when it comes to their approach to american democracy. tonight, i'm gonna talk to house speaker emerita nancy pelosi about all of that. plus, president obama has appointed david plouffe as a senior strategist who might be useful to the biden campaign. of course he would be. david is gonna join me tonight as well. but we do want to start tonight with some new reporting from abc news that is shedding greater light on what trump was doing, and more importantly not doing on january 6th. as a mob pushed its way into the capital, becoming more and more violent as the minutes tic

by, trump was reportedly just not interested in doing more to stop it. and trump learned that his own vice president had to be rushed to a secure location, trump reportedly responded, so what? so what? trump accepted the violence that they. he liked the threat to democracy than, they're whipping of violence on his behalf, the anger. and he still does. and that's quickly emerging as the core argument in president biden's reelection campaign. in a speech on friday, biden called democracy the most urgent question of our time, saying trump is willing to sacrifice it. and just this afternoon, speaking at mother emanuel church, he compared the perpetuation of the big lie to those who denied the outcome of the civil war. biden isn't imploring americans to save democracy from the man who by his own account wants to destroy it.

but as president biden leans into this contrast with trump, this particular line of attack, something to think is just kind of old dunes, it's in the past. republican senator mitt romney told the new york times, as a biden campaign theme, i think the threat to democracy pitch is a bust. january 6th would be four years old by the election. biden needs fresh material, a new attack, rather than kicking and that political horse. he's been a defender of democracy, mitt romney has

been. but i did political -- that's quite a visual there. but here's the thing. it's not that at all. none of this is in the past. this is directly connected to how trump would approach a second term. i mean, just look at what we have learned in the past few days alone. just this morning, trump suggested that if he is reelected, he would have president biden indicted. one day before an appeals court in d. c. hears arguments on trump's claim that presidential immunity protects him from prosecution. over the weekend, three years to the day after the very real insurrection, trump's son posted in part, happy fake insurrection day! i do hope it was the start of something real, though. the start of something real. also over the weekend, republican congresswoman elise stefanik took a page out of trump's authoritarian playbook, refusing to commit to certifying the 2024 presidential results. you may have missed the story out of illinois with all of that happening, but it is particularly telling. trump reportedly failed to sign the illinois state loyalty pledge, which is a pledge against advocating for an overthrow of the government. it's been around for a long time, decades. he even signed it back in 2016. he signed it in 2020.

he did not sign it this year. he is leaving the door open for a coup. he is telling us what he plans to do if he doesn't get his way. i'm not quite sure if this is kicking a dead horse. all of those anti-democratic forces that were alive on january 6th are still very much alive. january 6th is not an isolated moment. it was a reflection of trump's approach to governing. trump himself is not putting this in the past. he is actually embracing it. he's just not reminiscing here. he's planning how he would govern in the future. joining me now is abc news chief washington correspondent jonathan karl. he is the co-anchor of abc's

this week and author of the new book, tired of winning. and he's one of the reporters who reported all of these new details over the weekend. i want to start there because we have heard bits and pieces about trump's inaction on january 6th. you wrote about a lot of it in your book. but what's stuck out most to you from some of the reporting this weekend that your responsible to broke? >> i worry that the january 6th committee did an entire primetime hearing, 187 minutes of inaction. trump and the white house, when

the attack on the capitol -- what's really significant here. one, dan scavino. understand who dan scavino is. this is the guy who has worked for trump since he was a teenager. he was his caddie. he was the most loyal guy. there's only two people in the world allowed to tweet from the real donald trump, it was dan scavino and donald trump. he was in charge of the social media. he was deputy chief of staff. his office was right next to the oval office. nobody was closer to him other than ivanka in the trump white house. it provides this vivid description to investigators of what he witnessed because he was also one of the few people who was with trump for the entirety of january 6th. the time when he went to dinner later in the day, he was with trump. and he describes trump arms folded, holding on the tv, watching the riot play out on

fox news as scavino and self is going in and pleading with him to do something, to put out some kind of a message, to call the attack resolve. and as the others, meadows, ivanka, white house lawyers, they're doing the same. and he says to the investigators, he is nonresponsive. he is angry, not even looking at them, looking at the tv. angry but saying they are angry on my behalf. the people attacking that capital are angry on my behalf. >> he wasn't angry about the vience. he was angry that the election was stolen. >> that's what he was saying. again, this isn't liz cheney saying it. this isn'te iting it in a book. >> it's dan scavino.

>> dan scavino refuses to talk to the january six committee -- this is an eyewitness account under oath from somebody who is as close to the president, the former president, as anybody. and he is still with him until this day. >> still with him to this day. one of the other pieces you are reporting was about trump's response to mike pence, his vice president, the threat of him being hanged and under threat from people. and in your reporting, per dan scavino, he said, so what? that was trump's response. >> tremendous reporting from the abc news investigative team. i want to say, fantastic reporting. nick luna was one of the president's, former presidents body man. he was his personal assistant. and nick luna is the person that tells trump on january 6th that mike pence had to be evacuated from the senate chamber and taken to a secure location because of the violence at the capitol. and the response, again, according to nick luna, another trump loyalist, by the way, who continued to work for him for a long time in mar-a-lago. this is not, you know, some trump critic. this isn't liz cheney saying this. this is nick luna saying trump 's response was so what. and the investigators, you know, ask what do you take that to me? that he wasn't concerned that

his loyal vice president might be in physical danger. >> and the fact that he is such a loyal to an important base. you also talk to trump about that day, and we want to play a bit of that and talk about it as well. >> now, we are living in an era of a -- >> you heard those chants, that was terrible. >> he could have, well, the people were very angry. >> they were saying hang mike pence. >> because it's common sense, john. it's common sense that you are supposed to protect. if you know a vote is fraudulent, right? how can you pass on a fraudulent vote to congress? >> it's common sense. it's very consistent, it's the point. you had spoken with him about it. close aides have said this. i'm thinking, there's no way he said that. there's a lot of evidence. >> there's a lot of evidence in the testimony. but listening to that sound, again, in conjunction to what we have heard from scavino and

luna, i mean, this is a really important point. and your point in the opening of this show, this is not old news. this is trump's state of mind and what truly, i think, are the defining hours of the trump presidency. and by the way, i think he sees that day as the defining moment of the trump presidency. he sees january 6th as a great moment because the people came to washington for him, because they agreed with him that the election was stolen again, because they were angry on his behalf. but to hear him telling me in that interview, which was just a couple of months after january 6th, that it's common sense that people would want to call for the execution of his vice president. and he is justifying it by saying they are angry, in the exact same way dan scavino describes what trump said in realtime on january 6th. >> you have obviously written books about trump. you know a lot about him. one of the things that stuck out to me recently, his view, this announcement that he's going to be attending these legal hearings, why do you think that is? >> by the way, he spends a number of days in court with a civil case in new york. he seems to -- you know, i wrote, really, detailed descriptions of his first appearance in court, his first arraignment in new york, his first arraignment on federal charges in florida. and when he first was in the courtroom, he's not in charge. the judge is in charge. he has to rise when the judge comes in -- >> right, why is he coming back again and again? >> he seems uncomfortable and freaked out about it. but i think what has happened since then is that his campaign

is becoming inseparable from his legal cases. first of all, in many ways, i extension victimizedthatit extension victimizedthatit >> not on but the big question , lot about trump. speech today commemorating the anniversary of a mass shooting by white supremacist at mother emanuel church in charleston, south carolina. in a pretty bold comparison, the president likened trump's election gia denialism to the end of the civil war when the former confederate states who are unwilling to accept defeat. in fact, he called trump's big lie the second lost cause. >> now, we are living in an era of a second lost cause, which again, there's some in this country trying to turn a loss into a lie, of lie which if allowed to live with once again bring terrible damage to this country. this time, a lie is about the 2020 election. >> and he did not at all shy away from bringing up the racist undertones and the violence that unfolded during the insurrection. >> we saw something on january 6th we haven't seen before even during the civil war. insurrectionists waving confederate flags inside the halls of congress built by enslaved americans. a mob attacked and called black officers, black veterans defending the nation, vial of racist names. >> my next guest has been very vocal about the ways trump's big lie threatens to disenfranchise the very people who struggle the most to gain an exercise their right to vote. joining me now is sherrilyn ifill.

she's the former president and director of the naacp legal defense fund. she is now the vernon jordan distinguished professor of civil rights at howard law school. sherrilyn, it's great to see you. happy new year. i want to -- >> happy new year. >> you too. i'm wondering, when you watch this speech, what you think about. if that bull comparison that president made. he compared to trump's big light to the aftermath of the civil war. you have been calling for more vocal action, from a lot of people on this point. but what did you make of his speech and that point specifically. >> i thought it was terrific, jen. in the sense that, you know, we've come a long way. and maybe, we are kind of used to it now. but we did not use to have presidents who named white supremacy. we did not have presidents who talk about the lost cause. and frankly, we did not have a country including journalists who are willing to call out trump's racism. it's refreshing to hear president biden do it. i mean, trump's behavior has

made it impossible to do anything else. obviously, he was in a friendly audience. but i think it was critically important that we set the terms of this debate and this choice as we head into november. >> absolutely. now, on the flip side, we have seen nikki haley, of course, refuse to say that slavery was a cause of the civil war. trump claimed that the end of the war could have been negotiated. my view is that this isn't just a misunderstanding of history. it's more of a dog-less horn. i'm interested in your view on their rhetoric in recent weeks, or lack of rhetoric. >> it's a fog horn, not a dog -less horn. you remember when trump was running in 2016, he kept being asked to disavow david duke and disavow white supremacists. and he constantly used strange language. he didn't want to do it directly because he recognized that that was a critical part

of his base. and that now is a critical part of the base of the republican party. that is what has happened. and that's why nikki haley will stand in front of an audience and say something so ridiculous about what caused the civil war, not because she doesn't know, but because she has to attack somewhere in the middle in order to make sure she is appealing to that white supremacist base. and i think that is a revelation that we need to come to terms with as well. >> it's such an important point. it's not a lack of understanding of history. it's an unwillingness to talk about not just history, but what's happened since then. i do want to talk to about the 14th amendment, another issue you have been so vocal about. you wrote a very thought-provoking piece back in december. the 14th amendment is rooted back in reconstruction. it was meant to keep insurrectionists out of office, which many people may know. you also said recently which

made me kind of perk up that fear is preventing these judges, or could prevent these judges from implementing that full power of section three. i want to ask you, you are a legal expert, if it weren't for intimidation, if it weren't for that fear, is there any question in your mind on the merits alone that they would uphold the colorado ruling? >> let me tell you what i mean by fear. the 14th amendment is an incredibly bold, i've called it, radical provision of the constitution. it was meant and it did reset american democracy. it was the beginning, and was setting the terms for how we could be a democracy in which black people were full and complete citizens. and in order to do that, you know, it required, you're gonna have to do some strange things, right? and one of them was not let insurrectionists back into government. and they were very clear about that. there was no confusion about what they meant. and when i say fear, i mean that there is a fear of the radical nature of the 14th

amendment. i mean, of course, unfortunately, we are in a period when decision-makers have to fear for their families and their personal safety. but i also think that, you know, it's transformative to say that this candidate cannot be on the ballot, but that is what section three of the 14th amendment says. and so, if this case were decided just on the law, on the history, on the intention of the 14th amendment, on the text of section three, trump would be off the ballot in colorado. and if you fold in politics, and most of the arguments that you've heard say he should not be removed from the ballot, are political. they're about whether or not voters should decide, which is not exactly how we apply the constitutional principle. they are about his base, which will get angry, which is essentially kowtowing to white supremacists, essentially nullifying a section of the

constitution, section of the constitution, directly meant to address who trump is. it was meant to address insurrection and the 14th amendment itself was meant to address ongoing white supremacy. and there are many people who are willing to make that bargain to suggest that we can ignore that section of the constitution simply to make peace with trump supporters. and i think that would be a terrible step for this country. now, i think the supreme court has got lots of options to try and get around section three. but the reality is if they were using their own standards, history, text, intention, originalism, then they would be upholding the colorado supreme court's decision. >> the law. if you don't want to be to -- come to the law, you shouldn't be a part of an insurrection. i do want to ask, you sherrilyn, before i let you go. we have some breaking news, special counsel jack smith was a victim of a swatting call on christmas. there's been a trend of that of course. and it basically means -- maybe you're watching i'm not sure, someone made false

emergency calls to prompt a large police presence at his home. this of course happened a lot, judge tanya chutkan, secretary of state in maine, even marjorie taylor greene. what do you make of what's happening with these officials and the frequency of this at such a high-level? >> jen, this is the pandora's box that trump opened. we know from the january 6th hearings about the kinds of threats that election officials were receiving, rusty bowers in arizona. we know about shaye moss and ruby freeman. and we know about many others around the country who feared for their lives. i remember that day when gabe sterling from georgia went to the front of the mic and said, you're gonna get somebody killed. people have asked whether if trump is reelected, we will see political violence. we are already seeing political violence. these threats are very, very serious indeed. swatting had a result in really terrible, accidental killings.

and we need to be aware that this is part of trump's brand, the menace, the threat of violence. and his followers, this is why what he has done is so irresponsible, his followers are taking up that mantle. and this is very, very dangerous indeed. we've heard threats called into the colorado supreme court. they have had to fortify as well. we are already in that period. and it raises the stakes because it shows us that this is all, this door has already been open. and if trump is allowed to ascend to the most powerful position in this country and perhaps the world, that door will be flung open. how much worse it will be? we need to get very, very serious about the threat to democracy. >> yes, the political violence is such an important one to highlight. sherrilyn, thank you as always. pleasure talking to you this evening. >> thank you, jen. coming up, congresswoman nancy pelosi joining me on the threat donald trump poses to democracy and what democrats can do to stop him. first, former president

barack obama has expressed concerns about the structure of joe biden's reelection campaign. and david plouffe may be appointed as a senior strategist who might be useful. david plouffe is standing by. he's coming up next. we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪

so apparently, there was a big meeting recently between two of my former bosses, president obama and president biden. and in that meeting first reported by the washington post, the two discussed concerns president obama has about the strategy and operations of the biden campaign. one source told the post, quote, obama grew animated in discussing the 2024 election and former president trump's potential returned to power. the post reports that obama has told biden aides that the campaign needs to move more aggressively, and he suggested that the campaign needs more top level decision makers at its headquarters. according to the post, he mentioned david plouffe, his

2008 campaign manager, my former boss, has that type of senior strategist needed at the biden campaign. joining me now is of course david plouffe, former campaign manager for barack obama's 2008 presidential race. okay, plouffe, i know, i know you've been telling people, probably including me, for a very long time that you are retired from active campaign or. but i think we can all agree we are in an existential moment here. two presidents, hypothetically, ask you to return to campaign work, for a little while, given how existential this is. would you consider it? >> they tried, jen. no. >> no, you would not! >> well, i obviously, you know, no surprise, i talked to a lot of my former colleagues involved, they will give well whatever advice -- at the end of the day, listen, president obama, and i have been informed perspective on this, i think has complete

confidence in the team around joe biden because that team won the white house in 2020. so my sense is i think probably what is driving, you know, some of the urgency is just that the stakes are obviously enormous. but, you know, the republican primary could be wrapped up very soon, you know, within a couple of weeks. maybe nikki haley would extend it if she goes to new hampshire. the general election is gonna begin and you have to make sure everyone is in the right place. we went through this, as you know, heading to reelection in 2012. we started with a bush reelect, the biden reelect, and i think there's a lesson there which is you want the campaign to be as fully empowered as possible. i think there needs to be coordination with the white house. but to move quickly and make decisions, and politics is a lot different even now than it was four years ago. platforms like tiktok, obviously, one place for a lot of younger people where a lot of people get information. the tools are available and

they changed a lot. at the end of the day i think biden has got the people around him who won the white house once. i think they can win it twice. they just have to get everybody in the right seats. >> for the david blough fans out there, which there is many, just gonna mark that, a total door slam of you helping them, but maybe not in a formal role at this moment. so you are still a pundit out there on the outside and you just outlined a lot of what they are doing. you are right, a lot of things has changed since you were traveling on the plane and i was traveling on the plane back in 2012 when president obama was running for reelection.

there have been some of these concerns expressed about the lack of senior decision-makers in delaware and that lack of urgency around setting up national structures around that campaign. there is tons of time to go here, for anybody who is bed-wetting. but do you share those concerns? you said you are confident how they're going. but would you like to be faster? would you like there to be more decision-makers, or different means of communicating on the campaign? >> well, you know, my sense, and obviously, i'm not in these rooms every day, right? but my sense is you see the schedules picking up. they've got new advertising out. i think they are beginning to place people in the skates. that's all great. i would remind everybody that sometimes working campaigns are afraid to say this. campaigns matter around the margins. they are kind of a field goal,

as our friend david axelrod used to say. they're not gonna turn 5% of the vote into 52% of the vote. but in a great campaign, you can get to a point or two. this is likely gonna be a close race. the campaign is not gonna change big things, how they handle things like, you know, aid, the state of the economy, foreign policy crises, you know, does donald trump, you know, try to appear in the middle, or does he continue to double down on the crazy? but i think the campaign is making strides. and it's important to remind everyone what is the campaign for a presidential race? in this particular presidential race, 2024, it is six, maybe seven states, probably a couple of million total between swing voters and people that you are concerned about, not turning out, or perhaps voting third-party which i think could be a factor in this race. those are where the campaign

really matters and can make at the big difference. but the big things, how you handle those debates, you know, does joe biden convince people, you know, if he's up to this job, which i think he clearly is. but i think there is people that need convincing. can you make trump make a full price for things like abortion, his desire to be an autocrat, the economic policies that are screwing the workers. a campaign can help their. but some of the big pieces i think, you know, are gonna be subject, particularly things like foreign policy and the economy, they're not control of. but you know, in 2012, we did a very good job of determining what the economic debate we are gonna have. who was best for the middle class. by the way, that's a debate i think joe biden is really well positioned, as you know well, to when. >> yes, who you are fighting for, this debate, it's less about data and more about how people -- the president gave to speeches on democracy. david plouffe, thank you as always. the plouffe fans hopefully won't be too disappointed forthn evening. elise stefanik, once c m's conversation with a speaker america nancy pelosi. tonight, and we'll be right 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.

i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too.

if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. options start at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate-lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information, and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling, so call now for free information.

(vo) with fargo, the new virtual assistant from wells fargo, you can instantly know what you spend on things like food. (dad) fargo, what did i spend on groceries this month? (son) hey dad, can the guys stay for dinner? (dad) no. (vo) want faster, easier banking? you can, with wells fargo. (vo) with fargo, the new virtual assistant from wells fargo, you can instantly know what you spend on things like food. (dad) fargo, what did i spend on groceries this month? (son) hey dad, can the guys stay for dinner? (dad) no. over the past few weeks, (vo) want faster, easier banking? you can, with wells fargo.

elise stefanik has really tried to position herself as the lead crusader against antisemitism in this country. she has been on a victory lap ever since her viral ousting of three university presidents at a december congressional hearing. and she's been more willing to take credit for their downfalls, even tweeting one down, two to go, after the resignation of the president of the university of pennsylvania. but somehow, here's where it gets tricky, when it comes to the antisemitic language of nazi germany, stefanik is striking a much different tune. >> i want to ask you about something that former president trump recently said. he referred to migrants as, quote, poisoning the blood of our country. this is language that the biden campaign and others say, quote, is parroting adolf hitler. are you comfortable with former president trump's comments? >> yet again we have the media which is so biased, reiterating whatever talking points the biden campaign is giving. yes, i stand by president

trump. and president trump also has -- >> i gotta say it's tough to square, being a bold crusader against hate and antisemitism when you refuse to condemn language like, say, the former president echoing the words of adolf hitler. but this kind of hypocrisy driven by devotion to trump is not really that surprising. for years now, she's been one of his biggest defenders on the hill. she is a self described, by herself, ultra maga supporter and proud of it. the track of stefanik the last six years or so, it's important to remember that this is a monumental shift from this stefanik who entered congress as the youngest woman to ever be elected into the house in 2014. at that time, and i remember this as well, she was seen as a fresh, new face in the republican party, a bipartisan centrist. for the first few years in congress, she was exactly that. as one former aide to gop

leadership put it, she was every democrat's favorite republican. and that independent streak continued to the trump era. in 2015, she criticized trump's call for a muslim ban saying, quote, this is not who we are as a country. and in 2017, she voted against trump's signature tax cuts. so, what happened? why did the most liked republican for democrats suddenly choose to go ultra maga? well, it's called ambition. >> former president trump in his interview with me said, quote, he likes the concept of picking a woman as his vice president. if called upon, would you serve as his vice president? >> i will of course be honored

to serve in any capacity in the trump administration. i'm proud to be the first member of congress to endorse his reelection. i am proud to be a strong supporter of president trump and he's going to win it this november. >> as striking as elise stefanik has been, it's not really that complicated. it's about ambition superseding values. that's not just the story of elise stefanik, unfortunately. it's the story of the modern-day republican party. something tells me house speaker emerita nancy pelosi is gonna have some thoughts on all of this. and she joins me next. ♪ ♪ ♪

[coughing] copd hasn't been pretty. it's tough to breathe and tough to keep wondering if this is as good as it gets. but trelegy has shown me that there's still beauty and breath to be had. because with three medicines in one inhaler, trelegy keeps my airways open and prevents future flare-ups. and with one dose a day, trelegy improves lung function so i can breathe more freely all day and night. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ♪ what a wonderful world ♪ ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for copd because breathing should be beautiful.

attention hearing loss suffers! do you have trouble keeping oncup with conversations?pd do you listen to tv on max volume? start hearing better today, with rca's all new, micro-hearing aids. through rca's hearing america program, you can get your choice of two state-of-the-art ultra discreet hearing aids now for a special introductory price, or pay as little as only $29 a month with free shipping. rca's are rechargeable with built-in volume controls and presets for better hearing wherever you are. go online and take the quick hearing test. it's free. to clearing up decades of frustration in a second. order now and we'll ship your pair of fda registered hearing aids in your choice of style with incredible savings. pay as low as only $29 a month. you get a 45-day money back guarantee, free 24/7 us based support, a portable charging case and free shipping call this number or go to rcahearingaids.com order yours now.

i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. options start at $9.95 a month. no medical exam,

no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate-lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information, and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling, so call now for free information. so, here we are, eight and a half years, if you can

believe it, since donald trump came down that escalator. he's on the verge of clinching the republican nomination again, unless something wild happens. his threat is not just to people but to our democracy, becoming more pronounced and more dangerous. and his party for the most part seems unwilling or just afraid to do anything about it. when i think about who is willing to stand up to donald trump and how to do it, i happen to think of the person standing across me in this photo. this was my twitter profile photo for a while, i'm not in this picture -- pointing the finger at him. and that woman is speaker emerita nancy pelosi. happy to see you. >> thank you. >> i want to start with january 6th and the threat to our democracy and how important it is because mitt romney who is a defender of democracy and has been brave at many moments, but he said recently to the new york times, quote, as a biden campaign theme, i think the threat to democracy pitch is a bust. january 6th would be four years old by the election. people process it one way or the other. biden needs fresh material to

attack rather than kicking a dead political horse. now, my view is that this is about how trump will govern. but what do you think in terms of essential argument and how central it will be in this election? >> well, with all due respect to senator romney, and i do respect him, i think that a campaign is what you may get. and when we talk about democracy and why january 6th was important, we have to convey to people what it means to them. so i see his point just in isolation, this is not enough. but what it means to them, for democracy, it's about freedom. it's about, he says, trump says, obamacare sucks. forgive me, i'm just quoting the president. >> you are quoting him, it's not your words. >> obamacare sucks, no. obamacare cures. he says he wants to undo that. he criticizes the senators who voted against terminating it. and so, this is a bad freedom, freedom to have access to health care, freedom to have access to health care in terms of reproductive freedom for

women and families, if they will have a family. the freedom for people to be able to have care at home so that they can have freedom to work and grow their families and plan for the future. so, it's not just about the ideal of freedom, which would be enough reason. our constitution, the congress of the united states, that is enough reason. but you have to translate it through the kitchen table because the truth of that, what he says, people make votes in a different way. and i believe they make votes when it comes to that kitchen table. affordable health care is not about the person, it's about the financial health, being able to afford health care. what we did in the i. r. a. to reduce the cost of insulin from 500, $600 a month for seniors medicare, to $35 a month. republicans want to overturn that. what we did about the secretary of hhs being able to negotiate a lower prescription drug price, they want to take that to court and overturn that. this is what it means to you and your financial security is part of your freedom. >> so, it's about making it real for people. and that is so important because people vote in that way. i do want to ask you, you wrote this powerful op-ed, i read it today again, about the

anniversary of january 6th. you were there that they. you were so heroic that day. and you outlined a lot of what happened. and recently, this weekend, donald trump repeated the lie that those convicted for their involvement or hostages. he used the term hostages and i just wanted to know what you thought of that. your response when you heard him say that? >> well, he is a disgrace. i just put it this way. we have known that for a long time. he has disrespect for congress, for the capital, and the rest. it has been clear. he came to the capitol and gave a presidential medal of freedom to some friends. get out of here. he talked politics on the floor. we don't do that. we talk policy. and at any event, let's not even worry so much about what

he says except that is what he says he's going to do. and that is what we have to convey to people. we understand this. he has no faith and belief in social security, and medicare, anything like that. he, again, thinks affordable care, obamacare, sucks, to use his always crude language. so these people who still support him, the people who don't share our values about the respect for the dignity and worth of every person, rich people who don't want to pay their fair share of taxes, they will for money into the republican system. but then, there are people who have serious concerns. what does it mean to their family, whether it's innovation, globalization, or immigration? women being more involved, and the rest of that. they have concerns. and we have to make sure they understand that what we are doing, what president biden has been doing with all of this legislation is to make sure everyone has access. >> and has their votes heard and their rights respected.

i do want to ask you, you are speaker emerita, and you are so familiar with the rules of the house. we spent a lot of time talking about the threat of trump and the rule. this weekend, when she was asked, elise stefanik, when asked about whether she would certify the election. she was in republican leadership. she didn't commit to that. should we be focusing more on what republican leaders might do to help trump or not do the role of that they were elected to? >> what i understand is you know and you've shown that he has said that he will not even promise not to engage in overthrowing the government, the pledge -- >> in illinois! >> he said this. >> which he signed. so for people who are not familiar with what we are talking about, he signed it in 2016 and 2020, and did not sign it, which stuck out to me, including you as well. >> but the fact is, there's, it's not a question about whether he's going to certify. it's a question about what the american people are going to do. and we have to make sure they know their vote will be counted as cast, and that whoever wins that vote of the electoral college, not that we have it, but we do, we'll be certified. and god bless mike pence. he had the courage to follow the rules and do what's right, even though he's being threatened with his life by the

president of the united states inciting the insurrection that he did and calling on him to take it out on pence. but pence knew there is no power to overturn what the public has done. now, i do know the rules of the house very well. and i know the constitution very well. and they were trying to manipulate it at the time, the house. they wanted to take it to a place where it was a mess to certify the electoral college. the constitution says if that isn't decisive, then the house

of representatives voting by state, that means 4 million people have one vote. that means other states, would not even 1 million people, have one vote. and our founders did not have -- >> that was not what they intended when it comes to people's voices. we're gonna squeeze in a very small break. speaker emerita is gonna stay with me. we're gonna be back in a moment.

we are back with house speaker emerita nancy pelosi. speaker pelosi, it can't get crazier, it seems, but it kind of does. in an interview just tonight, trump made interesting remarks, interesting as the one we described, about the economy. we just want to play for. >> we have an economy that is so fragile. and the only reason it's running now, it's running off the fumes of what we did. it's just running off the fumes. and when there is a crash, i hope it's gonna be in the next 12 months because i don't want to be herbert hoover. >> i mean, basically, he wants a crash because he thinks it's good for him. he thinks it goes back to him. but what's your reaction to that? >> it's just the -- of intensity and the grotesqueness of this person. he doesn't care what that means to the kitchen table interests of american working families. maybe, some of his dear friends who pour money into the campaign, because they don't want to pay taxes, might take notice of his ineptitude, not

understanding -- and by the way, that was a stupid statement he made. he also made an untrue statement. we are not living off his fumes. we are not living off his fumes. joe biden has done a remarkable job as president of the united states. there is around 14 million jobs, maybe more, by now with the latest report, lowest unemployment, cut it in half. the path of inflation, going down. he has been remarkable and he has done it in a way that has justice, social and economic, environmental justice in every way. that's not, i don't think this person would understand that. he calls himself the messiah. i guess he doesn't know much about the messiah. he says he wants the economy to crash, i guess he doesn't know what that means to america's workers. >> that may be true. >> time for a new intervention, maybe his family -- >> maybe if they're watching. you're calling for an intervention. i do want to ask, one of the many roles you've served in is on the intelligence committee. secretary lloyd austin was recently in the icu. he did not disclose that, which has received a strong reaction from republicans and democrats as well. how concerned are you about that lack of disclosure? >> my first concern is that, it's about his health, and what

the nature of that is and why he would not disclose it. but the change of command is something that really does have to be respected. and the president of the united states is the commander in chief. he should have known. again, we don't know the particulars of this. but i do think that this could've been handled much better. >> do you still feel confident in serving as secretary of defense? >> i'm a fan of the secretary. i think he's done a remarkable job, the secretary of defense. he commands great respect, and in fact i was gonna give him a call this past week about something. i wanted to do it when i get back to d. c.. but that's really something that's up to him and the president of the united states because nobody knows better than the secretary of defense and the commander in chief about the chain of command. >> i think i know what you're

gonna say here. but in our limited time left, do you have any resolutions or hopes for the new year? >> just win, baby! better win this election. we've launched our health care campaign, which will duplicate what we did in 2017, 2018, to make sure the public knew what's at stake in the election. health care is on the ballot and it's being on the ballot puts every person on the ballot. their health, well-being, opportunity about the future and their children, and the strength of our democracy. >> speaker emerita pelosi, happy new year. wonderful to have you on our first show back. i can talk to you about every topic under the sun. always great to have you here. i think a lot of people watching probably share your new year's resolution and your hopes as well. and they're not gonna be interested in what you just

described. i'm very grateful that you are here with us tonight. thank you so much for your time. that does it for me tonight. we will of course be back on sunday. and we will have lots to talk to you about. the rachel maddow show starts right now.

have the first votes in one of r those parties, in the republican party, to decide who the winner will be of their contested primary for the republican party's presidential nominating contest this year. and you know all t