bullet glass in her house. there is so much going on, they should not be something that kids have to worry about. >> people in america are being hurt by that. we have to help them, for myself, my sisters and the kids who died and can't ask, i ask our lawmakers to be brave and work together to make our country a better place. >> in pre-k, i first learned how to hide and be quiet if an intruder came into our school. i love to play hide and seek with my friends, but i do not want to hide at school. >> what happened in texas, i did not understand at the time. i was only in the second great, but having this have been in my own town, that made me realize that politicians, legislators and lawmakers need to make changes to restrict guns. that will then reduce the gun violence. when you hear us, hear us, we need the protection. always remember, one kid, all

the guns, kit is greater. >> think about those kids practicing the speeches at home, heartbreaking pleas for change from what is now known as the lockdown generation takes us off the air tonight. and on that note, i wish you all a very good and safe night. for all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you for staying up late, see you at the end of tomorrow. the end of tomorrow >> the united states senate was still in the middle of impeaching the previous president for stoking insurrection. the house impeachment managers, all of them democrats, were making the case that even though trump was no longer president, he had to be impeached because otherwise future presidents would be free to commit any crime or misdemeanor as long as they did

so right before leaving office. to rebut that, trump's lawyers offered this counter argument. >> if my colleague on this side of the chamber actually think that president trump committed a criminal offense, and let's understand, a high crime is a felony and misdemeanor is a misdemeanor. the words haven't changed that much overtime. after he's out of office, you go and arrest him. so there is no opportunity where the president of the united states can run rampant in january at the end of his term and just go away scot-free. the department of justice doesn't know what to do with such people. >> after he's out of office, you go out and arrest him. the justice department knows

what to do. that's from trump's lawyers. in other words, there was no need to impeach a president after he left office, because the justice department would bring criminal charges against him. and that logic was apparently so convincing for republicans that the number one republican senator, mitch mcconnell, cited that very argument in his speech, explaining why he would vote to acquit trump in the senate impeachment trial. >> president trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office. he didn't get away with anything, yet. we have a criminal justice system in this country. we have civil litigation. and former presidents are not immune from being accountable by either one. >> trump did not need to be impeached. congress could acquit trump in the senate because the criminal justice system would take care of all of it later. that was the logic trump's lawyers and senate republicans relied on. today, donald trump's lawyers went before the d. c. circuit court of appeals to argue the exact opposite.

they argue that trump cannot be prosecuted for anything he did as president, and that the only way to prosecute a president for crimes committed during his presidency's impeachment. >> i understand your position that a president is immune from criminal prosecution for any official act that he takes as president. even if that action is taken for an unlawful or unconstitutional purpose. is that correct? >> with an important exception, which is that if the president is impeached and convicted by the united states senate, in a proceeding that reflects widespread political consensus. >> you see, it's a shell game. congress impeach is trump for trying to overturn an election, and his lawyers say, no, this is a job for the criminal justice system. the criminal justice system charges trump and his lawyers say, no, this is a job for

congress and the impeachment process. at one point, judge florence pan tested that theory with a hypothetical for the history books. >> could a president who ordered seal team six assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, could he be subject to criminal prosecution? >> if he were impeached and convicted first. >> so, your answer is no. >> my answer is qualified yes, there's a political process that would have to occur under the structure of our constitution, which were require impeachment and conviction at the senate. >> trump's lawyer actually argued in court today that trump could send seal team six to kill a political opponent and absent unofficial impeachment conviction there's nothing the u.s. criminal justice system could do about any of that. it is a shocking position to take. especially when you consider the number of times trump has toyed with the idea of killing his political rivals. accusing general mark milley of treason. punishable by death.

encouraging a mob as it rallied to hang vice president mike pence. announcing that he could shoot someone, anyone, on fifth avenue. so, history happened here in this courtroom. maybe some prognostication to. president trump was in the courtroom today, just feet away from special counsel jack smith. trump was surrounded by his lawyers and buy his body men, walt nauta, who is of course trump's codefendant in the mar-a-lago documents case. by all accounts, the judges here appeared more receptive to the prosecutions arguments, but trump and his lawyers may not really have been there to convince the judges anyway. for them, the point may have been the hearing itself. delaying trump's criminal trial, even if it meant explaining the hypothetical immunity and sending commandoes to assassinate your political rivals. joining me now is former u.s. attorney and senior fbi official chuck rosenberg. also with me is former senior adviser to president obama and co-host of pod save america,

dan pfeiffer. gentlemen, thank you for being here. chuck, i was astounded and not in a good way by what was said by trump's legal team today in the courtroom. was there anything that they said that struck you as particularly merit us? >> no. >> full stop. >> but i wasn't astounded, because they were very clear about what they were going to do in an appellate case, you on both sides filed briefs. judges read the briefs, the judges clerks read the briefs, and nerd life me reads the briefs, and the things that the trump team argued today were all in their brief. i think they made a strategic and legal mistake, alex, by taking that absolutist position that you just described. so no, i wasn't really surprised today. i think that's the corner that they painted themselves into. >> dan, are you winning when you are arguing that the president can order seal team six to assassinate your political rivals and there's no necessary punishment for that?

>> i recognize we are living in a political upside down these days, but you're -- the defendants table during a felony criminal trial, judges are only allowed to -- >> true. i think, and i'm loath to say this, because we're talking about donald trump, dan. it feels like the articulation of the strategy of ultimate and total impunity, even in a situation where commandoes are assassinating rivals, feels like the crossing of a certain rubicon. even for team trump. do you think it's resonant, this scenario that's been outlined? especially given the presidents past history on statements related to assassination? >> well, we should stipulate that most people are not going to follow what's happening in this court case, most people haven't tuned into this election yet. but what i think is happening is donald trump, ironically enough, rose to power in 2016 by dominating attention, and he resurrected his political career by being absent from attention. most of the public has not seen or thought about donald trump.

and by sitting at the defended trial, by this speech president biden gave, he is reminding people why they were so uncomfortable with his temperament, his corruption, his authoritarian meetings in 2020. so it's not that there's a specific thing to this, it's that donald trump's return to center stage and highlighting some of his greatest vulnerabilities at this moment in time where people are starting to wake up and pay attention. >> fair enough. chuck, the sort of legal aspect of all this beyond the actual question of presidential immunity. there is the potential, the litigation of all of this, has the potential to significantly delay this case. which is seemingly trump's ultimate end goal here. can you talk a little bit more about how meaningful that delay might? be >> sure. so this trial right now is scheduled for march 4th. and i think that date, alex, is in danger. perhaps not doomed, but certainly endangered. every defendant benefits by delay. and mr. trump has open to him some avenues to try and incur

even more delay. it's not clear to me that the d. c. circuit court of appeals is going to take a long time to decide this case, i think it's relatively easy. and in the government's favor. but then mr. trump could ask for a full panel hearing, the entire d. c. circuit, to hear it on bond. if he loses, there he could house the supreme court. and there's no guarantee that the supreme court will hear it either. but you can ask. in so the more that mr. trump does these things, the more that he stretches out the timeline, and puts the government at a disadvantage. i still think this case could be tried before the election, i'm not convinced it will start on march 4th. i think it's a remote possibility, but i think they can get it done. >> i want to bring, for folks who have not followed closely the hearing that unfolded, a judge karen anderson, one of the three appeals court judges, had this to say out, tangentially, the scope of presidential duties. let's take a listen to what she had to say.

>> i think it's paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal laws. >> what she's getting at here is basically the scope of what is official duties for the president. it feels like that's actually a question that, beyond the immunity question, could be sent to another court to decide. and delay this in an even more meaningful way than just the back and forth between the appellate court and the supreme court. >> by the way, if mr. trump's lawyers had not taken an absolutist position, this is the logical argument for them. they could've said, sure, there might be a circumstance under which a president or former president could be prosecuted criminally. but this one isn't it. all they had to do is argue

that what he is charged with in the underlying indictment was an official act. and then it's not an enormous leap to claim immunity for official acts. but they didn't do that. to your earlier point, they staked out this absolute disposition, painted themselves in the corner, and of course judge henderson or another one of the judges was going to ask, precisely that question. because that's the fallacy, that's the weakness in their argument. >> dan, we started this segment off playing some sound from republican mitch mcconnell. who took a decidedly different attack then the trump team is taking today, which is to say the justice department should sort it all out. he does not want to answer questions about that today, as team trump is taking the opposite of mitch mcconnell's position. do you think senate republicans are in a different place when it comes to the questions about trump's liabilities here? do they get the same, for lack

of a better term, hall pass that trump gets among republican voters? >> no, i think ultimately it's interesting that you played that footage of mitch mcconnell, because mitch mcconnell is the person probably most responsible in the republican party for the fact that donald trump is still this dominant figure. because, as we all remember, you floated the idea that he would vote to convict. and then at the last minute, kind of made up this cockamamie excuse to avoid doing it, because he thought he would take some heat from the base. and you probably thought donald trump would just disappear. a mistake that no one in the republican party has made to date. so i think that house republicans mostly, really firmly behind trump, there's a growing number of very pro trump senate republicans, but most of them just tolerate him. they need him to win, they need his money, and they're just going to abide by this and stay silent for as much as humanly possible. i'm sure for the msnbc reporters, if they were to grab these people, the republican senators, they'd say i didn't hear that. they would refused to comment on it, to avoid talking about it.

because it's in their interest to keep trump around. they just don't have to like it. >> do you think that this -- trump has made hay of all of these trials because he thinks it's good fundraising, and he thinks it's good for brandishing his profile. that's a double edged sword, as you pointed out in your first answer. but he's fundraising off of this, and i wonder if you think that the continuation of these trials, and we're in this sort of pretrial motions part of, it we haven't actually gone to the trial, but nonetheless, there is action happening. there's the threat of using navy seal commanders to assassinate political rivals. do you think trump keeps fundraising off of it? when you think of the base, can you continue to stoke outrage over the sort of incremental process of being held criminally liable? >> absolutely. he will fund-raise on this. the jail cell being slammed with him behind it, just as he will sund of the final fund raising email on this. so that's definitely going to happen. i think the base will stay engaged. this obviously helps him in a

political -- when you look at the polling in this primary, the point where trump passes desantis and dominates the field come right after that first indictment in march of 2023. the real question now, as this primary could be over in a month to six weeks, is does this help him in a general election? and we have yet -- we're in really uncharted territory's. what is the electorate going to think when they turn on their tv in the summer, three or four months before the election, and they see the former president of the united states, the republican nominee, sitting at the defendants table, having these charges run against, him having these witnesses testified against him, when you have republican witnesses like white house counsel -- testing against him, what's that going to do? that's a huge moment it's going to real impact on this campaign. >> check, as dan talks about sort of outlining the total eclipse of the summit this could be in a presidential

campaign, as you sit here now, and i'm not asking you to make predictions. what's a thoughtful assessment about if not march, given how the appellate courts been moving, what the supreme court, the x-factor here my do, do you think it's likely that summer is a time for trials? >> let me ask you a question. how many ifs can i use? >> as many as you want. 200. >> i may need it. if the circuit court decides, as we expect that they, will against mr. trump and for the government, that he doesn't have immunity. if the entire d. c. circuit doesn't take the case on bunk, if the supreme court doesn't grant a certain petition to hear it now, i think you can try this case in the summer. >> that's a lot of things going in the special counsel's direction. >> a number of things have to break his way. but remember, alex, this is in many ways the simplest case. i don't mean to suggest that any case is easy, it's a one defended case, only mr. trump is charged. but only for charges.

so in terms of getting this thing to trial, we're not dealing with classified information, as you are in the mar-a-lago case. you don't have to be under 97 defendants, as you do in the fulton county case. this is an easier case to get to trial. no case is easy to, when because the government has to meet a very high burden. but if things break in the right way for the special counsel, yes. you can try this case before the election. >> history being made every hour, every day, every week, every month. chuck rosenberg, dan pfeiffer, thank you both for your time tonight. really appreciate it. coming up, as trump tries to delay his january 6th trial until after the election, there is new reporting that multiple members of trump's inner circle will be talking to special counsel jack smith. we will have the latest damning revelations about what exactly president trump was doing and saying on the day of that attack. that is next.

♪ upbeat music ♪ asthma. it can make you miss out on those epic hikes with friends. step back out there, with fasenra. fasenra is an add-on treatment for eosinophilic asthma that is taken once every 8 weeks. fasenra helps prevent asthma attacks. most patients did not have an attack in the first year. fasenra is proven to help you breathe better so you can get back to doing day-to-day activities.

and fasenra helps lower the use of oral steroids. fasenra is not for sudden breathing problems or other eosinophilic conditions. allergic reactions may occur. don't stop your asthma treatments without talking with your doctor. tell your doctor if your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. get back to better breathing. get back to what you've missed. ask your doctor about fasenra, the only asthma treatment taken once every 8 weeks. if you can't afford your medication astrazeneca may be able to help. >> here is something to

consider. if donald trump does indeed go to trial for trying to steal the 2020 election, special counsel jack smith will have stunning new testimony to use against him. according to abc news, dan scavino, who served as trump's deputy chief of staff for communications, told smith's

team that as the violence began to escalate on january 6th, trump was just not interested in doing more to stop it. former trump aide nick luna also told federal investigators that one trump was informed that than vice president mike pence had to be rushed to secure location, trump responded, so what? abc news also reports that after unsuccessfully trying for up to 20 minutes to persuade trump to release some store of the escalating statement that day, scavino and other aides just left the president alone to watch the violence unfold on television. that is when, according to sources, trump posted a message on his twitter account, saying that mike pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done. scavino, the only other person with access to trump's twitter account, told both jack smith and white house lawyers at the time, quote, i didn't do it. meaning, one of the most incendiary, controversial messages of january six was all donald trump. joining me now is michael schmidt, investigative reporter for the new york times and author of donald trump, versus

the united states, inside the struggle to stop a president. my gosh, but it is great to see you. i found this reporting standing, not just because of what was reported, but the sources themselves. first, let's talk about dan scavino. this is a person i think that has been with trump since he was a teenager. what do you make of the fact that he is talking and being apparently quite opened with a special prosecutor, special counsel's team? >> scavino tried really hard not to talk. he wouldn't cooperate with the january six committee, he was held in contempt, the justice department declined to charge him in connection with. that when the special counsel came calling, he again tried to not answer their questions. and was ultimately compelled by a judge to do so.

so, a bit under duress, he went before a grand jury and, you know, from scavino's side, answered factual questions about what happened that day. if you are him, you are trying to strike these very odd balance between cooperating in a federal investigation where you can't lie, and remaining as donald trump's tweet or assistant. and apparently he's tried to do that. he's still in trump's orbit, at the same time that we are learning about this testimony where it is not -- new and different. we've known the basics of the story what happens on january 6th in the west wing, but when you read and you see in this story what happens, through scavino's eyes, and scavino is the person who's trying to get trump to stop this violence, scavino is being portrayed as trying to and it's, it's pretty striking. even on a story that we sort of already knew. >> yeah, very much not an enabler in the eyes of scavino, but someone who's saying this is not good and not a good look for you, mister president.

so when abc news approaches the trump camp, a trump spokesperson says a response to this reporting, dance given it was one of president trump's longest serving, most loyal aides, and his actual testimony shows just how strong president trump is positioned in this case. okay, i'm very interested in this sort of tenor of this statement. because i wonder if maybe the audience is people reading the abc news article, or dance gavino. is this a kind of like, dan, you would never betray, me kind of statement? how do you understand that? >> i've seen different statements that have come out that trump has put out since leaving office, and when he was in office. they really consider that there is nothing to do with the underlying issue. that court doesn't really speak to anything in the story. if you read the story and you read what discovery know said, regardless of what the law is and what the evidence may be, it's just not a pretty portrait of what goes on. it's actually pretty ugly. and, you know, if you were a juror and you heard this account from someone who is so close to trump, it is not really adverse to trump. so, it's not like you're

bringing in someone who trump has broken with, like, let's say, bill barr, or john kelly. this is someone who's still in trump's orbit, but as we see in that statement. so it would be interesting to me to see at the trial, well, what would the jury see if dan scavino was the one who is saying, yes, donald trump would not respond to stop this violence. and this account were to come out of his mouth. do they call him at trial? do you take someone who is such a trump loyalist and put them -- >> yes the! don't you? >> but you could also end up with dance given are going on and on about what a witch hunt this is, or whatever. you're really rolling the dice in a way that you are not with a less contentious witness. dance could be no has been contentious here. he tried to get out of having to give this testimony. >> michael schmidt, why are we hearing about this? who stands to gain from leaking this reporting about what danced finau has said to special prosecutors?

>> i always hate that question, because as a reporter, it's the notion that we are sitting around and the phone rings and here's the leak. i mean, the reason that stories like this come out is because it's a very big story, a lot of reporters are talking to a lot of different people, we don't know everything that's going, on we don't have full access to everything that was before the green jury, and little by little, institution by media institution, we learn different things and we put them out there and we get a bigger sense of this. this is an incredibly intriguing story, it would be the definitive story that any other presidency, because of the january six committee and the work that they did. it sort of this adding on to

something that has already been created. ok at the same time, it takes all these different stories for us to get the portrait that we have today. however many years we are into the trump story. it's because of stories here, there, and such, and reporters that are out there just trying as hard as they can to learn what's out there. >> to breathe the strands together. stunning to me that dance give you, know and even evan corcoran, some aides who have offered some of the most damning details about what trump has been doing in these federal cases, remain in his orbit. >> but the thing is is that when we get to someone like scavino, who was right around trump and is still a trump loyalist, his account basically lines up with what the january six committee says. >> well, there's apparently still more to come. michael schmidt, new york times, my friend, thank you. great to see you, thanks for your time. >> still to come this evening, heading into the first actual contest in the 2024 republican presidential campaign. there is a heated race for the most embarrassing performance. plus, donald trump returns to a well worn page in his campaign playbook. birtherism. that is coming up.

to hydrate, smooth, visibly firm, brighten, and improve texture. it's my best skin yet. olay 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. ♪ nexium 24hr prevents heartburn acid for twice as long as pepcid. get all-day and all-night heartburn acid prevention with just one pill a day. choose acid prevention. choose nexium. my skin has been so much smoother so much more hydrated.

it's olay! with olay hyaluronic body wash 95% of women had visibly-better skin. and my skin is so much more moisturized. see the difference with olay.

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. >> sometimes if you build it, they all come. yeah, i don't think there are any buses. >> that was minnesota congressman and long shot democratic presidential candidate dean phillips today. after literally zero voters showed up to his event in new hampshire. the people you see drinking coffee around mr. phillips here

are his own staffers. over in iowa, where a winter storm has blanketed the state in deep snow and where we are now less than a week away from the iowa caucuses, the republican party's long shot candidates are also getting iced out. >> there are campaigns are canceling events today. not us. we have multiple events planned across northwest iowa. we are keeping them intact. if you can't handle the snow, you can't handle jinping, that's what i would say. >> hours after posting that video, the long shot republican candidate vivek ramaswamy posted these photos, explaining that he himself got stuck in the snow. it took six people to get his car unstuck, and then this morning mr. ramaswamy posted one of his campaign -- postponed one of his campaign events because of the snow. it appears he cannot handle the snow either. but the long shot candidate who takes the cake for the most

embarrassing last 24 hours is arkansas governor isa hutchinson. now, if you forgot that isa hutchinson was still in the republican primary, you are not alone. even asa hutchison's supporters forgot. in an interview with the washington post, governor hutchinson said that while canvassing earlier today, he knocked on the door of someone who said they loved him. this person then asked hutchinson, who are you going to support? to which hutchinson replied, i'm still running. just brutal. but you know, points for honesty. in the words of dean phillips, sometimes if you build, it they don't come. now tomorrow night is the next republican primary debate, only nikki haley and ron desantis and donald trump have pulled well enough to qualify for that debate. but yet again, trump is not actually attending the debate. instead, he is running his own counter programming on fox at the very same time. so, my question here is even

though they are not the longest of long shots in this race, are nikki haley and ron desantis also basically iced out at this point? they have both built a sizable presence in the iowa battleground, but next monday, will anyone show up for them? then i'm going to talk to the amazing hosts of msnbc's new show the weekend about that and so much more, coming up next. r really been offered a beauty campaign when i was in my twenties or my thirties or my forties. it wasn't until i was 48 years old, when i thought that was way behind me. here you come along and ask me to join you

on this journey with meaningful beauty. announcer no matter what your age, now is the perfect time for beautiful, younger-looking skin with meaningful beauty. join ellen pompeo and millions of women who use the age-defying super treatments that have kept supermodel cindy crawford looking so youthful for over 20 years. look at cindy's skin at age 31, and at age 52. there's hardly any difference! and it's doing the same for ellen. ellen pompeo my skin looks better today than it did 5 years ago. that's a great feeling! we can be such an inspiration to women. to embrace aging and to celebrate it, to show other women this isn't necessarily a bad thing. cindy crawford i'm so passionate about meaningful beauty because i'm able to share with women everywhere. ellen pompeo so, make the call or go online now and put yourself on the path to the most beautiful skin of your life. trust me, it's worth it! announcer meaningful beauty is normally $139, you'll pay only $49.95 for all five concentrated super treatments. plus, we'll include free shipping and a 60-day

money-back guarantee. and now for 2023 and beyond! be among the first 500 orders now and we'll add cindy's new radiance recovery duo, a $110 value, free. you'll get sixty of cindy's favorite revive & brighten eye masques, the celebrity secret that visibly smooths, awakens and restores. and our legendary dark spot treatment. you'll be amazed as you watch the appearance of sunspots, brown spots, and dark patches diminish. this is a limited time only special offer. only $49.95 for everything you see here. call the number below or go to meaningfulbeauty.com right now. hi, i'm ben and i've lost 60 pounds on golo. or go to (guitar music)ty.com with other programs i've tried in the past they were unsustainable, just too restrictive. with golo i can enjoy my food and the fear and guilt of eating is gone. >> in iowa, it looks like it is

donald trump's race to news.

but the republican primary could be a lot closer. maybe. depending on which poll you look at, trump's running either seven points ahead of nikki haley or 20. so the most reliable indicator of whether trump is worried about haley, the window into the campaign's sole, if such a thing exists, is truth social, where trump posted this week a link to a right-wing web website that argues nikki haley is ineligible to become president because her parents were not u. s. citizens when she was born in south carolina. you can call it re-birtherism. joining now is my colleagues, symone sanders-townsend, michael steele, and alicia mendez, all hosts of the weekend premiering saturday at eight a. m.. it's spanking new. just a little spice. guys, so happy to have you here because there is so much to discuss. and yet, in a way, so little as well. alicia, first off, the birtherism thing, natural chestnut. trump coming out against nikki haley. the question for you is, nikki

haley's immigrant background has not been explored as fully as perhaps donald trump would like to be and republican primary. i wonder if you think that toxic line of attack can be a successful one, given the current climate. >> i don't know if it can be successful. i'm curious as to why he is choosing to launch. it there is no person in the united states who should this moment be more familiar with the 14th amendment than donald trump, given that is currently being used making him ineligible for the presidency, given that he partook in an insurrection. but this is what he does. we saw him do it not only with barack obama. we saw it in 2016, he tried to go after ted cruz. given his familiarity with the 14th amendment, he should know the fact that nikki haley was born in the united states. she is automatically a citizen. it doesn't mean that he is afraid. it doesn't mean that his ego is produced by the fact. both she and desantis are so but far behind him in the polls

that beyond a latent xenophobic, at his hatefulness, his laziness to go back to this attack, i don't really understand the rationale. >> i've got a possible rationale. internal polling. it's the internal polling. what their internal polling is probably showing him in new hampshire is that seven point lead is probably accurate more accurate than the 20 point lead so. he needs to create a little distance, particularly if they wind up for iowa and swing into new hampshire. he wants momentum for him and a little bit of drag for her. the internal polling is always the towel when you see candidates start to do and react and respond a certain way to their opponents,

particularly when they have a lead and i've got it all, wait a minute, hold up, you know what? okay so we're gonna push our little -- i bet you more than anything -- >> i am reminded of barack obama, that his most infamous birther attempt, and the fact that it went from barack obama to barack hussein obama. i feel like it was a matter of time, time your watches to the moment when -- honestly that's the next tail. i think it's in the double indignation that he is being challenged, potentially, but by a person of color, the daughter of immigrants, a woman, that adds to the venom, i think. >> i think it adds to the vendôme that nikki haley has not leaned into her heritage in the primary campaign. she's nikki, not nimrod on the campaign. trail i a lot of brown folks behind or talking about how she was a child of immigrants in what she brings to the primary. but i do think, a little bit it is the internal polling. the question i always have, when candidates decide to attack another candidate, because they do have indicators

that this president is a threat, they also have indicators on what is a viable attack. i don't actually think in iowa or new hampshire the who she's a scary brown lady, because that's what he said. he saying that she is attempting to other her in an attempt to say that she's not one of us. she is not a white woman. and this is one of the brown immigrants i'm talking about that is coming in here trying to take things away from you. that's what donald trump is saying. i don't know if that's effective in iowa in new hampshire. >> it's a double play, as well. as you pointed, out the birthright citizenship, which he doesn't like either. by the way, if you are born in the united states you are an american citizen. >> unless dom trump gets his way. >> true, true. >> dredging up the ugly specter

of birtherism, to me, it's such a reminder of all the reasons why people of color in particular should be horrified by the candidacy of donald trump, and yet, i bring this up to all of you guys, the reality is that voters of color are increasingly either undecided about president biden and looking for a third party candidate, or attracted to the candidacy of donald trump. do you have a working theory about how on one hand this man can be doing things that alienate the latino community, the asian community, and the black community, and seeing gains among all those folks? >> yeah, because he appeals to a pro orient interest politically that they have about things that are important to them. he becomes an avatar, a manifestation of their particular interest or desires or how they feel about others in the country. if you notice in the along the border, hispanics along the border sound no different than some white folks from iowa when it comes to how they look at immigrants in migrants coming across the border. so once he understands that,

unpacks it, and knows that this is a bit of your thing, he's going to lean into it. he's going to exploit it. he's going to expose it. and more importantly, he's going to expand his influence and reach among others in the community. so when you see someone else like you saying an acting a certain way on this issue, guess what? now you have permission to do the same. donald trump is all about giving you permission to go to the lowest common denominator amongst the interests at hand. and that's what he does. >> at the same time, voters of color are the backbone of the democratic party. we all know democrats have not won, indifferent for voters of color. that's why they should be concerned when they see erosion because the slightest bit of erosion into these key states will make a difference. part of what will also being done is we've oversimplified these electorates. latinos, aapi voters, they have never been as baked in their partisanship as some operatives

would have wanted them to be. and so yes, they are mistrustful of republicans, but they also want leaders who are going to deliver for them, and that's going to be part of the task for democrats in the next ten months, delivering that message. >> i think democrats must treat black and brown voters, aapi voters, especially black and latino men, persuadable voters, all of the energy and messages you put into independent voters, suburban, women, who are usually more diverse, by the way, and the oldest -- >> suburbs are increasingly -- >> young women at this point, hello, my producer litany is liable.

persuadable young suburban mommy. and she's black. so, again, it goes against the myth that who we think about when we put people in these boxes. but i don't believe that a large swath of black and brown voters are going out there casting their ballots for donald trump. it's more likely they don't voted. all >> right. it's third-party curious. i would say, simone, it's also not looking at aapi voters as a monolith or black voters, this is a generational divide that is so real. on the biden campaign i think we have news that they are, sorry, it's a dccc, the democratic democratic committee, has announced an investment into voters of color. >> couple below my pocket. there you go. >> yes, this is what we should be doing. kudos to the dccc for doing that. i will say though, these record investments in investments of communities of color should be applauded. usually people say they don't have this kind of money for black and brown people. >> i can't tell you the fights we had inside the rnc.

>> they need to be in communities. ads are not going to move a voter that is frankly overly persuaded by the disinformation they might see on social media site. it's peer to peer. >> kamala, for example, she has put out a lot more, which has been really good. i think they should get uncle joe about a little more, not president joe biden, but uncle joe. >> aviator joe. >> dark branding, man, neighborhood after neighborhood i think has a lot more viability among the voters are talking about than president joe biden. >> all right, well, listen, somebody tells me you guys got me talking about this a little bit more. >> just a little bit. >> in the future, for the next cole of forever's.

michael steele, simone sanders townsend, alicia menendez, they never allow us in the same room at the same time. it finally happened. teleprompters moving all around. tune in this saturday at eight a. m. for the premier of the weekend. i didn't need the teller profit prompter. that's right, i said tebow, right here on msnbc. thank you. coming up, joe biden adopted many of the policies of the progressive left and now he has a booming economy to show it. can he succeed in convincing the majority of americans to believe it? judge king joins me to join his new book, the rebels. that's next. you can cuddle and brush that hair off. bounce. it's the sheet. what about your husband? is he here? no, unfortunately, he couldn't make it. she attacked him last night. you attacked your husband? [silence] dice dreams, attack your friends and steal their coins. play now.

you're probably not easily persuaded to switch attack your friends and steal their coins. mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? did we peak your interest? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. there are no term contracts or line activation fees. and you can bring your own device. oh, and all on the most reliable 5g mobile network nationwide. wireless that works for you. >> we have an economy that's it's not just possible, it's happening.

incredible. we have an economy that is so fragile. and when there's a crash, i hope it's going to be during this next 12 months, because i don't want to be herbert herbert hoover. >> setting aside what would normally be a career ending statement for a presidential candidate, the other notable thing in that piece of sound is trump's assertion that the u. s. economy is terrible because democrats. trump likes to do that a lot. he has been doing it for a while. in 2020 it was all about joe biden and the policies of the left that would unleash an economic disaster of epic proportions. the irony is that the progressive policies championed by elizabeth warren and bernie sanders and alexandria are

ocasio-cortez, what emerged was not a great depression but record unemployment, best jobs market since the 1960s, a lowest uninsured rate in history, the manufacturing boom, decreasing gas crisis. joining us is josh green, author of the new book out today, the rebels, which chronicles how left-wing economic populism and people like warren, sanders, and aoc, i've played a fateful role and will continue to in the upcoming presidential election. okay. i want to hear from the man who has been on the ground in steel towns in pennsylvania. how have the very voters that joe biden needs to make sure are in his corner, how they understand this economy. >> i think the answer is in my travels they don't quite yet. but the story of the book

really is how these three characters gave rise to this brand of left-wing populism. they really hadn't existed in the recent democratic party. they took the financial prices crisis and a huge backlash for, democrats are kind of wake up and say i think we need more populous brand of politics. and so even though neither warner or sanders ended up in the white house, they had a profound effect on biden's administration. i was in pennsylvania a week ago. there's a steel plant plan going. up unemployment is going down. economically things are turning the right direction. the challenge for biden is getting that to translate into positive terms. >> i don't understand when you have architects of so much with the current economic policy, progressive democrats, self-described populists, why did the democratic party not get credited with a more populist approach. what is the disconnect? >> i think part of it is that a lot of the fights in politics today or about culture not economics. but the kitchen table concerns is the state of the economy.

i'm flooded with economic numbers all day long, i work it business week. they all point at the idea that it's about to be mourning in america again. all the numbers in the intro show things are turning in the right direction. a lot of times there's a delay effect, but if you don't joe biden, if you're an incumbent running for reelection, this is the economy want to be running on. >> how much are we missing in this, the point that needs to be hammered home again and again we talk about the economy. should be there be more focus on the price of eggs, something my friend and colleague loves to talk about? what is the metric that is the sort of convincing metric about

the health of this economy? >> to me it comes down to jobs. into a broader question about how is my family doing? what are my kids prospects looking light? if those things are turning around, that has really been what warren and stan standards and aoc have hammered away on in the last few years. we've seen it translate in the biden transition see. when trump is the guy in the other side of the ticket, that's really going to be what they're thinking about. if you're joe biden, you hope that's enough for them to pull a lever for you. >> biden talking a lot about democracy, institutional integrity, the sacrosanct nature of the constitution. does that matter to these voters? >> on some level it does. but look, at the end of the day you've got to be able to pay your mortgage. you want to put your kid through college. you want to have a secure retirement. it's important, obviously, things like democracy, authoritarianism. you also have to focus on these kitchen table concerns. the irony is, biden does have a story to tell. not just to the progressive left, whose policies he has

enshrihe