tonight, on the readout. so more of it will be -- an it was enough for every individual --

>> control for nikki haley, after she did everything shy of declining to name slavery as the cause of the civil war. just the latest example of the republicans mission to raise the difficult parts of american history. also, tonight, profiles in cowardice. just as she is facing a tough reelection campaign, low one forward announces plans for her constituents, and runs for office elsewhere. plus, with just days away from what promises to be a momentous here in politics we will preview the many criminal and civil trials of the republican front runner, donald trump. and, trust me, there are a lot of them. >> good evening, i am charles coleman read, are in for joy reid and you are watching the readout. we've got a lot to talk about. we begin tonight's conversation with revisions history by the republican party about one of the darkest and most painful

periods ever in america. this time, from presidential candidate nikki haley. on wednesday, healy sparked with the new hampshire voter over the cause of the civil war. >> what was the cause of the united states civil war? >> well, don't come with an easy question. i, mean i think the cause of the civil war was basically how government was going to run. the freedoms in what people could or couldn't do. what do you think the cause of the civil war was? >> thank, you had in the year 2023, it's astonishing to me that you answer that question without mentioning the word slavery. >> what do you want me to say about slavery? >> no -- you've answered my question. thank you. >> next question. >> next question. >> now, haley hudson's tried to clean up those comments, but also claiming, without evidence that the border who asked the

question was a plan sent by democrats. and, it really shouldn't be hard to name the root cause of america's bloodiest and deadliest for. , the civil war. see, the president, joe biden he did it himself in just four words on x. it was about slavery. period. and, this is where things take a turn. and you have to call it out. in a full-throated voice in the one as they use. i have to use your birth name. -- stop playing in our faces. there is something uniquely detestable and diminishing about trying to tiptoe around the history and the legacy of american slavery. for one, it rejects historical facts that have been a firm and accepted for more than a century. but, also, it reflects america's refusal to reckon with slavery and by extension, to reckon and reconcile black humanity. now, there's nothing about

rewriting civil war history. the practices just about as old as the civil war itself. but, remember, this is a particular challenge for nikki haley, who has -- around the confederacy, feeling for criticizing him his horse. i, remember, when she run for governor in 2010 she was asked a similar question about the civil war in an interview with a now defunct activist group, they're known as the palmetto patriots. at that point, haley described the war as two desperate sides fighting for a tradition and change. what? she also said that the confederate flag was, quote, not something that is racist but part of heritage and tradition within the state. miss me with all of this. now, as the former governor of that state, you would think, that she would know basic facts about south carolina. like, how it became the first state to 60 from the federal union in 1860. which precipitated the outbreak of the american civil war in charleston, harbor.

on april 12th, 1861. south carolina's declaration of succession, specifically mentions slavery. indirectly representing the election of abraham lincoln as a contributing factor when stating, quote, a geographical line has been drawn across the union, and all states north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of president of the united states, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. delia's facing backlash, over the comments less than three weeks before republican voters start voting in early primary states. but, while the crowded republican field is shrinking against the front runner, donald trump, haley is actually getting support. minimizing the horrors of slavery, reese shull violent and terrorism are pretty much standard playbook for her party these days. after all, we have republican governors, including some of her old rivals in the presidential race was about to eliminate the rest of the inclusion efforts in hard to

qishan, as well as banned books about race altogether. if you forgot, take good old rhonda scientist. those camping pitches, basically, make america florida. when he enacted new education standards requiring teachers to instruct -- to develop skills that, quote, could be applied for their personal benefit. i said it before. i'll say it again. missing you with all of it. it's important that we understand, this is bigger than nikki haley. and, it's even larger than the republican party itself. this is about a set of harmful individuals who are running for the highest office in the land. and, at the same, time who are committed to diminishing whitewashing and rewriting as well as a racing the horrors of american shadow slavery. my friend, writer molly john fastiv enedy fair said it best. referencing haley, earlier today, quote, moral, clarity

dies in euphemism. this moment, not only in terms of haley's response but in the long reflection points where we find ourselves around american democracy. demands the loan clarity that mueller jumped fast wrote about. it is imperative as central throughout tomorrow, as anything else about the fight being currently adjacent but it's worth asking whether the so-called backlash will even hurt her. or will it lead need voters in her party at all? >> joining me now to discuss all of this is christina greer, political scientist and host of the black's questions podcast. and my friend and colleague susan depressing, republican strategist and msnbc public local analysts. good to have you both on. i am so happy to have this discussion. susan, i want to start with you. the response to hillary's comments, seem like they may have helped her in terms of toeing the line in the

republican party more than they hurt her. what does that say about where the party isn't what they're trying to, sort, of hone in on as their core values? >> well, i think your opening said it perfectly. it is, as of right now, the republican party is trying to whitewash history and again you did it so well i'm not going to get into the ethical lessons that we have to learn. because we know what they are. politically, what's so interesting charles is i kept thinking of donald trump's questions when he was questioned by chris matthews, in the 2016 election. when he said, should the women be punished? and donald trump looked around, he was wondering, he was thinking really hard. and, he was just trying to figure out what with sound best. and he said, yes, the woman should be punished. and with nikki haley, you could see her struggling, trying to figure out what to say. she didn't say what she believed. she said what she thought would work best for her in the republican primary for

president. now, by the way, fyi, it is what we call politically very, very bad. that's very berry -- and it will harder, and to do it in new hampshire of all places is just the. >> right. but, christina, this is a question that she's essentially been asked before. this is not her first time having to deal with this issue. should we be surprised that even as someone who reaches back to 2010 and rephrases a question that, i guess, at one point testament or that she didn't have a better answer almost two decades later? >> right, well, coleman, my grandmother always just to say, the only time we should be surprised as one were surprise. we're dealing with these particular people so nikki haley i think she's also thinking that she's in new hampshire. i don't know if she was necessarily prepared to answer that particular question. she should always be prepared and this is a question that has been asked several times. and we know that south carolina

also has a state, a black population, of well over quarter. so, she should know that this is a great import to the people of a former state when she was governor. so, the fact that she was ill prepared, i think are opponents will most likely use this as an opportunity to try and curtail some of the winds and ourselves. those, say she can't answer a basic question that she's been asked for almost two decades. on the lack of preparation, there's a lot more about her and her campaign than it does about anything else. but, sadly, as you have susan both played out, this is where the republican party is right now. they want to erase the facts. , and we are all entitled to our own opinions we are not entitled to our own. facts the republican party, wants to rewrite history. especially american history. christine, i want to follow up with you, because there is a very linear sort of path that we can look at when we are talking about white grievance and how these things have played out, going all the way

back to 2017 sherrodsville in moving forward. i consistent approach by the republican party of downplaying white supremacy and its effects on american history and in the present you have the unite the right rally in 2017. ron desantis and everything that he has doing in florida. he's not the only. one you have extreme pushback, the 16 19 project. all of these different things. what does this tell you in terms of the notion that trumpism, regardless of what happened with respect to donald trump? >> i think we did face the facts that donald trump as a very powerful candidate, but his ideas of permeated the entire party. he is sort of festered in the entire republican party and everything has moved toward his thinking but don't forget, he is thinking has been a part of

a right-wing portion of the republican party that has very diligently, dare i say, since 1973, rollback roe v. wade. these are the same people who have been working on local elections, state by state, these are people putting up candidates that look like governor youngkin, but if you listen carefully he sounds just like a donald trump in quite a few areas. these are the people that are going to college campuses, indoctrinating students to make sure they work against civil rights and civil liberties for so many americans. these are the same anti immigrant anti-woman anti-people of color, and i black specifically party. and we have to be honest about the ideology of the republican party right now. it extends well beyond donald trump and it's on local state and federal levels. we must take it very seriously because it is anti black. it is largely white nationalism.

white supremacist. it's perricone highly capitalistic in a very anti black in anti immigrant space. >> susan one of the things i thought was interesting about this, especially when ron desantis tried to campus elias on nikki haley's flub as they described it for fundraising purposes. if you look at that field, no one is innocent. everyone has blood on their hands, proverbial bubbly speaking, with the record on race and how they dealt with issues of multiculturalism, diversity, and alike. has this become on the right a race to the bottom, to see who can out trump each other in order to be second place winner? >> mostly, yes. mostly yes. and the one thing, the one person i will kind of separate from that conversation is chris christie, not because of his beliefs that you just described, but rather because he has made his sole mission to defeat donald trump.

whereas the other candidates in the race have not done that. there saw mission is to basically secure themselves for the future at this point. but chris christie is only in this to defeat donald trump. so as far as that part goes, absolutely. but there is no doubt that when you are looking at a question like this that was given in new hampshire town hall, it shows you that the republican party is settling into the bottom on an issue they should be rising to the top on. there was a point, by the way, in the early 90s, when the republican party did try to be much more inclusive. frankly, the time i got involved in politics. but that has changed, because especially under donald trump you can mobilize hate and that is what the republican party is capitalizing on. mobilizing heat for the primary. >> this is very fascinating to me because i'm very curious about where the bottom falls

out. i don't necessarily know, susan, where whether we have reached that point, but is a republican candidate, whether it's trump or someone else, going to be able to pivot when they reach a general election to grasp the voters that are in the middle, that are independent, or voters who are centrists who are not necessarily buying what joe biden is selling. is this a space that even provides an opportunity to walk back at all? or do they care? >> it's not so much walking back, but with donald trump, no, he'll never pivot. he'll never change. other republicans who for lack of a better world war professional inexperienced, they know how to pivot back. they know what language to use. and frankly, in the 2024 election, it will be more about reaching out to those who are unhappy with joe biden. when you're looking for those sliver voters, the ones who went with joe biden in 2020, those republicans and

center-right independents, will they stay with biden? or could they find someone like nikki haley, a more attractive candidate? right now the polling says they will find nikki haley more appealing. but they won't necessarily go for donald trump. >> christina greer and susan del mercy no, thank you for getting us started on this thursday. i'm next on the readout, breaking news out of maine, the state has followed colorado's lead in removing donald trump from the ballot. color publicans make it official asking the u.s. supreme court to hear their appeal on removing trump from the ballot in that state. what are the chances trump's handpicked justices adhere to the constitution? i'm charles coleman junior, and the readout continues right after this. e readout continues righ after this >>

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.

>> breaking news tonight out of maine we are moving the secretary of state has made maine the first state to officially remove donald trump from the ballot on 14th amendment grounds. in a ruling just months ago secretary of state shenna bellows writes, quote, specifically, i find that the declaration on his consent form is false because he is not qualified to hold office of the president under section three of the 40 the minute. bellows added, i concluded the record establishes that mr. trump, over the course of several months and culminating on january 6th, 2021, use the

false narrative to inflame his supporters and direct them to the capitol to revert certification of the 2020 election in the peaceful transfer of power. i likewise conclude that mr. trump was aware of the likelihood for violence and at least initially supported its use given he both encouraged it with incendiary rhetoric and did no timely action to stop it. this now comes a day after colorado republican party has asked the united states supreme court to overturn colorado's ruling, firing trump, which basically means trump will appear on that states ballot for now. late today the high court was asked to fast-track its review of the colorado ruling for the six colorado voters who brought the lawsuit in the first place. joining me now is color disagree of state, janet griswold, so glad to have you here. before we even talk about your state, let's talk in unpack

some of this breaking news out of maine. what is your reaction to this move? and what it means for the future of all of these challenges? >> good evening. thank you for having me on. honestly, i think it's great that shenna bellows, secretary of state of the state of maine, followed superior court in ruling that don trump is disqualified to the bell. it is clear donald trump engaged in insurrection. it's also very clear that the language in the constitution says that if someone swears to uphold the constitution and then engages in insurrection, they cannot be placed in office again. so i do think the secretary of state of maine did the right thing, and again it maine is her job to make this decision. she also recognizes that very likely it's going to be appealed, and like in colorado, has put a stay, a hold on her decision, to allow the

appellate process to play out. >> so secretary griswold, i would like to ask you, we are expecting, no actually, i will see that. don trump has yet to file an appeal before the supreme court regarding the colorado case. i shall not presume. do you expect that he will, number one, and do you have any sense of what he may put as the issues in front of the court if he does file an appeal? >> donald trump's lawyers have indicated they will file something. whether that is their own appeal or joining the appeal already filed i cannot say. and if they continue to follow the argument they followed in the lower lower courts, i'm sure he will want to contest that two courts have decided that he engaged in insurrection. whether or not he is on the ballot, i think there are a couple of things that will play

in court. number one, the united states supreme court considers the urgency of the time and act quickly. whether that means denying review of the case or making decisions. but number two, whether he is on the ballot or not, he is a danger to this country. and we are only here because he tried to steal the presidency from the american people in 2020. >> how important do you think the supreme court actually weighing in on this issue is? because without clear direction from the court, it seems like we could be headed to a space where come election day he is on the ballot in some states and not on in others, which could be chaotic for a number of different reasons beyond simply being unprecedented. so are you looking forward to the supreme court getting involved? >> i'm looking forward to certainty. my job as secretary of state is to make sure the coloradans have great elections.

republicans, democrats, unaffiliated alike. i have to certify who will be on the ballot next week friday for the presidential primary. so we are really urging the courts to act quickly. whether that means that they decide not to review or they do review the case, well, that is out to them. but i also agree with secretary bellows in maine in the colorado supreme court. they've gotten it right. don trump engaged in insurrection. and because of that he should be disqualified by the constitution from appearing on any ballot or serving as president again. >> we've learned that since this decision has come out, not only the justices in denver but also you yourself have received a number of different violent threats from extremists about 64 death threats, i am told, in 900 sets of abuse. this is reporting coming from axios. do you anticipate this number

is going to increase as of this issue is litigated joe the highest court in the land? and if so, what are you planning to do to ensure not only your own safety but also the safety of the justices who made the decision? >> unfortunately the statue just referred to, where the death threats that came in within three weeks of the case being filed, they have increased since the colorado supreme court has made the decision to disqualify trump. both against me and against the justices of the supreme court. and yes, unfortunately i believe that they will continue throughout the united states supreme court action. at the end of the day, donald trump has incited violence to try to get his way. he incited violence on january 6th, leading to the death of police officers. he incited violence on some of the people who are listening to him were intent on hanging the

vice president of the knighted states. and he has incited violence to election workers and secretaries of state all over this country. i just think it underlines that he is a danger to democracy, he is a danger to the right to vote, he is a danger to women, and people of color in this country, and whether or not he is on the ballot, americans have all of the power come november to protect our democracy and fundamental freedoms. >> we've had so much breaking news around maine and everything else that we didn't even get to the conversation i wanted to have about lauren boebert, before i let you go i have to ask. she is now essentially carpet bagging to move to another district and run there. the state democratic party chair said that boebert can run but she can't hide. what's your reaction to her choice of changing districts to try and remain in office and run for reelection? what does that tell you about how she feels, how confident

she feels the villagers in her current district are in terms of sending her back to washington? >> i think lauren boebert's actions are blatant, self preservation. she knows that she has failed the citizens of her district. she has failed to deliver coloradans on the western slope on issues the matter to them. she has failed to deliver legislatively. there is scandal after scandal after scandal. so i do think this is her trying to hold on to power and ultimately we will see how the primary plays out in this do district, which, by the way, is literally on the opposite side of the stage for where she currently serves as congresswoman. >> that's a very interesting point because a lot of what she hasn't done has really gone under the radar by everyone else because of the noise she makes and the distractions. i understand that her trip to

the theater and visit to walter production of beetle juice did not play well with voters in that district. now we are seeing, to your point, the effects of that. is there any sense that in this new district anything is going to change? i'm just wondering why she feels like this is the right move if whatever she was doing in occurrence bought didn't work. >> the district that she is moving her campaign to is a much more conservative district. and i imagine she realized that she only held on by a thread last election, given the recent scandals and including this scandal you just mentioned it would be harder to hold on to her seat. but ultimately that's just my perception of the situation. but the bigger picture is that maga republicans are vulnerable from defeat in swing districts

and conservative districts. we saw that play out in 2022 where we were able as the democratic association of secretaries of state to help defeat election deniers in every battleground state where they were running. i think that americans generally do not like extremism. they like people who say they're going to get things done and go do it. and ultimately what we are seeing what happens in this colorado situation that's playing out. >> yes we will. and i'm sure we will be talking again. thank you so much. color to secretary of state janet griswold. coming up after the break, a look at the year ahead in trump's extremely packed legal calendar. his attorneys will certainly be earning their retainers, assume he actually pays them, of course. and charles coleman junior. we'll be right back with more on the readout. k with mor on the readout >>

>> welcome back to the readout. i'm charles coleman junior in front of a read tonight. we are just less than three weeks out from the first votes that are going to be cast in the 2024 presidential primaries. that is going to kick off the election season. the primaries alone would be enough to keep any candidates calendar super packed. but for donald trump, he is also facing an even more packed

legal calendar that includes's numerous court trials scheduled for next year. of course trump is making every attempt to have these cases pretty much all thrown out altogether. or at least postponed, delay, delay, delay, beyond next year's election. his latest to tempt will play out on january 9th in just a few short days, when a federal appeals court hears all arguments on trump's claims of presidential immunity in his federal election interference trial. joining me now is super mario paul butler, a former prosecutor, georgetown law professor, and msnbc legal analyst. how are you my friend? good to talk to you. i can take my glasses off and talk to a lawyer. attorney butler, before we get there, before we talk about this march pot of cases that trump has facing him, i'm interest in wayne county because the reports we are hearing about donald trump making phone calls there to

pressure potential electors, those things could potentially land him in hot water as well. am i not seeing that right? >> i think you're seeing it exactly right. so everyone's been focused on the federal charges regarding election interference and state charges in georgia. but in every state that was contested, trump basically did what he did in georgia. so i think what some states are doing is charging fake electors while they are watching to see what happens with d.a. willis in georgia. but trump is certainly not out of the woods in terms of other exposure in stage criminal court for what he did to try to steal the election. >> so he could be looking at even more legal peril than he is in now. but let's talk about what he is in now. there is a whole chart with donald trump's myriad cases.

that is packed. that's a lot of cases. that's a lot of criminal and civil work that his attorneys are going to be involved in over the next year. i want you to put on your professor hat, mr. georgetown law, and i need you to pick the hollywood square of case that his attorneys right now should be most concerned about and tell me why. >> washington and lee see, jack smith federal election interference case. jack smith maybe the only person in d.c. who thinks this trial is going to happen on march 4th. but at some point judge chutkan will get her case back from the appeals court and possibly the supreme court. those courts will almost certainly deny defendant trump's grandiose claims of absolute immunity. and when that happens, jack smith wants to hit the ground running.

trump is of course trying to run out the clock so that the trial happens after the election so that he can then appoint an attorney general who will dismiss the two federal prosecutions. so until the supreme court says what it's going to do, everytown jack smith tries to move the case forward, the trump defense team will go whining to judge chutkan. >> speaking about hitting the ground running, i want to shift to fulton county. replaying hollywood squares and donald trump and his legal entanglements, as it were. fani willis has said that her office will be ready to drive this case in about 30 days. you are a former prosecutor, i'm a former prosecutor. i think that's a bit of posturing by her. but what say you? do you think that's a realistic timeframe? oh do you think that might somewhat be a little bit of a bluff by her office to maintain the sense of prosecutorial initiative and aggression?

>> we >> did we lose? paul i think we may have lost my friend paul. >> are you back? >> i can hear you now. >> yeah, i can hear you. >> my question was, do we think that the 30 days the fani willis has advanced, do you think that's realistic, or do you think that there may be some bluffing that she is doing with respect of maintaining the appearance of being ready to move forward? >> it's not gonna happen in 30 days. but trump lawyers say that if fani willis gets her way and this trial happens, even in all of this with a presidential campaign is in full swing, that will be the most effective election interference in u.s. history. that's not true but last week d.a. willis has said just because someone is running for president they shouldn't be put on trial.

so here's the thing, charles. d.a. willis has for cooperating witnesses, and if this is like her other rico cases, many more defendants will fold before trump goes on trial. her r.i.c.o. case against -- started out with 27 defendants, and now is just six people on trial. even -- older brother played out. that's gonna happen with regard to trump's r.i.c.o. case. but jury selection in the -- trial took ten. months that surgery selection. i think it's extremely unlikely that this trial in georgia is going to happen before the election. >> last question, paul, really quickly. one name. if there's someone who we do not know yet who is cooperating, who is not cooperating, who is a codefendant, and you are the prosecutor on this case, who do you want to flip? one name. >> mark meadows. he's got to be the one. >> my man! >> closer than anyone to trump.

he'd be a lousy witness. he said one thing in a book and another thing under oath, but he's got the goods. >> i've been saying the same thing. that's why you, sir, are a super lawyer. professor paul butler for joining us, thank you. still coming up after the break, a group of black women filed a class action lawsuit against the largest credit union in the u.s., alleging racial discrimination in mortgage lending. i'll speak with their attorney, ben crump, right after this. this is the reidout, and i am charles coleman junior. stay tuned. n junior stay tuned >>

>> welcome back to the reidout. i'm charles coleman junior, in front away tonight. nikki haley's claim that the civil war was simply about economic freedom was absurd on many counts. especially considering disparities that exist today that directly stem from slavery and jim crow. disparities such as housing discrimination. during the civil rights movement, the fair housing act was indicted to try and write that wrong. but today the homeownership gap between white and black households is even wider than it was a 1960. and black applicant is more than twice as likely to be denied a home mortgage as a white applicant. now we have seen the scenario play out over and over again. you may remember the viral story a few years ago of a black couples home valuation increasing by 50% after a white friend posed is the homeowner.

now a new report from cnn his found that the largest credit union in the united states, maybe federal, has a huge disparity gap, almost 30%, accepting less than half of black conventional loan applicants. last year a white -- and a 75% chance of being approved well a black berhad a 48 perchance. that's less than half. maybe federal reportedly approved a higher percentage of white applicants under $65,000. as compared to black applicants, who made over $140,000. in a statement, a spokesperson from navy federal defendants acquitted unions lending practices and said cnn's alis, quote, does not accurately reflect our practices, and quote. noting that they left out major criteria that wasn't publicly available. but the thing about that is, the company declined to release

that data to cnn. makes you wonder. and now, there is a new class acon lawsuit against navy federal on behalf of two black plaintiffs whose home loans were rejected despite their high credit ratings and incomes. the suit accuses navy federal of violating the equal credit opportunity act as well as the fair housing act. stating, there is no reasonable explanation for this disparity apart from racial discrimination. joining me now is civil rights attorney, my friend, my friend, my brother, benjamin l crump, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the two plaintiffs. good evening my brother. good to talk to. what are you just get me started. get us started with the basis for the suit against navy federal credit union. >> our clients feel that they were discriminated against when they were denied their lone win in their opinion they had checked every box, charles

coleman. they had a strong yet to income ratio. they had great credit scores. they had a long history of paying their mortgages on time. they did everything right. but yet they were still denied. and then when you just oppose that fact with the horrific statistics that were released by cnn that they approve 75% of the white citizens and less than 55%, and according to that study by cnn, it said even when black people head twice as much income as the potential white borrowers, who the approved, and so it is this whole fight for economic freedom, this fight that might luther king was fighting for at the end of

his life to say that we not only have the right to life and liberty but we have the right to pursue of happiness, to give our children a better quality of life, to be able to give them generational wealth. and that is what the 21st century civil rights struggle is, charles. >> big brother, sir, i have to pick up exactly where you left off around economic freedom. because there are so many different fights here waging as civil rights attorneys. there's a fight around diversity and inclusion. the fight around the curriculum. the fight for global voting rights. but this conversation about economic freedom is something that you have championed, even going back to the suit that you filed against wells fargo. can you just explain, for our audience, how important that inclusion and writing the wrongs of systemic inequity in the financial services sector is to the civil rights struggle but we are currently engaged in

today. >> thank you for that excellent question, charles, because when you think about it, it is about this economic freedom is the foundation of being able to make all the other freedoms unconstitutional promises that america makes to its citizens obtainable. when you think about if i have economic freedom than i can have have more opportunity to access quality health care. i can have more access to quality education. i can have more access to make sure that my children will inherit a better world than i inherited. but when you start denying black and brown citizens, that economic freedom, when you try to denying them access to capital, then what you are doing is shutting them out of the american dream.

and that as important as the battle for justice for george floyd and breonna taylor. this banner that we can give our children, the american promise of equal opportunity and the american dream. wells fargo and navy federal and other institutions who will not allow the equal opportunity to access to justice is really denying black and brown citizens the american dream. and so with this lawsuit we hope to be able to help them be better financial institutions, but most importantly, charles coleman, hopefully to close this wealth gap that continues to increase in america. and if we're not careful, our children will have less opportunity access and capital then we had. >> attorney ben crump, i

couldn't have said it better myself, your struggle in terms of our struggle for human rights continues to be something that i marvel at and appreciate. thank you for joining me tonight. we'll be right back with more when the reidout continues. i'm charles coleman junior. charles coleman junior charles coleman junior >> and in 20 seconds you've got yourself a nutritiou and delicious smoothie. mmm! tastes just like the ones they sell here. and for a whole lot less. i'm ruined. awww. kick your expensive smoothie bar habit to the curb. order yours now at blendjet.com. >> before we go tonight, make

sure you head over to check out the reidout blog where ja'han

jones foresees trouble ahead in the state of texas due to their immigration. as he uses past experience to predict this nightmare that could soon unfold and lone star state. all that are much more at msnbc.com slash reidout blog. and that's it for tonight's reidout. i'm charles coleman junior in for joy reid. she'll be back here on tuesday at seven pm easter easter. and i want to thank both her and her entire team for allowing me to sit in the chair. past two days. happy new year to all the read reiders out there and see you n 2024. all in starts right now. good evening from los angeles. i'm jason johnson in for chris hayes. as we approach the new year when the many legal troubles facing donald trump will come to a head, tonight the