AMNA NAWAZ: To discuss the fallout of Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang's resignation and the continued fallout from last week's midterm elections, we turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Marcus.

That's "The Atlantic"'s David Brooks and Ruth Marcus of "The New Yorker."

Jonathan Capehart is away this evening.

Welcome to you both.

DAVID BROOKS: Good to see you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let's start with Nvidia, shall we?

The finger-pointing Nick Schifrin was reporting on earlier at the White House in the wake of the scandal and the departure of Nvidia's CEO.

You have the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, essentially blaming the commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, for not cracking down on those export controls for chips to China.

David, I'm sort of less interested in the palace intrigue here and whether or not you think there's going to be accountability in the wake of these revelations.

DAVID BROOKS: I'm super interested in the palace intrigue.

AMNA NAWAZ: You go for it then.

RUTH MARCUS, "The New Yorker": Me too.

DAVID BROOKS: I know.

When agencies go at each other, it's like popcorn for people like Ruth and I. AMNA NAWAZ: So Washington.

Here we go.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I -- right, at this stage, I have questions.

What was Trump told about Huang's situation last month?

DAVID BROOKS: What was -- what did Howard Lutnick know?

Why did Cantor Fitzgerald, Lutnick's old firm, which his kids now run, why did they cut their position in Nvidia by 50 percent?

Why did we do nothing?

What kind of chips were sold?

There's a whole -- just a whole series of questions, that things look pretty bad.

And the fact that one agency is going on for another makes you suspect that Scott Bessent isn't talking for nothing, that he knows something that is going to make this a bigger story.

AMNA NAWAZ: Ruth?

RUTH MARCUS: I think we have a twist on the old Watergate question.

What did the president know?

When did he know it?

And when did he forget it?

RUTH MARCUS: Because we have been told that the president was briefed twice, including right before Jensen Huang hitched a ride with him on Air Force One to China, that Jensen Huang was having an affair with a Chinese asset.

And what did the president do about this?

Your questions are very serious and highfalutin.

My question is, why is the president expressing condolences to Jensen Huang and he's been through hell, the president said, when, as an American citizen, I would like him to be worried more about what this might have -- what might have happened to our national security than what happened to his friend who couldn't keep his pants zipped.

Sorry.

AMNA NAWAZ: And lawmakers have questions.

We're going to see if we get any answers.

Let's talk about the continued fallout from these midterm election results, and specifically how Republicans, how this administration is responding.

There is new reporting today that Vice President Vance is considering not running in 2028 after those terrible losses for Republicans.

Just a reminder for everyone out there, he wrote a very lengthy tweet after the elections.

He basically said it was a loss because of the Iran war.

And then, yesterday, the president seemed to respond in another post, saying the vice president was no longer working on the Iran war, saying we don't need to deal with Iran, telling Vance to focus on corruption and crime taking place, as he put it, in Democrat-run cities.

David, what do you take away from this about Vance's future and the future of MAGA?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, I think Vance has no near-term political future.

I think the fallout from this will be such that people will not want anybody near the top of the Trump administration, including Marco Rubio, come 2028.

I think we're past peak populism, at least in this country right now.

I think this win was so big that a historic hinge has happened, at least in America.

Europe may be different.

And so I just think Republicans are eager, or some of them are -- well, there's some Republicans who are fighting over why we lost.

There's that dogfight.

But then a lot of Republicans, a surprising number, are saying, let's just change.

Let's just change.

We're not happy.

Let's just change.

And I think there's a lot of that energy bubbling up.

As for the -- moving Vance off Iran, I have been noticing on my MAGA Twitter feed and all those other sources that the charge that the Democrats stole this election has been rising by the hour.

AMNA NAWAZ: Really?

DAVID BROOKS: And so there are a lot of the usual suspects who we remember from January 6 who are saying, look at this, they stole it in this city, they stole it in that city.

RUTH MARCUS: Yes, they stole it in Mississippi.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes.

And how do you claim that an election you lost by 14 percentage points was stolen from you?

This is beyond me.

But he -- Trump may actually believe that the election fraud is the most important thing the administration should pay attention to.

And this may not be the demotion it appears to be for J.D.

Vance, at least in Donald Trump's mind.

RUTH MARCUS: Oh, come on, David.

Of course it's a demotion.

It's -- the president said, some people criticize J.D.

Vance's tweet, but it didn't bother me.

Like, if you believe that, I have a bridge across the Strait of Hormuz that I will sell you.

DAVID BROOKS: But Donald Trump Jr.

echoed that tweet.

(LAUGHTER) RUTH MARCUS: Yes, but that may say something more about Donald Trump Jr.

's relationship with Sr.

than it does about anything else.

I think the president is not happy with J.D.

Vance.

I think J.D.

Vance is not happy with the president.

He's in a terrible situation, as is every sitting vice president who wants to succeed essentially a two-term president.

There's a reason it's only Martin Van Buren and George H.W.

Bush.

And if you're -- it's even worse for you if you're the sitting vice president for a president whose approval ratings are in the toilet.

But J.D.

Vance is in a terrible position because, if he doesn't run this year, it could be past his sell-by date.

He will look like he was just taking a pass this year as part of his continued belief in doing things for his own ego and political future, rather than to do things the right way.

So I think -- and I agree with you on this part -- he is electoral toast, really.

AMNA NAWAZ: Electoral toast, quite a phrase.

Let's talk about some of those leadership battles that Lisa was reporting on earlier in Congress.

The leadership is starting to take shape of some kind.

We saw Republicans last week in the House elected Jim Jordan as their leader.

In the Senate, they selected John Thune to lead them once again.

House Democrats are going to elect their leader next week.

It is widely expected to be Hakeem Jeffries.

Senate Democrats hold their elections in early December, and Chuck Schumer is officially facing a challenge now from Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen.

David, what do you make of how the leadership is shaping up?

And who do you think is going to lead Senate Democrats?

DAVID BROOKS: I think Chuck Schumer will get reelected.

It's very hard as an outsider to know what's going on inside, because in those kind of races, what we know doesn't matter.

It's all about the personal relationships of those 100 or those 57 or 56 individuals.

And so what has he done for me?

What has he not done for me?

And so what can he do for me in the future?

And so it's all that.

It's super insidey baseball.

I would say, for the public perception, Chris Van Hollen is only -- he's going to be 68 when they meet next year.

And by Senate years, that's like 35.

RUTH MARCUS: That sounds good to me.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes.

And so he looks a lot younger.

He presents younger than Chuck Schumer does.

And I think a lot of Democrats still have Joe Biden scars and do not want to look like the old person's party.

To my mind, though, Chris Van Hollen, red flag, he's against the filibuster.

And I think you destroy the filibuster, you do damage to America, because we will have party after party after party, radically different policies going in and out.

I think it would just be very bad for the Senate, bad for the country.

So that would be the one vote -- I would never vote for him.

But he's a more appealing face to the -- as the Senate -- for Senate Democrats.

AMNA NAWAZ: Ruth?

RUTH MARCUS: Well, I thought Angus King, the independent from Maine, who caucuses with the Democrats, asked a really good question.

He said, why would you fire the manager when you just won the World Series?

Now, Schumer, let's be clear, did not manage the team to the World Series.

Actually, Donald Trump helped them win the World Series, and Republicans helped them win the World Series.

But the best -- I think the best thing for Schumer and the best thing for Democrats, more importantly, would be if he were to remain majority leader for two years.

I think that's going to happen, based on the conversations that I had after this announcement from Van Hollen, Senator Van Hollen, last night, and if he were to -- and this is not easy for politicians to do -- recede gracefully from the scene and not have an ugly reelection fight in 2028.

But I think the thing that's really important for Senate Democrats to keep in mind here is, this election was not an endorsement of them.

It was a repudiation of Republicans, and these seats are all extremely precarious.

And if they run it to the -- run to the left, they will just rediscover how unhappy it is to be in the minority.

AMNA NAWAZ: We will see what happens.

Ruth Marcus, David Brooks, always great to see you both.

Thank you so much.

DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.