i'm like, we've had a ten point plan. this is what we would do in a crisis like this, but as it is today, there is no day after. >> what does that mean? >> there is no infrastructure left, there is, you know, what is it? less than a third of the hospitals are even remotely operational. half of the homes are destroyed, that number is probably old by now. half of, almost none of the schools are undamaged or completely destroyed. there is no infrastructure. there is no water infrastructure. >> the founding fathers -- the founders of this country warned against single party they said it would be bitterly divisive, perhaps irreparably divisive for the country. the founders of this country warned us against a single party

impeachment because they feared it would bitterly and perhaps irreparably divide our nation. the founders of this country warned against ais single party impeachment you know why? you guys know why. the founding fathers warned us, i mean they feared a single party impeachment. they knew it would bitterly divide the country. it might be irreparable damage tore the country. >> the founding fathers warned us no single party impeachments. if an impeachment isn't bipartisan, it should not happen. so spoke theno founding fathers and that was the message from louisiana congressman mike johnson. when congressman johnson was especially concerned about an impeachment happening the december before an election year. >> if you don't like the president, he goes ondo the balt again after four years. we have an election in 11 months. let the people decide this. >> today we are once again 11

months outga from a presidentia election, and speaker mike johnson has decided he wants to go ahead with a single party impeachment of the sitting president. today republicans in the house passed their impeachment resolution through the rules committee, and they plan to vote on that resolution in the full house as soon as tomorrow. but unlike the impeachment of donald trump, republicans do not actually know what their impeachment is about. they have not actually found any conclusive proof of wrongdoing by president biden. and now speaker johnson says, well, that's the point. the speaker says the reason that republicans need to impeach president biden without evidence is because the administration has notec helped them find that evidence. >> the impeachment inquiry is necessary now as the member just explained because we've come to thisd impasse.

the white house is impeding that investigation now. so we have no choice. >> they have no choice. the white house isn't providing enough documents orho witnesses so thets impeachment, it just h to gomp forward. i wonder what 2019 mike johnson might have to say about that. >> the democrats could and should have just simply gone a few blocks away to a federal court to get an expedited court order compelling the extra documents and information they requested. that's what's always been done in theha past. but they didn't do that here because theset democrats don't have time for it. they're trying to meet their own orbtrary, completely reckless, machiavellian time line to take down a president that they loathe. >> mike johnsonresi is in way o his head right now. as he r and the republican part barrel toward an unfounded impeachment inquiry, the entire world is waiting on this congress to take action. today ukrainian president

zelenskyy was in washington, d.c. to meet with both president biden and speaker johnson about desperately neededjo aid. right nowy russia is ramping u its military offensive in ukraine insi what u.s. intelligence says w in an attem to undermine support for ukraine in western nations like this one. democrats support sending ukrainede assistance immediatel but republicans under speaker johnsonan refuse. policies like bringing back trump era restrictions on immigration, electronic monitoring systems in the u.s. including children and expedited deportations. there are huge issues right now. peoples lives are hanging in tha balance here, but as of this moment congress is scheduled to leave washington at the end of this week not to return until

nextto year. now, senate majority leader chuck schumer is calling on congress to stay in session through the next week, but there is no indication that republicans willin agree. time is running out, and right now their top priority is impeaching president biden. but they can't really tell you or anyone why. joining me now is former speaker of the house now speaker e emerita, nancy pelosi. thank you so much for being here. it is wonderful to have you anytime, but especially in a moment like this when we're trying to make sense of what exactly is goingen on with your colleagues across the aisle. i wonder what you think of the impeachment push and whether the gop is trying topu render the concept of impeachment effectively meaningless? >> well, thank you. it's nice to be with you, amash, especially at this difficult time in our country, when we have so many needs we have to meet, so many challenges to

democracy in ukraine and our own country and that the speaker is going down this path. he says he has no choice. the fact is he has no respect, no respect for the constitution of the united states, no respect for his own members who he's asking to vote for an impeachment with no basis -- with no basis. you referenced when we impeached the president a number of years ago because of his refusal to implement the -- send the aid to ukraine that was voted by congress, and he was supposed to send but was threatened to with hold it unless he got certain favors donee for him by presidt zelenskyy. but he said to me what's the problem with the call? it was a perfect call. it was perfectly impeachable. and so they have no basis. so their excuse for having no basis is they have no basis. and yet they're saying to these people nearly 20 of them, maybe 18 of them are in districts that

president biden won. so it's going to be a hard sell for them to go home and say why they went down this careless path. it's most unfortunate. and i want to say one more thing. you ran all the statements that are made about you shouldn't have aar one-party impeachment. well, our founders knew we coule possibly have a rogue president, but they didn't think we'd have a rogue congress at the same time. andgue in addition to that, st hoyer mentioned this on the floor this evening during our special order on ukraine, this speaker a few congresses ago introduced a bill that said you can't have more than one subject on a bill and yet he's putting immigration on the ukraine bill. >> i want to mention the cliff it appears speaker johnson is leading his biden district republican over hisbi impeachme inquiry vote.

kevin mccarthy winning the speaker if you can remember it happen y very quickly. it was over before it began in many ways but in his speakership he at least understood the political reality it would not be good quote-unquote interest those centrist republicans to vote on impeachment. what fortune awaits for those republicans who vote yes? >> well, they've made a decision to go all out with donald trump. donald trump has instigated this, encouraged it further, and now they're all just going down the donald trump path. and that'se not a good path in some of these districts. we fully intend to win the house in this next -- in this next election, buts in the meantimee have plenty of work to do. instead of this impeachment, well, what dohm they have to offer? former -- i don't like to even call him president trump in the same sentence but the former occupant occasionally of the

white house who would say we thought to overturn the affordable care act. others have said we have to pass it, a total ban on abortion in our country. these are the kinds of things they have in store for women and families. these are the kind of kitchen table issues that they have in store should they win, which they must not. but in the meantime to keep people distracted asked to look effective to theirp base, thiss red meat to their base. look effective to their base, let's impeach the president for noen basis, no respect for the e constitution, no respect for tht office of president, and certainly no respect for the house of representatives and their own members. >> yeah, i want to focus on that last bit. the lack of respect for the sp actual office that these republicans hold, this congress isho on track to be the -- i thk it's the second least productive congress in modern american history. and you know a lot of excuses are made for that on the right, which is, oh, it's a slim

majority, et cetera, et cetera. you were speak of the house with a very slim majority and managed to get many things done. what would your advice to the current speaker of the house be if you wanted to get anything done? >> well, in addition to what some of those republicans have said about their slim majority, some of them have been bragging that they sent all these bills over to thent senate. they're ridiculous bills and they're never going to see the light of day. but as some of them said, we've done a lot of things. one of the staff persons said we sent a letter and we got the mask mandate removed. and we sent a letter about this or lethat, and now we're going have a hearing on it. their standard for accomplishment isei very low. but their anti-governance -- and you remember that their anti-governance, this is good thing for them because they're accomplishing nothing.g nothing good. >> yeah, and you mention some of

the priorities for these republican lawmakers in a vacuum the most egregious things really stand out. among them their war on reproductive freedom, and the most recent comments from their titular head, their informal head, theirth front-runner dona trump who wants to replace obamacare. >> imagine that. >> yeah, imagine that. >> when he was president he sais repeal and replace. he had no replacement. he just wanted to repeal, and he was defeated. and he was defeated not by just our inside maneuvering but by the outside mobilization, the grass roots people, the people who benefit, the millions of people who benefitted from the affordable care act. it wasn't about them talking about afprovisions, it was them talking about their personal experience, andt that's what w intend to do. we've already launched the same campaign weun did then. we'll come full bloom around martin luther king weekend to, again, havert the outside

mobilization to protect the affordable care act, which has brought c care to millions, neay 20 million more people in our country, and again benefits including the most important one that affects so many people is a pre-existing condition, the benefit of saying if you have a pre-existing condition no longer can you be deprived of care. and we had no more time limits whether it's annual or lifetime time limits, the list goes on about the t benefits that woulde returned as well. these are kitchen table issues as are thetc issues you referend earlier about a woman's right to choose. kachen table a issue, it's an economic issue. all of it is profoundly about their health and financial well-being, about their freedom. we fight for democracy here in our country. the ukrainians are fighting for it there, we are fighting for i here. whether it'sit freedom for the elderly community -- whatever it

is the freedom people want to read a book, the freedom for your child to read books in school that have been classics and are nowee burned. >> something tells me that formerel speaker of the house nancy pelosi is ready to talk book adbans, women's bodies, an health care as much as republicans will let her. speaker nancy pelosi, it is an honor and a thrill to have you on the program. thanks for making some time tonight. i really appreciate it. >> my pleasure. but remember the longer they takeme for ukraine, more people will die, more women will be w raped, more children will be kidnapped, and it will be all ol them. we have to get them to move. thank you for giving more exposure tovi this issue tonigh. thank you. >> thank youth for all you do. i appreciate it. joining me now is "the new york times" columnist michelle goldberg. michelle, it's great to see you here to sort of unpack what we just talked about. well, there's so many things to talk about.

first, the impeachment push as zelenskyy is effectively begging hat in hand for the u.s. congress to do something about anan incredibly desperate situation over in ukraine. itu mean the cynicism to me is astounding. i wondere if you think it resonates the way it can and shouldit with the american publ. >> h well, i think the american public is soolerized that i'm not izsure. i think there is still a middle on ukraine aid specifically i do think that there are people who are right leaning who are? inspired by the heroism of the ukrainian people, absolutely. but, you know, one function of donald trump has been to polarize a lot of the republican party in favor of vladimir putin. and there's o a connection betwn this incredibly cynical impeachment pushy and the decreasing willingness of republicans to support ukraine because it's true we can't quite articulate what republicans are impeaching joe biden for, which is telling.

but at least part of the impeachment push is a resurrection. donald trump was impeached for trying to strong arm zelenskyy to implicate biden in this bogus corruption scandal. nowus republicans are once agai tryingw to implicate biden in this boguing corruption scandal and sort of act as if donald trump's accusations had been en legitimate, and that is part of the, same sort of -- they're caught upt in this anti-ukrainn propaganda both in terms of impeachment but then also much more seriously in terms of their willingness to abandon ukraine at this critical junction in thc war. >> that they'll sacrifice lives for political gain, which we by the way saw during covid, but this is yet another example even if they're not necessarily american lives.re i do have to ask you about the impeachment push because i feel like you give actual -- like some strategic credit to republicans in this and there's a common thread between trump's'

impeachment and biden's. i really do worry the more you say biden was impeached and trump was impeached, it renders the sort of gravity of it somewhat meaningless. >>t that's why they're doing i. >> yes. and i worry it's going to be quite effective, actually. >> i do, too. yes, people wail say they were both accused of different things. i meandi it's very clear the reason that -- and i think some republicansnd have said this. we want to give trump ammunition to say two impeached presidents running against each other and so lessen the gravity of his double grimpeachment. but at the same time -- and yes, it's hard for people to keep straight i mean especially when it comes to ukraine and burisma and victor shoken and there's all these foreign names and moving parts and people become cynical and just think they're all corrupt, they must have both done something, there must be er something shady going on with

ukraine. which then i think bleeds into, well, maybe it makes sense we've given them enough money. i wonder in terms offing managing the funding to ukraine when seems warranted and desperately arneeded, whether i was mistake. former speaker pelosi mentioned it was a mistake to tie immigration into all this, but it was president biden who initially basically attached tha immigration funding to the ukraine funding andnd gaza funding. what does that like like it's a mistake? >> i think it looks like it's given i republicans -- i can't y it's mistake, but i do think it's given republicans enormous leverage because negotiations are often about can and they don't care about ukraine if at all and they care a lot about theey border. they're quite willing to play

chick wn the future of ukraine as a f nation if it means they' going to get the border funding. >> the sweetener is draconian border policy. that's where the modern day republican party is at. michelle goldberg, we're not done yet. please stay with me because i want to bring you back in just a few minutes to talk another massiveju story in tonight's ne. and that is the might mare in the state of texas as elected officials and the state supreme court start directing reproductive health care. but first the supreme court may be soon deciding whether donald trump is immune from prosecution. we're going to gets the latestn that from neil katyal. that's next. katyal. that's next. sold for only 50 cents. this ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. i got this kitchenaid stand mixer for only $56. i got this bbq smoker for 26 bucks. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see

how much you can save.

if i could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot somebody and i wouldn't lose any voters, okay? that's incredible. >> that remark has followed donald trump ever since he first said it during the 2016

campaign. . it followed him all the way to the new york second court of appeals when a judge cited that comment when asking trump and one of his lawyers about the scope of presidential immunity as it pertained today a subpoena in a criminal investigation. at the time trump's lawyer tried to argue that a sitting president's immunity is absolute, that, yes, donald trump could theoretically shoot someone on fifth avenue and get away with it. that argument ultimately failed when the entire supreme court including justices samuel alito and clarence thomas, when they all agreed just being president did not grant trump the immunity he was seeking. but donald trump is trying a variation on this theme as part of his defense in special counsel jack smith's election interference case, in conduct he engaged in when he was still a sitting president. and now jack smith wants the supreme court to weigh in on this quickly. the supreme court has agreed to

think about taking up this presidential immunity question on an expedited basis. and that goes against trump's strategy of choice, to do whatever he can to delay this trial. joining me now is neil katyal, former acting solicitor-general for the u.s. under the obama administration, a person who knows lots and lots about the high court. neal, thank you for being here, and i am so eager to hear what your thoughts are and whether the supreme court actually takes this up on an expedited basis. >> so i think jack smith did the right thing by using this procedure before judgment to bypass the court of appeals and to say to the supreme court decide this now. i think the supreme court is going to decide it. i think they're going to agree to hear the case, and i think they will if not unanimously pretty darn close to rule against criminal defendant donald trump. and that's over a couple of reasons, but the most important of which, alex, is the

extraordinary thing trump is trying to argue, which is that he can murder someone and get away with it, that being president gives him a get out of the jail free card. and it's an even stronger claim than what he said last time in the case in which he was clashing're. there he didn't quite say he could get away with it. he said while he's a sitting president he can't be investigated. but his lawyer was very clear saying i'm not seeking permanent immunity, meaning once trump leaves office he could be prosecuted. now trump has left office. jack smith is prosecuting him and is a former president. i know trump still thinks he's a president, but he's not in the reality based world. and the supreme court i think is going to say how can it be that a former president has absolute immunity? that's just not america. >> yes, permanent immunity is not something america gives its presidents the last i chicked, but i'm not a supreme court

justice. how does trump's team respond to this because they have to file a response to jack smith's motion here. smith is effectively calling his bluff here, is he not? >> exactly. so trump has already issued some sort of social media statement saying that, you know, that jack smith is playing games, which is bizarre because if anything, you know, i've sat in the chair authorizing appeals for the government and making decisions before judgment. the things you always worry about when you try to bypass the court of appeals is that it'll look like you're trying to gim the system, that you don't trust the court of appeals because of the composition of it. here the composition of the court of appeals in washington, d.c. is overwhelmingly against trump. it's all like basically rule of law people, which is just a definition against trump. and jack smith is still saying i want to bypass that. and so there's no allegation

here and it's just simply a matter of time. i think trump can try with the filing next week, but i don't think it'll go just about as well as his merits argument will. and look just like the one which you flashed on the screen before, a unanimous loss for donald trump or pretty darn close to it. >> neal, i've been really interested in the pretzdential immunity question here not so much because i'm a legal scholar and i'm interested in testing the outside bounds of the law but because it seems like it is a fairly effective delaying mechanism for trump not because of its merits but just because of the way courts work. and i wonder the threat of the deadline march 4th could be push here even the if supreme court takes this up on an expedited

calender. >> yeah, i think it's a realistic fear that the march 4th date will be pushed. the question is by how much. i think it's pretty easy for the supreme court to resolve this case. i mean donald trump's lawyers are saying supreme courts never decided whether a president has absolute immunity as a former president. that's because it's such a ridiculous question, i think it's easy for the court to decide it. and i think maybe it'll delay things by a few weeks, but i don't think longer than that. this is not a hard case. >> one more for you, neal. in terms of what can happen while this is working its way through the courts, you know, there's talk of a stay that of course trump would like, that jack smith has been pleading sort of against if you will. how much can judge chutkan do while, you know, scotus and the d.c. circuit court decide what they're going to do with this? >> i argued this question last year and basically the supreme court said while the case is on

appeal much of it cannot go forward in the district court. some things can, the gag order and discovery of abuse and the like, but some cannot. and that's the reason why jack smith was so smart to file this motion he did yesterday to bypass the court of appeals. >> bluff calling from the special counsel. neal katyal, the person who knows the behavior of the high court better than most americans. thank you for your time tonight, my friend. >> thank you. much more ahead tonight including the strangely tight grip donald trump has on evangelical voters. the new author of "the kingdom, the power, and inglory" will join us to explain how this happened. but first there is one case out of texas that republicans really, really, really don't want to talk about. michelle goldberg will be back to discuss that coming up next. k to discuss that coming up next

yesterday the texas supreme court decided that kate cox, a woman with a life threatening nonviable pregnancy, did not qualify for a medical exception to the state's near total ban on abortion, thereby overturning a district court ruling. when cox who could not wait any longer had already left the state to seek an abortion. in a statement cox's lawyer

responded if kate cox can't get an abortion in texas who can? now, cox may have gotten her abortion, but this particular fight is not over. far from it. there are hundreds of women like kate cox nearly dying from nonviable life threatening pregnancies in states where they are denied abortions. 20 of them have sued the state of texas this year. they want the state supreme court to clarify the medical exemptions that are part of the state's abortion ban. texas attorney general ken paxton's office has argued that the law is already clear that kate cox's case highlights the utter absurdity of that argument. in her latest column "the new york times" opinion writer michelle goldberg interviewed cox's lawyer, molly duane, who said i think it's the clearest message you could possibly receive from an anti-aborgds state that they never meant the medical exemption to mean anything at all. joining me now is michelle

goldberg, opinion columnist for "the times." thanks for being here. i am astounded and appalled by what has unfolded in texas. you write in your piece right-wing politicians and those who support them would rather inflict unimaginable suffering on women than relax the tiniest bit of control over their medical kig. i mean you make the case if they had actually relaxed their control over women's bodies, this actually could have played well for them in some scenarios. can you talk about that? >> yeah, i think since almost the dobbs decision came down we started hearing these horror stories and they were inevitable. you've heard them in countries where abortion was illegal, it was obvious it was going to start happening here. women with unwanted pregnancies terribly mismanaged, women being told they had to be septic to be treated, women who had to wait until they happen on the verge of losing a bodily function in the version of some of these

laws even if it was inevitable they were going to get there. and you have a lot of doctors feeling paralyzed when they didn't know what they could or face prosecution. and when they stories started coming out, the response of the aept abortion movement was this kind of conspiracy theory that pro-choice forces are making things more complicated than they are. they're exaggerating the -- >> the gravity. >> right, they're basically making doctors think they can't intervene when really they can because of course these laws are meant to protect women as well as babies. and that was always a ridiculous argument, but i feel like this shows just how ridiculous it is because this was someone who was seeking clarity. you know, it was -- and the center for reproductive rights which represented here are seeking clarity. and if they had gotten that clarity, if you had had say ken paxton the attorney general of texas either abiding by the

lower court ruling, not threatening hospitals that they let this aborgds go forward, that they would face possible felony prosecutions, if they had done that, it would strengthen this argument that there are actually -- that we might ban abortion but we actually do have good faith exemptions for people in emergency situations. >> and that we care about the women who are carrying these children. >> right. and it's this pregnancy -- her pregnancy is doomed, so it's not a matter of quote-unquote saving a baby. so they could have if they had wanted to, i think, made their abortion ban look slightly more politically palatable. but they couldn't do that. you know, you saw him -- it's true that some republicans don't want to talk about this, but ken paxton seems happy to talk about this. like he was willing to fight this woman and her doctor and her lawyer like personally and

to the bitter end and for what? >> the personal -- the personal punishment directed at this woman by the state telling her that she wasn't effectively dying enough to merit an abortion is unthinkable. the idea that a man would ever have to go to a panel of judges to get a vasectomy and then be denied it through the appeals process is juls not something that would ever happen in america. i think there are women, men, people across the country who look at this and say, wow, overturning roe is one thing, this is another level of cruelty, unusual cruelty here. i don't know just setting aside the human cost of this, the political cost of this seems extraordinary for republicans. >> right. and i think it's important to realize that as much as -- what makes this case unique is not kate cox's medical circumstances, it's her unbelievable bravery willing to

go public and fight this in the middle of a catastrophe a lot of other women in states like texas and abortion bans have faced. >> the notion there are people out there who very much want these chirnl that look like republican voters cannot get them and have to go out-of-state or put themselves through this ordeal is just decide udly un-american, and that is what is unfolding in the state of texas today. michelle goldberg, always writing so brilliantly about the horrible issue of our time, it's great to see you. coming up evangelicals in iowa have compelled donald trump to a record lead with just over a month to go before the iowa caucuses. we're going to discuss the evangelical movement with the maga base. that's next. evangelical movement with the maga base. that's next. (man) mm, hey, honey.

looks like my to-do list grew. "paint the bathroom, give baxter a bath, get life insurance," hm. i have a few minutes. i can do that now. oh, that fast? remember that colonial penn ad? i called and i got information. they sent the simple form i need to apply. all i do is fill it out and send it back. well, that sounds too easy! (man) give a little information, check a few boxes, sign my name, done. they don't ask about your health? (man) no health questions. -physical exam? -don't need one. it's colonial penn guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance. if you're between the ages of 50 and 85, your acceptance is guaranteed in most states, even if you're not in the best health. options start at $9.95 a month, 35 cents a day. once insured, your rate will never increase. a lifetime rate lock guarantees it. keep in mind, this is lifetime protection. as long as you pay your premiums, it's yours to keep. call for more information and the simple form you need to apply today.

there's no obligation, and you'll receive a free beneficiary planner just for calling.

i had the sense we were going to come to a red sea moment in our republican conference and the country at large. and the lord told me clearly to be prepare asked be ready for what. i don't know, we're coming to a red sea moment. the lord kept telling me to wait, wait, and when it cahim to the end the lord said, now, step forward. mike johnson, the most powerful elected republican in the country last week described his call to run for speaker. johnson said that god had

revealed to him johnson would be a moses-like figure helping to lead the republican party and the country through a red sea moment, which is quite a call. as an evangelical johnson often uses scripture to promote policy goals. he essentially believes bible is a governing document, and that puts him right in the main stream of american evangelicals today who want to combine church teachings with policy. now a new nbc news des moines register poll shows donald trump with 51% support in iowa. it is due entirely to trump's support among a majority of evangelicals in that state. and that's different from eight years ago when trump lost iowa to ted cruz. back then trump only had the support of one in five evangelical caucus goers. tim alberta writes in his new

book the kingdom, power and glory, that for decades evangelicals were skeptical of if gauging in politics or straying from their central focus of the church's teachings. that all changed in the 1970s and '80s. fallwell, alberta writes, made a conscious decision to start packaging the cross with the flag. and others followed. under fallwell's tutelage, alberta writes, preachers who once prescribed total detachment from world affairs were now trafficking in jeremiah ads of civilization collapse and winning huge audience of older conservative christians who feared the american apocalypse was nigh. in recent years trump's pugilism and culture wars has more evangelicals yearning for combat in politics.

the purpose of the church is now to own the libs with an aggressive identitarian conservatism. tim alberta has spent the last four years traveling the country reporting from inside the modern evangelical movement, and he joins me coming up next. movemene joins me coming up next. ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. i got this kitchenaid stand mixer for only $56. i got this bbq smoker for 26 bucks. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see how much you can save.

donald trump is not what you would call a model christian. he's not into asking for god's forgiveness. he could not name a single verse, any verse when asking

from a bible passage, he's openly mocked conservative religious leaders, but beyond handling the supreme court over to hard line conservatives, vevangelicals continue to see donald trump as their defender. the atlantic's tim alberta has a new book out, and in it he questions how and why the evangelical movement has flopped toward politicians. politicians saw the pointlessness in talking about humility and unity and peace and love for thy neighbor. their appeal to evangelicals had everything to do with acting like champions and nothing to do with acting like christ. joining me now is tim alberta, staff writer interest the atlantic and author of this new formidably excellent tome, the kingdom, the power and the glory, eamerican evangelicals in an age of extremism."

tim, thank you for being here. it's so deeply reported and so well-written and so of the moment. thank you for being here. first, trace if you will how trump effectively went from being like a punch line among religious conservatives to being their retribution, in his words their hero. >> you know, i think 2016 was just -- it was transactional for everyone involved, right? a lot of these white evangelical supporters who are now his staunchest allies back then, like 8 years ago it's easy to forget now, but they were deeply skeptical of trump. they were highly suspicious of trump. they had to put mike pence on the ticket, had to release a list of supreme court nominees. >> he had to have leonard leo sitting on his shoulder. >> truly. yes, all these gestures to assuage those concerns to say i will deliver for you. i'm not one of you, but i will deliver for you. and the folks said, okay, we don't like this guy, we don't

trust this guy but what clois do we have? hillary clinton, it's a binary thing. we're going to give him our votes in exchange for these policies. that transactional relationship has morphed into something entirely where they do view him as this protector figure and i think in many ways it boils down to this under siege mentality, this idea christianity is in the cross hairs, they're idealized christian america is slipping away. and the barbarians are at the gates we need to defend and that's how they view trump. >> there was a same kind of feeling in the 1970s and the beginning of the '8 0z they were under assault from the civil rights amendment, desegregation, the end of school pray. and this is the sort of environment in which jerry fallwell and paul wire create

the moral majority, right? and trump's sort of ascendance in the evangelical movement seems a much more radical version of that fight, right? and i wonder if that's a testament to donald trump juicing the evangelical movement and making it angrier and more keyed up or whether the movement itself was on its way down that path of desiring someone so aggressive, so much a pugilist. >> i think it's been a combination of those things. i mean, look, there's no question that steadily here over the last 50 years much of the white evangelical movement has been conditioned more and more and more to expect not just to be in the culture wars but to dominate the culture warsch and also i would say, alex, that the rules of engagement have sort of evolved, right, where there was a time when folks who were part of the crusade with fallwell sort of recognize at the end of the day we are christians, right? like we care about these

conservative issues. we care about winning republican elections, but we are above all christian. our citizenship is in heaven. we need to adhere on biblical teachings on the how. >> the bible was always on the front burner. >> exactly. in other words, they were viewing politics through the prism of their faith instead of now i think at the heart of the problem a lot of these folks are viewing their faith through the prism of politics and this end justifies the means mentality in which jerry fallwell sr. in 1976 he launched this almost holy war against jimmy carter in part because if you recall jimmy carter had the temerity to give an interview to playboy magazine in 1976. and jerry fallwell jr. they pose for a photo back at trump tower thumbs up in front of a playboy magazine. it went from politics being down

stream of culture to culture and everything else being down stream of politics. if we don't win these elections, if we don't dominate these culture wars, then nothing else matters. >> you mention some crises that sort of ratchet up the temperature and make donald trump even more positioned to be the sort of saver of the evangelical movement or evangelical voters. one of them is covid. can you talk about the ways in which i think ways unseen to the broader public, the way in which that affected the evangelical community. >> listen, this ties into what we were just discussing. the seeds of the moral panic here were sown a long, long time ago. >> you're very familiar with this idea of an imminent clash in america between the good god fearing christians and those

godless evil secularists in the culture going to come after us, they're going to try to just abolish god from public life. if you've stewing in that sort of rhetoric and those warnings of the apocalypse, then suddenly covid-19 arrives and you have these governors issuing shutdown orders, telling people they can't go to church. even if it's for a couple of weeks. and alex, a lot of people in that setting say, yep, see, i told you. we knew this day was coming, it was just a matter of time. and really it became this question of, okay, are you going to stand your ground and fight, fight for your beliefs, fight for your country, fight for your god, or are you going to be a cowered? are you going to back down and pushed by the regime and these secularsts? and you can't overstate how that divide grew and fractured congregations around the country including you had pastors check

every box they're conservative thelogically, culturally, politically. these are not progressive pastors in these churches but they said okay i'll shutdown my church for a few weeks to protect my congregants, love your neighbor, and they became marxists. over night they lost a quarter of their congregations just because they were not willing to sort of take on this brawler mentality, and you used the word earlier a pugilistic. that is in many ways how the evangelical mind has been conditioned to expect something more than just bicklical doctrine. it's now we need you to fight and we need you to fight against our enemies who are out to get us. >> tim, it's an extraordinary book. the book is "the kingdom, the power, the glory." that is our show for tonight. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. this host of a kremlin-run show sa