our final question, should donald trump be legally kicked off the ballot based on the public knowledge of his insurrection activities? regardless of some of the issues we discussed, let me know your views. we care about your views and everyone else's. it's a public democracy. at ari melber, you can see any of the platforms or connect with me directly at arimelber.com.

have a great weekend. "the reidout" starts now. tonight on "the reidout" -- >> after all we have been through in our history, from unless to civil war to two world wars to insurrection to pandemic. i refuse to believe in 2024, we americans will choose to walk away from what's made us the greatest nation in the history of the world, freedom. liberty, democracy is still a sacred cause. >> president biden marks the anniversary of the january 6th attack on the capitol with a scathing rebuke of the man who sparked the violence that day. and a warning that trump remains a serious threat to democracy. plus, breaking news from the supreme court on whether it will hear arguments on trump's ballot status in colorado. the same court that trump's lawyer says owes him a favor.

>> i have three very special guests tonight, congressman betty thompson, and adam schiff from the january 6th select committee. and officer harry dunn, who is planning his return to the capitol. the place he so bravely defended on january 6th, but this time, as a member of congress. but we begin tonight on the day before the third anniversary of the january 6th insurrection. and late today, the u.s. supreme court agreed to answer what might be the fundamental question for our democracy. whether a president who attempted a coup to try to remain in office and failed can then come back and run for president again. and since january 6th, 2021, was our first coup in america, it is something this court has never grappled with, namely the meaning of section 3 of the 14th amendment. which was written after the civil war, specifically to keep the confederate insurrectionists

and any future insurrectionists out of office. the difference today, of course, is that the insurrectionist in question was not a slave holding senator or a congressman from a seceding state. it's a former president. but i guess there is a first time for everything. oral arguments are set for february 8th, which is also the date for nevada's republican caucus. it is the first of what could be many pivotal decisions that could come from this court, not only impacting the 2024 presidential election but our very democracy itself. while colorado along with maine are the only states to have ruled to kick trump off the state's ballots, there are dozens of other states facing efforts to do the same, and likely awaiting the supreme court's decision. and while one of trump's lawyers, alina habba, confirmed earlier that trump is concerned the conservative justices could rule against him over worries of being perceived as critical,

yesterday, she said certain justices may rule in trump's favor because they feel their owe her client for their jobs. >> i think it should be a slam dunk in the supreme court. i have faith in them. people like kavanaugh, who the president fought for, who the president went through hell to get into place, he'll step up. those people will step up. not because they're pro-trump, but because they're pro-law, because they're pro-fairness, and the law in this is very clear. >> joining me now is congressman adam schiff of california, former member of the january 6th select committee. he's currently a candidate for senate, and it's good to see you. i wish that alena habba sounded mad to me, but i don't think she sounds like a mad woman. i think what she's saying might have some legs. not just samuel alito who has gotten everything he's wanted from donald trump, meaning his ability to get rid of roe v. wade and confine women to the stirrups, but clarence thomas, whose wife materially

participated in the insurrection. here's what house democrats wrote to justice thomas, askic him to recuse. this time, we must urge you to recuse yourself because your impartiality is questioned by substantial numbers of fair minded members of the public who believe your wife, ginni thomas, of substantial involvement in the events leading up to the january 6th insurrection and the financial incentive it presents for your household if president trump is re-elected are disqualifying. do you question whether this court might feel it owes donald trump and the conservatives might rule in his favor for that reason? >> well, i have to say, if you're skeptical about this court, there's good reason to be skeptical. they have shown they're not a conservative court, not a court that feels bound by precedent. they're a reactionary court, a partisan court. here one of the justices in particular, justice thomas, has

a very personal close family member, a spouse, who had a role in trying to overturn the election. there is unquestionably a conflict here and an appearance of impropriety should he sit on the case, but i have to say, i expect that's what he'll do because he doesn't seem particularly concerned about avoiding conflicts of interest, the appearance of conflicts of interest, neither does alito. and so there is, i think, room for concern and skepticism. the constitution here is very clear. if you have held office and you took an oath to uphold the constitution, and then you essentially incited an insurrection against the constitution, you're disqualified. that's not just the view of liberal constitutional scholars but conservatives like michael luttig, if the court follows the constitution as it claims to owe its fealty to, it shouldn't be that difficult a decision. but i have to say i don't have a

lot of confident in this court. >> i think i share your lack of confidence. but let's just say by some miracle, five of these justices decided to rule that he should not be on the ballot. what do you tink the political consequences of that would be? >> well, i think it would be a good thing for the country. i think that the debate in the election could get back to a difference of policy rather than this kind of cult of personality around the former president. you know, i think we have to be concerned with the former president trying to egg on violence in the event of a court ruling like that. obviously on january 6th he was willing to do it. he would be willing to do it again. but i think we're a better, stronger country than that, and i think the country will accept the decision if the decision is to remove him from the ballot. i think the country will accept the decision whatever the court ends up doing. but i think we need to prepare

ourselves certainly for a president who is not averse to using violence to achieve his political ends. >> you have not only been a member of congress and the january 6th committee member, but you have been an impeachment manager, gone through this former president's, you know, sort of ill acts in many ways. what do you think would be the consequences for our country if this court rules that somebody who egged on an insurrection, that was an insurrection for him to remain in office, remains on the ballot? if they rule that he can stage a coup and then run again, what do you think the consequences of that will be? >> the consequence i think will be at least twofold. first, it will mean that the 14th amendment section 3 no longer has any meaning. if it doesn't apply to someone who led a mob to attack the capitol in an effort to overturn and interfere with the joint

session. overturn the results, it has no applicability anymore. it will be the supreme court essentially nullifying a part of the constitution. the other impact, though, will be to throw this court just into further discredit. it will come to be seen by even more americans as simply now another partisan institution. another institution that essentially has fallen in line behind a corrupt president, and i think it will damage the court's reputation further, but even more broadly, at the end of the day, it will mean someone who should be disqualified will be likely the republican nominee, the nominee of one of america's great political parties, and it will move us potentially even closer to catastrophe because should donald trump ultimately be successful, and i think joe biden beats him in that election, but i do think we would be something less than a

democracy should we have to go through another trump presidency. we have to take him at his word when he says he wants to be a dictator on day one. and i could have little confidence in what would happen on day two, three, or four or any subsequent days of any kind of trump second term. >> i think more than a few people will likely agree with you. congressman adam schiff, thank you for your time. let's bring in neal katyal, professor of law at georgetown university and former acting solicitor general, and joyce vance, former attorney and professor. neal, what would be the implications of this court deciding for one reason or another, that a former president who staged a coup to try to remain in office can legitimately run for office and be president again? >> yeah, i would read the 14th amendment, section 3 out of the constitution, because in the

1860s, representative bingham and others put that in as an ironclad qualification. you can't give aid and comfort to insurrectionists, like you have to be 35 years old to be president or you have to be a natural born citizen, or you couldn't have been president for two terms. and so if colorado put barack obama on the ballot or put a 20-year-old on the ballot or put arnold schwarzenegger on the ballot, they would be removed because of the qualifications in the constitution. it should be zero difference here. and you know, i'm optimistic that the supreme court will see it that way, and today's decision, joy, to me is a huge deal to be sure, but it's not surprising. this is just the court agreeing to hear a case of critical importance, which both sides wanted the u.s. supreme court to resolve. it was absolutely appropriate and i'm glad to see them moving forward on a fast timeline. >> and you know, joyce, alina habba saying, you know, calling out brett kavanaugh and saying he owes donald trump, and you

know, one could sort of make similar arguments about some of these other justices, the three justices he named to the court, neil gorsuch essentially got a stolen seat on the court because it was barack obama who was supposed to choose. you can talk about samuel alito who got his lifelong dream of overturning roe through donald trump being the president. you could create that atmospheric for a senate -- you could go on and on, the people who want him there, clarence thomas, you could argue his wife has material financial benefits from having a trump presidency. i just wonder what you make of the fact that this court is operating in a world in which some people believe they owe him and that isn't like a krazy thing to think. >> you know, alina habba has a much darker view of our court system that i do. apparently, she believes that justices and judges are transactional, that they respond purely to the people who put them on the bench.

and for all federal judges, that's a president from one party or another. the federal judiciary that i know sets aside their origin story, their political origin story, when they take on their role as a judge. and they commit to decide cases on the law and on the facts. this is a supreme court that has strained our credulity in some cases. the end of roe v. wade comes to mind. in other cases that have involved the trump presidency and the core of democracy, in cases following the 2020 election, the courts have held firm. and i think the hope we have to have is that they will do that in this instance. i tend to agree with neal in large part on the legal issues here. i have a little bit less confidence than he does that the supreme court will uphold the ruling of the colorado supreme court. i think that they may look for a procedural off ramp that lets them off the hook for deciding

here, but joy, what stands out to me is that the supreme court is only being asked to make this decision because republicans in the senate abdicated their duty following the 2020 election to convict donald trump on articles of impeachment. that would have established for all time the issue of whether or not he was eligible to run again, and so we're at this juncture for reasons of political failure. and that's something we should hold on to going into this next election. >> and that is such an important point, neal, because not only that, but you have a president who attempted to strongarm and bribe a foreign official in order to try to undermine joe biden. they let him off the hook on that. this is a president who stole classified documents, put them in his house. republicans have nothing to say on that. he has 91 criminal counts he's facing, to say nothing of the counts of -- well, he's been found liable for sexual

misconduct and also defamation. you could go on and on and on. that is the real failure, isn't it? a failure of politics that now is being laid at the feet of this court. >> that is -- those examples you gave, joy, are certainly failures. i don't think that they're strictly relevant. i think joyce's point is, but the other examples aren't relevant to the question before the united states supreme court now which is whether insurrectionists are barred by the 14th amendment from holding the office of president. and i think to me, the most striking thing is trump's defense is really not, hey, i'm not an insurrectionist. it's all this technical stuff, like the 14th amendment is not self-executing. he's trying to look for loopholes here and there in the law instead of doing what if you or i were running for president and accused of being insurrectionists, found we were insurrectionists by a trial judge after a five-day hearing, we would be screaming from the rooftops saying we want to clear

our name. what is donald trump doing? in the very proceedings he has chances to clear his name in d.c. and georgia. what's he doing? trying to delay those proceedings to the point of trying to end them altogether. again, that's not the way an innocent person behaves. joyce may be right that there are a bunch of technical ways for the supreme court to resolve this in a way that keeps trump on the ballot. that's possible, but i do think the original intent of the 14th amendment, everything about it's spirit is about preventing someone like this from holding office. and i'm hopeful that the challengers from colorado will make that point based on the way our founders, the writers of the 14th amendment, understood that text. >> and joyce, there was a five-day trial in the state of colorado, and the judge found that donald trump did commit insurrection. how much weight do you think that finding, that he was an insurrectionist, they found on a technical matter, they couldn't

take him off the ballot and the supreme court overturned that. does the fabt there was a trial and he was found to be an insurrectionists, how much does that end up mattering to the supreme court? >> yeah, this is such an important point, joy. the supreme court is not a trial court. they don't hear evidence. they take the record from the lower courts and that's the factual basis for their decision making. now, trial courts' decisions about the facts can be reversed on appeal, but that's only in a situation where they reached totally unreasonable conclusions. and it's not the usual course of business. so those factual findings in colorado should be fairly controlling here. >> we shall see. not a lot of confidence in the court out there, but we'll see. neal and joyce, thank you both very much. up next on "the reidout," president biden was pulling no punches today as he laid out what's at stake in the upcoming election and who he sees as the greatest threat to america's

role as a global beacon of democracy. "the reidout" continues after this. inues after this ♪♪ it's two things a young man want to be, a cowboy or a gangster. and a gangster's out of style. i got back to my roots. we come from a long line of cowboys. my grandfather, my great-grandfather, my aunt even rode horses.

when i see all of us out here on this ranch i see how far our legacy can go. now on sale at ancestry. honestly, i was scared when i was told age related macular degeneration could jeopardize my vision. great. one more thing to worry about. it was all too hard to deal with in the beginning, but making a plan with my doctor to add precision was easy. preservision areds2 contains the exact nei recommended, clinically proven nutrient formula to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. thano r that i'm doing something about it like millions of others. preservision.

i'm an active mom, but when i laughed, lifted or exercised, bladder leaks were holding me back from doing the things i loved. until, i found a bladder specialist that offered me bulkamid - a life-changing and fda approved non-drug solution for my condition called stress incontinence it really works, and the relief can last for years. take the next step at findrealrelief.com to arrange an appointment with an expert physician to determine if bulkamid is right for you. results and experiences may vary. move beyond the leaks. ♪ ♪

results and experiences may vary. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

late today, president biden forcefully called out donald trump can his threat to democracy ahead of the january 6th anniversary. >> i promise you, i will not let donald trump and the maga republicans force us to walk away. >> went on to say he would be a dictator on day one. he promised he would be wild, and it was. he told the crowd to fight like hell, and all hell was unleashed. these maga voices who know the truth about trump on january 6th have abandoned the truth and abandoned democracy. they made the choice. trying to rewrite the facts of january 6th, trump is trying to steal history, the same way he tried to steal the election. but he -- we knew the truth. because we saw it with our own

eyes. >> the president spoke a short distance from valley forge national historical park, where general george washington mobilized troops in the revolutionary war, the fight to separate the u.s. colonies from the british crown and establish a democratic republic some 250 years ago. washington faced no constitutional term limits when he was elected as the first president of the united states, but after two terms he willingly stepped down, urging in his farewell address that citizens of the new nation should always put aside their regional and political affiliations and put america first. it's a stark reminder that there have been 44 american presidents who understood that you had to cede power. 44 presidents. until donald trump. trump's refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power resulted in one of the most exhaustive and aggressive congressional investigations in recent memory, the january 6th committee that investigated the capitol attack and laid out its case in vivid and disturbing

detail. committee chairman bennie thompson made it plain, saying donald trump spurred a mob of domestic enemies of the constitution to march down the capitol and subvert american democracy. he also laid out why insurrectionists should not serve in official positions, highlighting the post civil war change to the federal oath of office. >> in 1862, when american citizens had taken up arms against this country, congress adopted a new oath to help make sure no person who had supported the rebellion could hold a position of public trust. therefore, congress persons and united states federal government employees were required for the first time to swear an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. that oath was put to test on

january 6th, 2021. >> joining me now is congressman bennie thompson of mississippi, former chair of the january 6th select committee. chairman thomson, thank you for being here. your opening was one of the things that stayed with me the most, i have to be honest, after the whole thing, after all of those hearings. i love the fact you held to the history of it. what do you make of the fact that donald trump's lawyers are attempting to state that the oath he took as president differs from the oath you described which you took and every other member of congress took? they're trying to say the oath he took absolves him of responsibility for the insurrection. >> well, thank you very much for having me, joy. you know, when you are in a dispute and you have lawyers, sometimes lawyers take positions that don't make sense. that is clearly a position taken by donald trump's lawyers. they don't make sense.

but in the absence of any real fact, you just make something up. and just make it as if, well, the law doesn't apply to donald trump. his oath is different from everyone else's. and i think the work of our committee on this third anniversary speaks for itself. we identified the causes and circumstances that made january 6th happen. we identified the individuals, donald trump specifically and some others, who did promote, orchestrate that day. and in the end, we shared the body of that information with various authorities in the jurisdiction, but we held true to our challenge of getting to the facts and circumstances first. and that's what we did. 18 months we worked night, day, weekends, until we got it done.

produced a report that people who don't like our report, joy, but they can't refute the facts. we offered people an opportunity during the hearings that if you had information counter to what we have presented, please come forward under oath. under oath is important. now, you can just come and just run off your mouth, but the point is we were a serious body, we deposed hundreds of witnesses. and we stand by the facts and circumstances produced by our committee. >> let's talk about joe biden today. he called out one specific person, because there was universal agreement, it seemed, on capitol hill, at least for the most part, about january 6th immediately afterwards. here's president biden calling out one of the people who agreed with him at the time. >> when the attack on january

6th happened, there was no doubt about the truth. at the time, even republican members of congress and fox news commentators publicly and privately condemned the attack. as one republican senator said, trump's behavior was embarrassing and humiliating for the country. but now, that same senator and those same people have changed their tune. >> he didn't name him, but lindsey graham on january 8th, 2021, said he had never been so humiliated and embarrassed for the country. he spoke in palpable frustration over how his long time ally handled the riot. what do you make of the universal capitulation to trump by republican house members and united states senators like lindsey graham, three years later? they're all now with him, endorsing him, supporting him. >> well, joy, that's an absolute

demonstration of being spineless. you can't be for both events. you are either for it or against it. so our spineless colleagues, primarily republicans, who were upset as to the events of january 6th, as time went on, they came back into the fold. and i think what we see right now, the president talked about it, is maga republicans are at it again. they want you to believe what happened on january 6th was the equivalent of a congressional tour. they want you to believe that it really wasn't trump people breaking into the capitol, it was black lives matter or antifa dressed up as trump people. so you get all these stories, but the work of our committee refuted all of that.

it's clear that in that 850-page document, it is the truth. we identified those individuals who had become electors illegally. we made that information available to the justice department. we deposed many of those individuals. we made the case for the department of justice. had it not been for the january 6th committee and the work of that committee, i shudder to think where we would be. >> indeed. >> we challenged the justice department to do their job. and they have now moving in that direction. >> one might think a bit late, but they are. congressman bennie thompson, thank you very much, and thank you for all the work you and the committee did. >> still ahead, former capitol police officer harry dunn, who has testified extensively about his experiences on january 6th,

joins me to talk about his big announcement today. we'll be right back. like rounded corners that resist peeling, with an array of active ingredients... and sizes to relieve your pain. salonpas. it's good medicine.

[coughs] when caroline has a cough, she takes robitussin. so, she can have those one on ones again. hey jim! can we talk about casual fridays? oh sure. what's up? get fast, powerful cough relief with robitussin, and find your voice. ♪robitussin♪

here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today. . trump said there was a lot of love on january 6th. the rest of the nation, including law enforcement, saw a lot of hate and violence.

>> three years ago tomorrow, officer harry dunn was one of the many members of the capitol police force who went to work that morning not knowning they would wind up face-to-face with a violent mob, fighting for their lives on the front lines of an attempt to overturn our democracy. during the insurrection, officers were beaten unconscious, tased, blasted with bear and pepper spray, and attacked with flag poles. dunn himself was berated with racial slurs by members of the maga mob. one officer, brian sicknick, died the following day, having suffered two strokes the day after the attack. four others later took their own lives. now, officer dunn is hoping to join the ranks of the lawmakers he swore to protect that day, announcing today he is running for congress to insure america never sees another january 6th. >> we can't ever let this happen again. and you have heard it from trump himself. he is hellbent on finishing what he started this day.

i'm stepping into a new role today, but i can't do it alone. i believe every one of us has a role to play in this fight. so join me. we've got a democracy to protect. >> joining me now is harry dunn, former capitol police officer and congressional candidate for maryland's third district. okay, harry dunn. let's get into it. you have been an author, obviously a police officer, very brave police officer, a really wonderful author, and now you're aiming to be a member of congress. what sparked this decision? >> you know, hey, joy, good to see you. happy new year. all of the things you just said that just goes back to me being a public servant for the last 15, 16 years of my life, i have dedicated my life to public service, dedicated it to protecting members of congress who i disagree with, who i know and they know, knowingly spout

lies and falsehoods, but they're allowed to do that. and i protect them knowing that i totally disagree with them. i have lived a whole life, like i said, of public service, but i like to phrase that, until there's nothing that can be done, there's always something that can be done. i feel like i have done everything i can in this fight for accountability, justice, to preserve democracy, to fight for the constitution. i have done everything in my role as a capitol police officer. but that's not enough. democracy, i don't think it's an exaggeration to say we're one election from the extinction of democracy as we know it. >> yeah. >> stepping into my new role today because there's more to do. >> you would then be serving with people who took the side of the people who tried to kill you and your fellow officers, who were willing to kill you all,

who bear sprayed you, who beat officers. they would be serving alongside you. people like mo brooks, matt gaetz, scott perry, marjorie taylor greene, should they win re-election. how would you feel about serving alongside insurrectionists? >> you just said two very key points. i will be serving alongside of them, instead of underneath them. i get a seat at the table. they can't dismiss me as this angry, pissed off january 6th partisan hack. i can't be described as that anymore. i'm an equal. you can't run away from the speeches i'm going to give on the house floor. you can't run away from the legislation i'm going to put forward. you have to treat me as your equal. so putting a seat next to them is key of what you said, and honestly, one of the keys to why i'm running. additionally, how will i serve? the same way i protected them years before and the years after january 6th, when i know they were lying and talking for lack

of a better word, talking trash about what happened that day. i believe in democracy. and that meant putting aside who i was, a democrat, a father, a marylander, and just embracing who i was as an american. >> let me -- tell me a little bit about maryland. you're running in maryland's third district, between d.c. and baltimore. there are ten candidates in this race. what is your strategy to win this primary? it's a big primary. what's your strategy? >> it is. my strategy is just be who i am, my authentic self. a lot of those individuals in the race are career politicians. i'm not. i'm not a career politician. i'm a career public servant. also, one thing to point out, you know, a lot of those individuals, should they win, or excuse me, should they lose the race, they go back to their seats in annapolis, they go

right back to those seats. they don't have anything to lose. i resigned from the force four years short of being able to collect retirement, the pension. why? it's crazy, but i believe democracy can't wait another four years until i'm able to comfortably retire. i'm not going to step back and wait for somebody else to do it. it's very important that everybody has a role to play. and i believe right now, for this moment, this moment that we're in right now, i believe that i'm the person for that job. >> harry dunn, a very brave man, on january 6th, before, and after. spoken truth to power. best of luck. please come back often as this race goes on. >> thank you. have to say one thing. i have to learn how to be a politician. go to harrydunnforcongress.com and donate to my campaign. thank you, joy. >> look, you have learned. quick learner because yes, you

have to do that. plug the site. thank you, harry. appreciate you. best of luck. coming up, democratic campaign ads are writing themselves as republicans of the do-nothing congress call out their own colleagues for doing nothing in congress. back in a second.

♪oh what a good time we will have♪ ♪you... can make it happen...♪ ♪♪ try dietary supplements from voltaren for healthy joints.

after advil: let's dive in! but...what about your back? it's fineeeeeeee! [splash] before advil: advil dual action fights pain two ways. advil targets pain at the source, acetaminophen blocks pain signals. advil dual action. he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ your best defense against erosion and cavities is strong enamel- nothing beats it. new pronamel active shield actively shields the enamel to defend against erosion and cavities. i think that this product is a gamechanger for my patients- it really works. - "best thing i've ever done." that's what freddie told me. - it was the best thing i've ever done, and-

- really? - yes, without a doubt! - i don't have any anxiety about money anymore. - great people. different people, that's for sure, and all of them had different reasons for getting a reverse mortgage, but you know what, they all felt the same about two things: they all loved their home, and they all wanted to stay in that home. and they all wanted to stay in that home. - [announcer] if you're 62 or older and own your home, you could access your equity to improve your lifestyle. a reverse mortgage loan eliminates your monthly mortgage payments and puts tax-free cash in your pocket. call the number on your screen. - why don't you call aag... and find out what a reverse mortgage can mean for you? - [announcer] call right now to receive your free no-obligation info kit. call the number on your screen. hi, i'm kevin, and i've lost 152 pounds on golo. (uplifting music)

my biggest concern when i started golo was food. i'm a big guy and, shockingly, i like to eat. i was worried it was gonna be like other diets that were bland and restrictive. but with golo, my meals are great, and i'm no longer hungry like i was before. i'm so pleased i gave golo a shot. don't wait, go to golo.com. . we have nothing in my opinion, we have nothing to go out there and campaign on,

chris. it's embarrassing. >> i know, the republican party, the republican party and the congress majority has zero accomplishments. >> that was coup plotting congressman andy biggs having a rare moment of candor with his friends on newsmax and he's not wrong. maga-led congress just closed out one of the most unproductive years in modern history with a couple bland laws on the books. they can barely elect a speaker, they can't keep a speaker, they can't convince the american public they're not waging a war orwomen because they are, and they won't do their jobs. as much as they caterwaul about the border, they don't want to fix immigration. >> i don't think now is the time do immigration reform because it's very complicated. >> people are saying why not pass the $14 billion supplemental bill to at least try to help with the of these issues. >> that won't solve the problems i just articulated. >> and they don't actually want to keep the government open.

>> yes, we're at the point that we will take every measure necessary, including shutting down part of the government, and that's what would happen on january 17th. >> why keep it open if that means doing what they're paid six figure salaries to do, which is legislate and solve problems? joining me now is michael steele, former rnc chair and cohost of the new morning show on msnbc, the weekend with michael steele, symone sanders townsend, and alicia menendez, which premiers saturday, january 13th. there's the pretty picture. all right, michael steele. you ran, when you were in charge of the party in 2010, y'all did pretty well. ran even with the great barack obama in the white house. how would you -- put yourself in the position right now, let's say you're rnc chair now, a nightmare for a moment. this is your job again. how would you run when they haven't done anything? what would you say in the ads? >> well, here's the difference

between 2010 and now. in that there were those who did not want to engage on the obama agenda regarding health care. they just didn't. some in fact had already started to capitulate in that direction, very much as you heard here, well, there's not much we can do about it. but there were those of us who believed, yeah, this is a philosophical discussion we should have in the country about the role of government in the lives of individuals and their doctors. and should the government have a role there. legitimate discussion, legitimate debate. here, you have a situation where there is nothing they want to talk about. because none of it is as grift worthy or as maga friendly as what we're seeing. so you just heard it in the clips you just played, you heard the speaker tell the reporter, hey, it's too much work.

we can't do it. we can't get it done. the next clip was we're going to shut down the government if we can't do border. if we can't do the border. so the speaker is saying it's too much work to do a border will, and then the next member of his caucus is saying we're going to shut down the government if we don't get what we want on the border bill. that sums up exactly where things are now. they don't want to get it done because there is no upside to actually putting forward an agenda. look, i can tell them, mr. speaker, here you go. go back to 2006. you remember the republican governor, george bush, he had a plan for the border. it was a bipartisan plan. you could resurrect that bad boy and pass because y'all don't want to get this done. don't tell me there aren't ways to do it, joy. there are. you have a lot of time to do it. but the budget, the border, it's all in the same bucket of

not getting done. >> right. and they want the issue, not the solution. you mentioned health care. here they have a narrow house majority. by the way, nancy pelosi at the same narrow majority but she got a lot done, we're putting that aside, steve scalise who's the number two house republican is undergoing stem cell related cancer treatment. so he is going to be out. you've got kevin mccarthy out. you've got george santos obviously out. you've got bill johnson of a high oh who leaves on the 21st. but specifically let's stay with steve scalise. he's an interesting case. he's getting these stem cell treatments. god bless him, i hope they are successful. he voted against federal funding first himself research. so brand wise he's getting the treatment. he voted against it. >> yeah. >> maybe the problem for

republicans is irony. >> there's a lot of that. irony in places irony probably shouldn't be. but it's there. and the reality of it is, that doesn't faze them. we watched republicans vote against the infrastructure bill, and yet we are touting the infrastructure money that was coming to their districts. so, yeah. irony is not lost on them. they know what it is. they don't care about it. they figure most people aren't paying attention. so yeah i'm going to vote against the stem cell bill but what i need stem cells i'm glad it's there. >> let's talk about nikki haley. the kayleigh is running for president, apparently on lying about the civil war then saying she didn't mean it and then also pardoning donald trump and also having black friends. roll on. >> i should have said slavery

right off the bat. but if you grow up in south carolina, literally in second and third grade you learn about slavery. you grow up and you have, i had black friends growing up, it is a very talk about thing. >> then how do you forget it in that moment? >> but wait, michael. why did she deploy the i have black friends bit? why did she do that? >> i can't, no, look, the reality of it is, i'm not gonna go to that because i have my own rule. >> michael, but when people say i have black friends, don't you want the next, a follow-up question to be, okay, can you give us their names? >> no. my follow-up is usually, then why did you just say the things you said. if you have black friends.

>> maybe your black friends should check. you maybe you should talk to your black friends before u.s. requested about the civil war, nikki from south carolina. >> the reality is very straightforward here she is in iowa. she's talking to a significantly white audience. and that original comment was for that audience in that republican primary, trying to get to a position relative to trump that will appeal of some votes and further boost the energy around her candidacy right now. as i noted, i think that's unfortunate to do with that way. >> yeah. well, we'll see. maybe we should interview some of her black friends. i would like to see what they think about her support for the flag confederate flag. >> i was gonna say leave that to you. but maybe saturday morning.

>> call me, black friends. call me. michael steele, call me, because when we come back we'll talk about who won the week. we'll be right back. comey. the week. we'll be right back. comey. comey. >> at the source of inflammation. so for faster pain relief, advil the pain away. ♪♪ we come from a long line of cowboys. ♪♪ when i see all of us out here on this ranch, i see how far our legacy can go. now on sale at ancestry.

♪ ♪ every day can be extraordinary with rich, creamy, delicious fage total yogurt.

(jennifer) the reason why golo customers have such long term success is because we focus on real foods in the right balance every day can be extraordinary with rich, so you get the results you want. when i tell people how easy it was for me to lose weight on golo, they don't believe me. they don't believe i can eat real food and lose this much weight. the release supplement makes losing weight easy. release sets you up for successful weight loss because it supports your blood sugar levels between meals so you aren't hungry or fatigued. after i started taking release, the weight just started falling off. since starting golo and taking release, i've gone from a size 12 to a 4. before golo, i was hungry all the time and constantly thinking about food. after taking release, that stopped. with release, i didn't feel that hunger that comes with dieting. which made the golo plan really easy to stick to. since starting golo and release, i have dropped seven pant sizes and i've kept it off. golo is real, our customers are real, and our success stories are real. why not give it a try? >> we made it to the end of

the first week of 2024, which means it is time to play our favorite game, oh yes, who won the week?. back with me the great michael steele. michael steele, who won the week?? >> without a doubt, jimmy

kimmel and his unambiguous smackdown tweet of aaron rodgers. it doesn't get prettier than that. that tweet will last. trust me. and what i love about it is he pushed back. he pushed back. >> aaron rodgers like espn becoming the big sort of shop for a crazy conspiracy theories, horrible, but go jimmy camel. i'm saying who won the week?. let's put up the graphic. the u.s. economy. they said it was going into recession. nope. the opposite is happening. 216,000 jobs created. 36 months of job growth. unemployment at 3.7%. full employment for those who aren't aware. wages up 4.1% over inflation. inflation is down. inflation is now at 3% unemployment at 4.1. michael steele, this economy has defied all expectations. joe biden should be doing better based on that, because the economy is quite good. the american people