Ceasefire? Morning Joe Again Ties Trump to ‘Monsters of History’

What better way for Morning Joe to mark the Iran ceasefire than by once again tying President Trump to the “monsters of history”?

On consecutive days, co-host Jonathan Lemire reached for the same loaded line. He first used it yesterday, reacting to Trump’s bellicose Truth Social post warning Iran of severe consequences. He rolled it out again today—clearly deciding it was too good not to reuse. This time, he escalated further, suggesting Trump’s rhetoric would leave a lasting “stain” not just on his presidency, but on the United States itself.

On Tuesday’s show, Lemire cited Trump’s threat-laden language—of the sort the president has long used as part of his negotiating style—and declared it “the kind of rhetoric we associate with people like Vladimir Putin, with Kim Jong-un, with the monsters of history.”

Not content to leave it there, Lemire returned to the phrase the very next morning. Discussing the same post today, he warned that Trump’s words amounted to threats of “war crimes” and “genocidal-like behavior,” again invoking the “monsters of history” comparison and insisting the moment “should not be glossed over.”

To be sure, Lemire briefly acknowledged the argument from Trump aides that the president’s bellicose rhetoric may have helped push Iran to the negotiating table. But he quickly brushed it aside—“perhaps that’s true, perhaps not”—before pivoting back to his preferred framing: that the statement represented a lasting “stain” on Trump and the United States.

Enter David French, who took the argument even further. Rejecting any notion that the rhetoric could be justified as a negotiation strategy, French likened Trump’s language to alleged Russian war crimes in Ukraine—suggesting it amounted to threats of an even broader and more deadly campaign—and declared it “a stain on the United States of America—an absolute stain.”

So even as a ceasefire offered a moment to cool tensions—and even as the possibility exists that Trump’s rhetoric played a role in bringing Iran to the table—Morning Joe chose instead to recycle its most inflammatory talking point.

Because nothing says “peace” quite like associating President Trump with "the monsters of history."

Here are the transcripts.

MS NOW
Morning Joe
4/7/26
6:03 an EDT

JONATHAN LEMIRE: Peter Baker, start with you about the president's post this morning. And we know he is, you know, fond over-the-top language. He is fond of, you know, fire and fury threats and the like. 

But this, to me, is something entirely new. And even if it is, does prove to just be a bluff of some sort or a bargaining tactic, this is still a new place for a President of the United States. 

This is the rhetoric we associate with people like Vladimir Putin, with people like Kim Jong-un, with the monsters of history, and yet we have heard it now from the sitting president. 

MS NOW
Morning Joe
4/8/26
6:09 am EDT

LEMIRE: And David French, let's talk a little bit about how we how we got here. The president, his posting yesterday morning, we dealt with it in real time on air, should not be glossed over. The language there was, you know, a war crime, threatens war crime, threatened genocidal-like behavior.

Is the kind of language as I said yesterday, associated with the monsters of history.

To wipe out a civilization. That's simply not how presidents speak. That's not how leaders of democracies speak. 

Now, Trump aides say, well, that was part of the plan, the art of the deal. It was that kind of bellicose language that got Iran to the table. 

Perhaps that's true, perhaps not. But not only are we not sure what that deal looks like, I think we also need to grapple with, what happened yesterday is something that will leave a stain on the the White House, the legacy of this president, but also how the U.S. is viewed throughout the world, and particularly in that region in Iran, where certainly a vengeful regime someday could still lash out. 

. . . 

DAVID FRENCH: All of that tactical [military] brilliance has been in service of a man who's unstable, who's unhinged, who had no real strategic vision, obviously, given all of the different contradictory perspectives war aims he's announced and war objectives that he said have been achieved or not achieved. 

And then it culminates in this, what is truly a horrible episode. And I don't want to hear a single person say, oh, don't pay attention to this. This is just a negotiating tactic. 

The man wasn't just threatening war crimes. The man was threatening actions that have constituted the basis of allegations that Russia has committed crimes against humanity in the nation of Ukraine. He is promising an infrastructure campaign arguably even more comprehensive and more deadly than what Vladimir Putin has tried against Ukraine. 

This is a stain on the United States of America. It's an absolute stain.