preferred fro despots like the camera rouge. if obama had ever use that to describe is -- i don't think we need to pause to think about that without be on the right. to anyone else had an. that >> -- adam serwer, thank you both. have a good holiday. really good to have you on. that is all in on this thursday, alex wagner tonight starts right now. good evening, alex. good evening, alex. once again saying immigrants are poisoning the blood of thi he's well aware of the comparisons to hitler and is doubling down on them, all to the point of your last discussion. >> yes. >> thank you, my friend. and thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. in 1952 in the middle of the korean war the united steel workers of america threatened to strike. but before they could president

truman shocked theco nation wita televised address announcing he was seizing control of the steel plants so as not to interrupt the war effort. within half an hour of that address lawyers for the steel companies had driven to a district court ivjudge's home i washington, d.c. and gotten the judge to set a hearing for the next morning, a hearing as to whether or not a president could actually do that. now, the merits of that case are really interesting. but the reason the steel seizure case matters today is the speed at which it was heard by the supreme court. the issue was so urgent for the steel workers, the unions, the steel companies, the u.s. military, it was so pressing that the case skipped the appeals process, and the supreme court heard oral arguments just ad little over a month after truman's announcement. they decided the case less than a month after that, which is like light speed in supreme court time. and that is why in special counsel jack smith's filing

before the supreme court today, mr. smithrt cited the 1952 stee seizure case. trump's lawyers have argued the entire federal election interference case should be thrown out because trump as president was protected by presidential immunity. in his filing today jack smith argued that resolution of this issue is so important that it requires an immediate and definitive decision by the nation's highest court. and the 1952 steel seizure case shows that the supreme court can acthe fast when it comes to matters of national importance. but special counsel smith also offered the supreme court an even more direct precedent. >> this is nbc "nightly news," friday, may, 24th. reported by john chancellor. >> good evening. late this afternoon there was a stunning and t completely unexpected development in the

battle special watergate prosecutor leon juwarsky is waging to get presidential tapes. he wenten directly to the supre court and asked it to intervene on his behalf. jaworsky went directly to the supreme court in an attempt to avoid a time consuming test in the court of appeals. jaworsky said the issues raised by the president's defiance of thede subpoena must be resolved before the supreme court goes on vacation next month. >> in their own filing before the supreme court yesterday trump's lawyers made clear mr. trump does not want the court to act too quickly. trump urged the justices not to rush to judgment in an obvious bid to try and delay this issue from being resolved and therefore potentially delay trump's trial past the 2024 election. trump's lawyers claim that for the supreme court to decide this issue correctly, it should wait for the case to go through the entire appeals process. when the watergate special

prosecutor was trying subpoena nixon's white house audiotapes,p nixon's lawyers took the exact same approach. >> the president's answer went to the court today. he does not want the court to actwa quickly. >> the brief said that the president b opposes any attempto shortcut the legal process. it said the doctrine that the president can with hold evidence under executive privilege remains alive and well. it said it was more importantly the case be decided wisely than hurredly and said none of the parties would be served with a rush to judgment. >> the white house tonight saying it's pursuing a strategy of delay. >> a president pursuing a strategy of delay. sometimes history rhymes, and sometimes history repeats itself tune and verse. and here is how that nixon president resolved the very next day. >> the u.s. supreme court acting as swiftly as it ever has today

announced it will review the special watergatere prosecutor' complaint against president nixon. >> within two months of agreeing to hear that case, the supreme court issued its historic, unanimous 8-0 decision that president nixon must turn over the white house tapes. the supreme court can act quickly when it wantst to. and today in his filing jack smith made that case. just as the court granted judgment in the united states vs. nixon and expedited its proceedings, it should do the same here. here the stakes are high if at least not higherch the question is pivotal to whether the former president himself will stand trial, which is scheduled to begin less than three months in the future. the trials here is of the utmosh gravity. the case involves for the first time in our history criminal charges against a former president while his actions while in office. and not just any actions,

alleged acts to perpetwit himself in power by frustrating the constitutionally prescribed process by certifying the lawful winner of an election. the nation has a compelling interest on a decision on respond's claim of immunity from these charges. and if they are to be tried a resolution by conviction or acquittal without undue delay. joining me now are mary mccord, former acting assistant attorney general for national security in thene obama doj and current co-host of the prosecuting donald trump podcast. also with me is katie benner, "the new york times" reporting on the national desk. katie, i was struck by the language in jack smith's filing today, the way in which he presents the gravity of this case, and i wonder what you make of the urgency of that argument, you know, in light of all the back and forth. >> sure. you know, there are so many filings back and forth, you're right. but when you step back in

essence what he's saying is we have to decide whether or not the american people get to see and hear the full hearing of the evidence both that the prosecutors have and the defense has. they get to hear the evidence and a jury gets to decide, and we should know the answer before an election, before we decide who should be president b of th unitede states. now, again, the trump team has tried to cast this as a political move, but what if they have great evidence? what if they can exonerate him? >> exactly. >> shouldn't they be able to do that in a court of law through our process so he can be on the ballot. what jack smith is saying is whether or not he wins, a decision should be made. a jury should be allowed to weigh in on this before voters make probably the most important decision they're going to make, which is whong becomes presiden. >> exactly. and in that way trump has really dominated the argument by suggesting expeditious processing is somehow partisan.

butho of course it's about the american voters having all the informationer at hand. mary, i -- i wonder, you know, we played the tape of nixon and jaworsky. the parallels are eerie. even the same language. do not rush to judgment in this case, that was nixon's filing. trump's filing, partisan rush to judgment. i mean it'sus not a coincidence and i wonder how much you think the specter of that case looms, you know, as the justices take -- potentially take on this one and given the stakes at hand. >> i think what's significant about the nixon case as well as the steel seizure case is they're good examples when a case is significant enough and important enough and is reason for the supreme court to do two things. one, to leapfrog the court of appeals and take a case directly from a district court decision. and secondly, to take aicates on ane expedited schedule.

and in this case i think what jack smith is saying is that even though in the ordinary course cases come up to the supreme court, after an issue, a legal issue has been percolating in the courts of appeals for some times. sometimes years with different courts ruling in different ways, learning from each other, and eventually the supreme court will resolve an issue. but here what jack smith is saying is this is not the kind of issue going to percolate in the other district courts for years. this has importance now.mp this is an unprecedented situation. i mean the nixon case is good precedent for timing, but of course that was not about the trial of a former president. that was a different trial where evidence that president nixon did not want to be supplied for that trial, that's what he was trying to guard against. here we're talking about an actual former president being charged with and tried for crimes allegedly committed while

he was president. and what jack smith is saying is, you know, there's no need -- whatever we do stopping in the circuit court of appeals for a ruling, this court, the supreme court is still going to need to answer that question and so let's just get there now and do it quickly. even if it means the supreme court were to say, former president trump you're immune from prosecution. jack smith is saying we need a resolution. >> yeah, i was struck by another piece of the filing, katie, which is noted by the special counsel that even if the government were to win in the d.c. circuit court, the default rules give trump 45 days to seek a rehearing en banc, which is the full panel of judges, and 90 days to seek cert. 90 days is three months. the trial has to start in three months. s that has a create concern in the doj. the rules themselves push. >> it creates concern in the

justice department but you can imagine the trump legal team has also seen those very same rules andry encountered those very sa days. you have really seen trump try to run out the clock problematically. we're not trying to get into his head by saying that. it's truly the strategy he's espoused. so of course that is concern for the t department because the la thing anybody wants is we're already looking at so much unprecedented activity. the last thing anybody wants is a situation where there's a trial that's happening as voters are voting with a verdict that happens in that period of time between the voters electing somebody and that person taking office in january. i mean if you think we're having some dicy supreme court -- >> even a trial or conviction that happens after the nominating process,pe right, because then it becomes a deep state plot to derail the nominee of one of our political parties.

>> let us have a slate of candidates that everybody can feel should be the slate of candidates before we start. >>f mary, do you have spidey sense, one is the 14th amendment call made by the colorado supreme court, the other is the presidential immunity defense here. do you think one might help the justices rule on the other? which is to say roberts is very concerned about the legacy and thene impression of this court terms of thef public -- how th court sees this -- how the public sees the high court as independent or not. and might they take up both cases and rule differently for trump on each to show that they are neutral arbiters? >> so i do think they will take up both cases because both are really extremely important, right? one about actually getting to trial on criminal charges against a former president, the other about keeping a former

president off of the ballot due to his disability if he's found to engaged in insurrection, which is what the colorado supreme court found. there's no question that if the u.s. supreme court were to affirm the colorado supreme court, take that case and say you're correct, colorado supreme court, donald trump is not qualified to be president under the 14th amendment section 3 so therefore he cannot be on the ballot, then that would obviate some of the rush, the need to get thise criminal trial done before election because he would be off the ballot. i don't see it playing out timing-wise, though, that way. and i also think that it's a tall hill to climb to -- for the plaintiffs to win in the supreme court in the colorado case. it's not impossible, of course, but there are, you know, eight different legal conclusions that the supreme court would have to agree with that the colorado

supreme court made. so i do think the court will take both of these. i don't think the justice will think, okay, let's give trump a win in one and give him a loss in the other in order to retain their integrity. but i think they will look at each case on their merits. the arguments arehe very, very different in each one. and i do think, you know, that most of the judges will be trying really to rule based on the facts and the law and what they think is right under the constitution. because both of these matters raise significant constitutional issues. but there's no question they're human beings. they have in mind their institutional integrity and the impact of their rulings in both cases on this election in 2024. >> yeah. they are human beings, which is i think the kindest thing you could say about some of the conservatives on that court right now. but that's just me. one last one, katie. in the mar-a-lago case jack smith this week-l asked for a february 2nd deadline for parties to submit a jury

questionnaire, sort of an initial round of vetting. surprisingly exactly no one, trump's team has said absolutely not. this is a politically motivated election interference mission by the special counsel's office. smith today responded that trump's filing was long rhetoric and baseless accusations that do not merit a response, also can we get started with jury selection? >> itright. i think what he's trying to say is when you're looking at a case with this much publicity around it, and in the past we've seen the boston bombing case as an example and enron saying these were communities so deeply impacted by the boston bombing, of course the marathon, and then by the company enron that employed so many people and hurt so p many people's lives. in that you had jury selection include a questionnaire to whittle the pool down from more than 1,000 people to a few hundred to try to be as impartial as possible to get the

best jury. and it's not unusual to do this. he also points out trump is saying this is partisan and a way to interfere with the election, he notes the kinds of questions the jurors will be asked really have nothing to do with that. it's what kind of media do you consume? how much of it do you consume? do you know anybody that has really nothing to do with the political arguments trump made. so he's saying we want to be ready by may 20th just in case we go to trial then. this will help us make sure it happens. that's all we need. >> just reminding us -- >> there was a lot of rhetoric. >> and reminding us the justice department and justice itself should not be partisan. mary mccord, katie benner, thank you so much for your time tonight. i appreciate it. we have a lot more ahead this evening. rudy giuliani is running from a

court's order to pay massive damages to two former election workers he defamed. buter can he hide? and next the political fallout from the colorado high court's decision to order donald trump off the state's ballot. obama deputy national security advisorse ben rhodes joins me o that question right after the break. ns me on that question right after the break.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ getting sick and tired of cold and flu products that don't work? biovanta is the only number one physician-recommended product chosen over all others, including tylenol, mucinex, zicam, and nyquil / dayquil. the combat symptoms and boosts immunity. biovanta really works.

getting sick and tired of cold and flu products that don't work? biovanta is the only number one physician-recommended product chosen over all others, including tylenol, mucinex, zicam, and nyquil / dayquil. the combat symptoms and boosts immunity. biovanta really works. today we learned that donald trump plans to formally file an appeal with the supreme court after christmas in response to the colorado supreme court's ruling that removes him from the state's primary ballot. that is according to an nbc news source with knowledge of the trump team's plan. colorado's highest court made an exhaustive and compelling argument that trump was disqualified because he violated the so-called insurrection

clause under the constitution's 14th amendment. but the landmark ruling has left a lot of debate in its wake. this is eric lebts writing in new york magazine. precisely because it's important to keep authoritarian insurrectionists out of party i think the legal matters matter less than the litical consequences. the colorado supreme court decision will in practice fortify american democracy against the threat of backsliding that it is good. if it actually increases that threat, then it is bad. his piece basically raises this question. if the end goal is to keep an insurrectionists from the oval office, is it a good idea to disqualify an insurrectionist candidate via the courts if that process may ultimately help get the insurrectionists back into the oval office? joining me now to untangle this knot is ben rhodes, former deputy national security advisor for president obama and co-host of the wildly popular podcast

"pod save the world." ben, thank you for being here. i thought these are difficult unanswerable questions, who better to ask than ben rhodes. let's talk politically about the up side 14th amendment ruling from the supreme court in the state of colorado. i was really struck by a different magazine piece who said the average swing voter thinks about politics 4 minutes a week, and they're not waking up for 12 months. one-fifth of americans -- only one-fifth of americans are convinced trump will even be nominated. will this kind of maybe will help shape people's views about who should be nominate asked who should not? i don't know, what do you think? >> i think it's pretty clear trump is going to be nominated, right? it doesn't take a political genius to look at the polls and see that. i think what this tells us and reminds us is that this is going to be an incredibly abnormal election and that there's going to be a lot of twists and turns.

there's going to be a lot of court activity, a lot of things are going to remind us how extreme and authoritarian donald trump is. and it's not going to be a normal campaign where two people go out campaign and make their case and then we vote. we're going to be confronted with basically a referendum on whether americans are okay with donald trump returning to the oval office despite being an insurrectionist authoritarian. and donald trump is going to try to make it a referendum on joe biden and his age, but there's going to be no escaping this question that's going to be put more and more acutely in front of the american people between now and the election. >> do you worry, for example, having the supreme court or state supreme court decide to take a candidate off the ballot to americans whose don't read any of the rulings, who aren't as familiarized with the events of january 6th as perhaps you and i are, that that in itself smacks of arthoritarianism. >> i think our system has

already been worn down and eroded. donald trump should not be allowed to run for president again. he should have been impeached after january 6th. therlz never been a clearer case for impeachment in the history of this country. the courts absolutely if you look at the letter of the law. how is an insurrectionists allowed to get away with the insurrection act, right? but the reality is we all know the supreme court is not going to allow him to be removed from the ballot. we all know congress did not assert itself. this question is going to be put to the american people inevitably. obviously it's the democratic thing, but we're only where we are with trump because the other branches of government and the guardrails have failed. >> yeah. on its merits alone if you're a textualist sitting on the

supreme court it's not even a question. it's all there in the ruling. and yet ben, today trump on social media saying i'm not an insurrectionists, crooked joe biden is. crooked joe biden is a threat to democracy. this is what worries me about the sort of strange upside down in which trump exists. it's one thing when it's a witch hunt, right, and he says the witch hunt is against me. joe biden is the person that's using the deep state. >> flow, no, no, you're the puppet. >> exactly. and now it's not i'm not an insurrectionists, joe biden is an insurrectionists. i do wonder in some way it renders insurrectionism somewhat meaningless to throw it away the way trump does. >> that's what he always dedoes. alexei navalny about president putin said he doesn't have to

convince you he's not corrupt but convince you everyone else is corrupt. donald trump doing everything he can to make it a referendum on joe biden and his story about joe biden and joe biden increasingly trying to make a referendum on donald trump and the american people will have the final verdict here. >> do we have time to play this new sound from donald trump talking about the blood of our nation. can we please play that? >> illegal immigration is poisoning the blood of our nation. they're coming from prisons, from mental institutions all over the world. without borders and fair elections you don't have a country. make america great again. we must win in 2024 or we will not have a nation. >> he has been told in no uncertain terms that this is the language of hitler, this is the language from fascism. that is from an hour ago. this is not someone concerned about that and is instead embracing it. and i don't have the polling in front of me because i think it's

40% of caucus goers in iowa saying poisoning the blood of our nation rhetoric makes them more likely to vote for donald trump. >> all the quiet part is being said out loud in this cycle more than in the past with trump. vermin, poisoning the blood of our nation. this is the core of every fascist argument that there's some other out there trying to pollute the purity of the nation. and he is saying things that are so extreme but because we're accustomed to him mouthing off or accustomed to him violating norms, we have to take a step back here and evaluate this is nothing like anything we've ever seen before. this is someone running for the president of the united states as a fascist. and the question is are enough people going to say you know what, that's not a risk we can take? >> i would just say independent of whether or not he wins, the very fact he has a base of support that is increasing at precisely the same time he's saying this about the people who

have made america america is terrifying to me. >> it's a nation of immigrants. everybody came here from someplace else except inindigenous people. and i'm sure that's not who he thinks -- >> that's not the blood he's talking about. ben rhodes, please come back. please do not leave the building. stick around. we have a lot more to talk about tonight including the real focus -- the real focus of republican integrity units that cropped up in the wake of the 2020 election. but first the death of rudy giuliani's financial troubles laid bare in his chapter 11 bankruptcy filing today. we'll have more on that next. 1 bankruptcy filing today. we'll have more on that next i'm orlando and i'm living with hiv. i don't have to worry about daily hiv pills because i switched to every-other-month cabenuva. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month.

it's two injections from a healthcare provider. now when i have people over, hiv pills aren't on my mind. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you're taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions, post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. it feels good to just live in the moment. with every-other-month cabenuva, i'm good to go. ask your doctor about cabenuva today.

getting sick and tired of cold and flu products that don't work? biovanta is the only number one physician-recommended product chosen over all others, including tylenol, mucinex, zicam, and nyquil / dayquil. the combat symptoms and boosts immunity. biovanta really works. i'm a little anxious, i'm a little excited. i'm gonna be emotional, she's gonna be emotional, but it's gonna be so worth it. i love that i can give back to one of our customers. i hope you enjoy these amazing gifts. oh my goodness. oh, you guys. i know you like wrestling, so we got you some vip tickets. you have made an impact. so have you. for you guys to be out here doing something like this, it restores a lot of faith in humanity.

just a day after a federal judge ordered rudy giuliani to immediately pay the $146 million he owes in damages for defaming former georgia election workers ruby freeman and shaye moss, rudy giuliani has filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy. in paperwork filed today giuliani estimated his assets to be worth somewhere between 1 and $10 million, a sum that is much, much lower than the sum he owes to ruby freeman and shaye moss. and it's not even in the ballpark of what he owes to his lawyers and his ex-wife and the irs. so what happens now? joining me now to discuss is msnbc's not so secret legal

weapon the great lisa rubin. lisa, first of all, what is the upside for people not familiar with chapter 11 filings? what does this get rudy giuliani? >> it gets rudy giuliani two things. the first is it allows him to sort of reorganize his financial world. and some of the things that he has, some of the debts that he owes will hopefully from his perspective be wiped clean or at least reduced to cents on the dollar. it gives him somewhat of a fresh start and allows him to get rid of certain debts and also reduce them. but the more important thing for rudy giuliani at this moment is it freezes every lawsuit that he is facing other than the fulton county indictment against him. it can't freeze criminal lawsuits, and there are certain types of assets that you could recover that won't be freezed by bankruptcy like child support. but rudy doesn't owe anybody and

we know that from his filing today. >> it is expensive to be an awful human being. >> it is totally expensive. >> that seems to be the case here. >> you and i are were talking during the break if you read his filing where he lists his 20 largest creditors putting aside the irs and tax authorities, it is the longest list of people who have been wronged by rudy giuliani, to whom he may owe also tens of hundreds of millions of dollars because those cases haven't been disposed of yet. and they include people like hunter biden who has also sue him for defamation and an employ of his who says rudy giuliani assaulted and harassed her sexually and also stole her wages by never paying her. and of course it includes dominion and smartmatic, two makers of voting machines that were defamed by rudy giuliani and all his frequent media appearances where he said they were involved in the theft of legitimate votes. >> what are the implications for ruby freeman and shaye moss?

their lawyer said this play will not succeed. they're suing giuliani again for the defamation that happened on the steps of the courthouse after he was found guilty for defamation. what are the implications of them actually seeing their damages money? >> it definitely kicks that can down the road because of that stay we were talking about. but when you commit an intentional torte against someone, the bankruptcy law says that you can't discharges or eliminate those debts in bankruptcy. so just like alex jones who wasn't able to get rid of his liability to the families of those killed at sandy hook, so too will rudy giuliani be able to press pause on the collection of his debt to ruby and shaye, but he won't ever be able to eradicate. >> he's going to have to pay them some amount of money at some point in the not so distant future. >> that's correct. and if he's not telling the truth of what his assets really are, if he does have assets in excess of $10 million, the

bankruptcy court is entitled to know that. so if at any point in this process he's not fully transparent about all of his assets that will be a crime in and of itself. lying to the bankruptcy court about -- >> add it to the list, lisa. >> well, i'm not saying he is lying. >> i'mgist saying it could be yet another wrong committed by rudy giuliani on a long, long list of wrongs. >> that's right. and during the ruby and shaye litigation he was not transparent about his finances. in fact, he refused to provide discovery on that. that's how they ended up getting a default judgment he was liable for all of these things they allege he did. now they're going to find out things they didn't know before, which is rudy transfer assets somewhere or stash them somewhere to play a game with people. that is striking about this process. >> we've talked about the question of accountability, and we've talked about this

off-line. hitting trump and his allies right-wing demagogues like alex jones in the pocketbook is an effective tool for getting some version of accountability because it really seems like it deeply concerns these people. >> it absolutely concerns these people. and again, today not in the major filing but rudy also submitted an affidavit. and one of the things you have to tell the court is why are you filing for bankruptcy now? he is as clear as day this filing is precipitated by the $148 million verdict that was awarded last week. but for that case, rudy giuliani would not be filing for bankruptcy today. so, yes, it will stall the recovery that ruby freeman and shaye moss get, but justice will still be theirs, and in the meantime his humiliation is there for all the public to see as america's mayor becomes america's most recent debtor. >> i mean the fall from grace has been spectacular, and it is

apparently not over yet. lisa rubin, thank you for staying late tonight. great to see you. when we come pack, we finally know, finally at long last we finally know who all those election fraud task forces have been focused on. the answer is next. been focusen the answer is next

i got this $1,000 camera for only $41 on dealdash. dealdash.com, online auctions since 2009. this playstation 5 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. today i will detail some of the shocking irregularities, abuses, and fraud that have been

revealed in recent weeks. and we have so much evidence. >> after the 2020 election, after donald trump's claims of so-called rampant election fraud, after those claims took hold in the republican party, republicans in six states decided to create or amp up existing efforts to prosecute voter fraud. the attorneys general of virginia and arkansas established election integrity units in their offices. ohio's secretary of state created a public integrity division with oversight over investigation of election law violations. in georgia republican governor brian kemp signed a bill last year that gave the state's bureau of investigations jurisdiction over voter fraud. florida governor ron desantis created his own election police force, initially budgeted at $1.2 million, which this year was boosted to $1.4 million. arizona republicans already had an election integrity unit. they launched it after democrats

had a strong showing in the 2018 mid-terms. texas had already been in the business of investigating election fraud. attorney general ken paxton has reportedly spent nearly $7 million on it over the last three years to handle a total of 33 cases. so what did these guys get after all that fanfare, after all that money? bupkis. according to a report by "the washington post" the election integrity units established expanded in six states after trump's loss obtained only 47 convictions after tens of millions of votes were cast. the vast majority of the convictions represent small board cheating or as some defendants argue mistakes by individual voters such as casting two ballots, falsifying a registration or voting even if barred by a conviction. all of the convictions occurred

in florida, texas, and ohio while units in virginia, georgia, and arkansas failed to obtain a single guilty verdict despite allocating dozens of staffers and millions of dollars to ferret out voter fraud. thought a single conviction. instead these task forces mostly just made peoples lives miserable and somewhat scary. this is what it looked like in florida last summer. >> so ma'am, we have a warrant for your arrest. >> for what? >> for voter fraud. i'm like i voted but i ain't commit no fraud. >> that's the thing. i don't know exactly what happened with it, but you do have a warrant. that's what it's for. >> oh, my god. >> voter fraud? what is voter fraud? >> voting when you're not supposed to, sir. >> why would y'all let me vote if i wasn't able to vote? >> i'm not sure, buddy. i don't know.

>> and then why now? this happened years ago. why now? why me? >> why him? what many of the 52 people arrested in the last year by governor desantis' election police seemed to have in common was their party affiliation or the color of their skin. it turns out it didn't just seem like that, it was like that. "the washington post" analysis showed the election integrity units in those six states overwhelmingly targeted minorities and democrats for prosecution. the analysis found that 76% of defendants whose race or ethnicity could be identified, that 76% were black or hispanic while white people constituted 24% of the prosecutions. registered democrats made up 58% of those charged whose parties could be identified while registered republicans

were 23%. while the alleged point of the so-called election integrity projects is to make elections fair, the real point of them is not hard to figure out. the executive director of the watchdog group, american oversight, put it this way. at best these election integrity units are for show, designed to placate far right election denialests in the conservative base. at worst, they're used to justify new voting restrictions and to intimidate people especially racial minorities from exercising their right to vote. and yet the desire remains to stay in the good graces of those election denialists especially one in particular. >> the radical left democrats rigged the presidential election of 2020, and we're not going to allow them to rig the presidential election of 2024. we're not going to allow it. >> the gop remains willing to appease him apparently at any cost. coming up, the death toll in gaza reaches 20,000 as a u.n.

official warns the entire population is on the verge of starvation. we will discuss the spiraling humanitarian situation in gaza. that's next. humanitarian situation in gaza that's next.

hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. ♪ changing your habits is the only way that gets you to lose the weight. and golo is the plan that's going to help you do that. just take the first step, go to golo.com.

according to the palestinian health ministry an estimated 20,000 people have now been killed inside gaza since the start of the war. the entire population of gaza over 2 million people is on the brink of starvation. an official for the u.n.'s world food program says it doesn't get any worse. i have never seen something at the scale that is happening in gaza is at this speed. in northern gaza there are no more hospitals left. patients now shelter in churches, lying on pews. and the w.h.o. says these are now hospice centers where people wait to die. the w.h.o. aid worker describes unfathomable conditions of people receiving surgery and getting infections because there

are no more antibiotics. on the outside of this catastrophic suffering talks to release hostages in gaza appear to be stalled. the war it seems is nowhere near over even though president biden has called on israel to finish this war by the end of this year. a new year begins in ten days. joining me once again is ben rhodes, former deputy national security advisor under president obama. ben, the suffering -- the accounts of what is happening in gaza are so unbelievably wrenching. and i think it's on some level a sign we're still paying attention, that democrats in the house with national security backgrounds today sent a letter to president biden arguing that israel's strategy is not in the best interest of either america or israel. i wonder if you think this conflict is truly an inflection point in terms of changing

american attitudes towards israel. >> i don't know how you can look at this and think that anything about it is okay. i think it has to change attitudes towards the israeli government that is carrying out this operation. people need to step back and realize we have not seen anything like this in the 21st century. more women and children have been killed in gaza in two months than have been killed in putin's war in ukraine in two years. we're talking 20,000, how many people are under the rubble we don't know about? >> yeah. >> and when you hear the warnings, too, because of the cut off of food and fuel and water, people are going to start to die of starvation, of water borne illnesses. this could exponentially get worse. i'm glad they're raising

questions about how whether to provide assistance, how to provide assistance. we're behind on this thing. we're still vetoing cease-fire resolutions at the u.n., trying to get a short-term pause. a short-term pause and then what? resume this again. this has to stop. and, you know, the hostages are not going to be saved by this military operation. >> yes. >> how is it that the hostages themselves are not being killed in this operation. i think we don't understand how much this is profoundly changing global attitudes not just towards israel but the united states as well. >> that of course is true, too, beginning our sort of walking not in lock step but in parallel of israel. what do you think the calculation is inside -- as you say this has not happened in the 21st century. how and why has the biden administration not been more vociferous. at what point is it 25,000 people?

the scale of death and suffering is extraordinary. >> well, and i think to step back we all had a deep affinity for israel after october 7th. >> of course. >> had an instinct that you want to support israel, they have a right to defend themselves. it's also the case that you have to evaluate who is making the decisions in israel. and this is a far-right government led by prime minister b.b. netp hew who time and again has shown he'll ignore what u.s. presidents tell him. and i think the biden administration they said they thought if they embraced netanyahu they would have influence on him. and it is clear that's not been the case. he's continued to do this over their objections, i mean over their stated objections. and at a certain point you have to say we can't -- we can't support this. and to be clear, this is not helping israel. it's not securing israel. >> yes. >> hamas is still there. its political leadership is not even in gaza. there's enormous amounts of

sympathy for the cause. i think if you're a friend of israel, you have a friend, alex, and you see your friend not doing something good for them, is the way to be a good friend to say, okay, we'll keep doing it? no, a friend says this isn't working. >> to your point about hamas, hamas popularity has more than tripled among palestinians in the west bank. this is to end hamas, it is not doing -- if this mission is to end hamas, it is not doing that. it is not accomplishing that. it also is not getting the hostages back. and i do wonder if you think the absent sort of debacle of three hostages being held killed by the idf last week, there's support for some of this but it's not a blank check. the fact they cannot seem to bring or will not bring these hostages home i wonder if that is -- does that have any effect

on netanyahu's calculus? >> that is clearly like an enormously important issue like it should be. and i walked down the street today. there are hostage posters everywhere. i think people need to recognize, though, if that is your objective, when were hostages released? it was when the military operation paused. and the hostages are clearly in danger just as every human being is in gaza as long as this military operation goes on. and so i just think that there are other ways of doing this. there are other ways of securing israel. there are other ways of dealing with hamas and bringing hostages home. what we're seeing now is not the best way to do that. >> ben rhodes, thanks for spending extra time. i appreciate it. that is our show for tonight. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. rudy giuliani files for bankruptcy days after being ordered to pay $146 million in his defamation case. how lawyers for georgia election workers shaye moss and ruby freeman are