I could add just two quick points on this.

I mean, when you ask about consequences, you know, thereús a bit of irony in that Donald Trump and Republicans for so long said we just want to put January 6th in the past.

We donút want to talk about January 6th.

Democrats want to talk about January 6th.

And now, itús not just ending with the pardons.

Republicans are launching their own investigations on the Hill.

The Justice Department is launching its investigation into the January 6th investigation.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Investigations of investigations.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Investigations of investigators.

And then also, in terms of consequences, not to like hammer this point, but we have a historical parallel for what happened before when 14 white supremacists in 1988 were acquitted of seditious conspiracy and then it revitalized the far right groups across the country, and that led to the Oklahoma City bombing.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So, there is historical parallel to it.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right, interesting point, and we should talk about that in future shows because this is not going away.

Charlie, I want to turn to the broader picture here, Trump and the rule of law.

Youúve been covering a lot of these issues and Iúm wondering, simply put, what is this, what is the thing that - - apart from the January 6th part, whatús the thing thatús most surprised you about some of these executive orders so far?

CHARLIE SAVAGE: So, as I was processing that blizzard of executive orders that Trump signed on the night of Inauguration Day, suddenly dozens are showing up, he was sitting in the Oval Office stack after stack after stack, you know, itús very different than eight years ago.

I think he issued four executive orders in his first five days.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Most of that first day was Sean Spicer trying to defend outrageous claims about crowd size.

CHARLIE SAVAGE: They knew what they were doing this time.

This was well prepared, this was scripted, these things were written.

And he was really pushing at the limits of legitimate executive authority with some of them.

The pardons weúve just been talking about, as I just said, may not be a good idea, but thereús no doubt he could do that.

The Constitution clearly lets the president do that.

Some of the stuff thatús in these executive orders is quite different.

Heús, for example, you know, it all seems like a million years ago we were talking about TikTok, but heús directing the government to essentially suspend this law that was passed by bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress signed by President Biden, upheld unanimously by the Supreme Court just a couple days ago, and he said, weúre just going to suspend it.

It doesnút exist.

How does he have the power to do that?

You know, the Constitution says the president shall take care of the laws, be faithfully executed.

Heús just doing it.

Heús invoking commander-in-chief powers to -- in some of his immigration actions.

Heús saying weúre just not going to -- weúre going to treat migrants as invaders.

Heús activating North Com to develop a military campaign on domestic soil.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: The word invasion is used very deliberately in some of these documents.

I want to ask you about the immigration.

He ordered an end to birthright citizenship.

Well, he ordered it and then, very predictably, because it is in the Constitution, a judge, a Ronald Reagan-appointed judge, said, what are you doing?

You canút do that.

Any lawyer, any first year law student knows that, any judge is going to put a stop to that, or at least a temporary block on that.

So, whatús going on there?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Why do it?

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Why do it?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Well, because supporters and allies of Donald Trump who once were considered more on the fringe, whether itús Stephen Miller or John Eastman, a lawyer from California who wanted - - you know, this is their project.

They had long wanted to challenge birthright citizenship.

And Trump said, okay, letús do it.

I was told by a source close to the White House that some inside want this to be successful.

Some inside the White House want this to be successful.

Some inside the White House want this to go to the courts and get killed, so then that way they never have to touch it again.

Because they donút believe that they accurately say that in the Constitution, it says that he doesnút have the ability to -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: A pragmatically futile attempt to overturn the Constitution.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: But I think with others, the Trump White House is looking forward to the court challenges, whether itús in immigration, not necessarily connected to birthright citizenship, or whether itús in -- whether or not they can take back some of the power of the purse from Congress.

They want to be able to use whatús known as impoundment authority to disperse federal funds however they see fit.

And they want that challenge to go to the Supreme Court, and they hope that with some of these that theyúre able to get favorable ruling.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Ashley, where are the Democrats in all of these controversies?

I mean, this is not 2017 with mass rallies and protests, but it just doesnút seem as if the Democratic Party is coming out in force to say, oh, you know what, maybe donút let the leader of the Proud Boys out of jail.

ASHLEY PARKER: I mean, am I allowed to say it, that the Democrats are in disarray?

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes, you are allowed to say that Democrats -- LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: They said that they are.

ASHLEY PARKER: Yes, they said that they are.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Democrats continue to be in disarray.

ASHLEY PARKER: I mean, youúre right.

What is so striking is this sort of very forceful and energizing resistance that Democrats put up for so long has dissipated, at least in this moment.

And when you look at what theyúre saying and when you talk to them, some of them are kind of candid about their -- theyúre trying to regroup and retrench, right?

They just lost an election.

As weúre talking about, thereús, which is what Trump always does, this shock and awe fire hose of things, which is even just from a political messaging standpoint, which one do you go after.

Is it immigration?

Is it the pardons?

Is it withdrawing from the World Health Organization or the Paris Climate, you know?

So, theyúre regrouping.

And Democrats also are in a bit of a, an effort to reconstitute the party where Donald Trump and Republicans were able to claim a lot of the policies of Democrats as their own.

I mean, if you look back at when Biden was the nominee, it is so striking that Scranton Joe ceded being the advocate of the middle class in the American worker to Donald Trump, that Donald Trump was able to take that mantle from him.

And thatús something Democrats are trying to grapple with too.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: So, quickly, who is going to lead the Democrats into array?

And who are the -- it doesnút seem like anybody is sort of remotely ready to seize the mantle of direction and leadership.

Obviously, there are people -- there are the so called normie Democrats, you hear Elissa Slotkin and people like that talking about, letús not talk about identity thing, race, gender, letús not obsess about -- letús just talk about the things that people want to talk about.

But where is -- is there anybody yet youúve seen who says, oh Iúm going to take this by the horns and deal with it?

ASHLEY PARKER: I think the thing Iúve heard the most, and again, this is more from the normie Democrats, is this effort to wrest the party back from the activists and from the groups and -- JEFFREY GOLDBERG: The so-called groups.

ASHLEY PARKER: The so-called groups.

And Iúve heard people say, the next time a group says, you know, if you donút take this sort of very out of the mainstream leftist position, weúre going to blast you in a primary, the answer should be, okay, so blast us because we donút all want to be, if youúre a Democrat, standing up on stage and raising your hand for something that will get you killed in a general election.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right.

I want to - - one more topic I want to raise, and obviously there are a million topics brought up by these actions this week, but President Trumpús decision to pull security off of three figures, his former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, his former national security adviser, John Bolton, and his former advisor on Iran, Brian Hook, all of whom are under death threats from the government of Iran.

These are people that all worked for Donald Trump, they got on Donald Trumpús bad side for one reason or another.

Leigh Ann, this is way, way, way outside the norm of Washington behavior.

How much danger are these men in?

And are there people in the Republican caucus, people on -- Republicans on the Hill who are saying, you canút do that?

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Yes.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Theyúre under -- go on.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: I mean, so, I donút know how much danger they are in.

Iúm not talking to intelligence officials.

But what I will say is this is Trump promised retribution and this is it.

Itús not just retribution for Liz Cheney and Democrats, but itús retribution for people who have wronged him.

And this is one way that heús able to use his strings to do that.

This is not something that has come up on Capitol Hill.

I will say, like we all are, Republicans and Democrats are drinking through a fire hose right now.

Every single aide that I talk to is literally exhausted and overwhelmed and cannot even jump from one topic to another.

So, I think that this is not even resonating yet on Capitol Hill.

And, Charlie, you might have a lot more on the intel side.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Yes.

Charlie, let me give you the -- Iúll give you the last word if you can answer the question, is this so far out of the bounds of what a Washington norm traditionally has been that people donút even have the language to deal with the fact that the president is cutting these guys adrift when they carried out his order to assassinate Qassem Soleimani, the Iranian terrorist leader?

CHARLIE SAVAGE: I mean, well put.

I canút build on that much.

But.

you know, itús not just about, I think, bullying people that heús decided were once his, you know, minions, but, you know, criticized him in some way and now are out of the tent, but itús also about striking fear in his current minions that they better not do anything but toe the line because look what happens when youúre out of the tent.

Youúre really out of the tent.

And, you know, the physical danger aspect of that resonates for me with what Mitt Romney and others talked about during the second impeachment, where Republicans supposedly were saying to each other they wanted to vote to convict Trump but they were afraid for their own physical safety and that of their family after January 6th.

LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: And the reason Mitt Romney did not endorse Kamala Harris.

JEFFREY GOLDBERG: Right, exactly.

Unfortunately, we need to leave it there for now.

Itús been a great conversation.

And I want to thank our panelists and our viewers for joining us.

Iúm Jeffrey Goldberg.

Good night from Washington.