internal arm conflict which will be quite a challenge because it has been months, it's been years since ecuador has had full control of the inside of these prisons. and the violence that has been escalating around the country, katy. >> and this escalating violence, this escalating instability drives migration, it's part of what we're seeing as people flee countries like ecuador that aren't stable and safe to look for a better life. thank you very much for joining us. that is going to do it for me today. "deadline: white house" starts right now. ♪♪ it is 4:00 here in new york. i'm in today for nicolle wallace. this afternoon at long last it is here, a frenzied week of legal reckoning for donald trump circled in red sharpie on our calendars for months.

where he'll finally experience consequences for some of his actions. next week, tuesday, marks the beginning of the second e. jean carroll defamation trial. news on that later on. but first things first, developments ahead of closing arguments. tomorrow in new york's $250 million civil fraud lawsuit. the judge revealed he would not allow donald trump to deliver part of those closing arguments himself as he had requested. the reasoning, neither trump nor his attorneys ever got back to the judge agreeing to preconditions. in truth, it is hard to imagine what trump wanted more, an opportunity to put himself at the center of proceedings to deliver his message in his own way, or an opportunity like this, to complain, whine about being silenced, despite the fact his own team failed to respond to the judge on time. remember, in both cases, e. jean carroll's defamation and new york's civil fraud, trump's

guilt has already been determined. these decisions will only settle the punish. at any moment, perhaps we could hear back from a three-judge panel on whether or not trump is immune from prosecution charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 election. as expected, here we are. the doorstep of the chaotic period for donald trump and ultimately americans at large. and that is where we start today with former u.s. attorney harry lipman. with me here at the table, lisa rubin and "new york times" investigative reporter sue craig. harry, let's take this piece by piece. want to read the preconditions at were shutset out by the judge, he may not testify, he may not comment on irrelevant matters, inticular and without limitation, he may deliver aampaign speech and he may not impugn myself or my

staff nor the new york state court system. he went onto outline time limits, suggested he would interrupt trump if warranted, committed to fighting trump, harry first and foremost, these conditions, fair or unfair? >> totally unfair. normally go without saying. but it's just with him, you cannot leave the unsaid unsaid. what it means is, stick to the evidence, that's what happens in closing arguments. you give a summation, you explain why your side should either prevail or do well. and it was evident that he had to do something about trump and they never got back to him, by the way, not just late. they set a deadline of wednesday, then thursday and it was clear he wasn't going to commit to this. he wanted to give a campaign speech. and so he shot him down.

nothing at all untoward about the conditions. >> there was a lot of email traffic here, he rejected trump's request to be a part of closing arguments. let me read you some of the email exchanges between the judge and the attorney for donald trump, sent this morning just before 11:00 a.m. as i have already indicated to you, if mr. trump wishes to speak, you will have to tell me now that he will agree to the limitatis i have imposed, which go without saying and apply to everyone, as you just said. and he will have to agree to do so tomorrow on the record which should take no more than a minute or two. 40 minutes later, the response. this is very unfair, your honor. you are not allowing president trump who has been wrongfully demeaned and belittled by an attorney general to speak about the things that must be spoken about. >> i won't debate this yet again. take it or leave it now or never. you have until noon, seven minutes from now. i will not grant any further

extensions. then the follow-up 12 minutes after noon, quote, not having heard from you by the third extended deadline, i assume that mr. trump will not agree to the reasonable limits i have imposed a precondition to giving a closing statement above and beyond given by his attorneys and he will not be speaking in court tomorrow. only so much opportunity the judge can provide here, harry. >> it's true. and actually this really has the earmarks of trump himself, that one statement, it's very unfair, he's been railroaded, he needs to say things. that's a page out of his normal stump speech and you can bet there would have been more such pages. after all, what else would trump be wanting to do. and the one thing he was saying, he's going to keep him on a short leash. as soon as he started to violate, one warning, $50,000, et cetera, he was going to keep

that from happening. it's no surprise that they couldn't accept it. it's a bit of a surprise they never had the courtesy to respond and say no. but you understand exactly why the judge did this here and it tells you exactly what trump wanted to do and what he wanted do is not proper. >> this fits right into the trump playbook, right? act as if you're aggrieved. >> the victim, which is a familiar story line with donald trump. he's been playing it since he's been in his 20s. as soon as i heard the other day that he wanted to speak and the closing arguments, he knew this was going to be a circus and objections. donald trump wants eyes on this and the best way to do it is to say i'm going to show up. he did the same thing a few weeks ago, he said he was going to show up and then he decided at the last minute not to testify. and that created a lot of chaos, just the fight before and people made plans to go down.

he wanted media attention on it. i think this was the exact same. you look at -- harry made a great point. i've got a copy of the email exchange. even the type face is different on some of them as if they were cut and paste, as if the attorney didn't write them and they were sent to him. it's an odd several pages of emails i have to say. i don't know if it was donald trump or somebody with donald trump sent, you know -- here's what he should say and it was cut and paste into the email. >> i always do love a formatting issue. it also reminded me of when you were in court and he testified. rewind to that moment. in some ways, i think that performance was a tell about what we could expect had he somehow actually taken this opportunity here. >> absolutely. because he was unrepentant, he talked about things that were far outside the scope of this case, he really just wanted an opportunity to explain himself

and he could not believe -- he could not grasp that the judge would rule against him without knowing him. he was affronted that the judge wouldn't take the opportunity to get to know him and he was pointing at him, doing the alec baldwinesque point. he doesn't even know me. he was so insulted and the rage was not helpful for him. in any way. >> help me understand, if your idea is you want to -- if you're making the argument -- >> it doesn't. then to attack the judge, to attack the judge's clerk, it doesn't all fit together. >> this was never about making an argument about winning the case. it was getting bodies in chairs. let me be clear with you and our viewers. sue and i were scheduled to be there. we would have been there irrespective of whether donald trump showed up or not. but there are other people in the media who follow this more than the two of us do, and they will make decisions about

whether to get their bodies into the courtroom based on their perception of what theatric are going to unfold before them. part of it was getting bodies in chairs. part of it was ensuring that he could fund raise off of a new grievance, because all of these court appearances have been successful for him from a fund-raising perspective and it was also about just being able to complain. like, a new wound, a new grievance that you can use as a cycle for new social media posts. you know, the one thing that i think is also really interesting about this exchange i want to point out is how it starts. we talked about how it ends. it turns very trumpy at the end with wording and phrasing that doesn't seem like chris, even capitalizing the word mother-in-law which is straight out of trump's social media posts style guide, so to speak. but it starts with chris wishing

the judge and his law clerked who he has talked about ad nauseam in fairly graphic ways, wishing them a happy new year and signing the email chris. there's an informality going on here in this proceeding because these people have lived with each other for weeks. also because it's a state court proceeding. none of this would ever be happening in the federal courts that harry and i have practiced in. there could be no email. there would be no dialogue like, signing things chris as opposed to respectfully christopher whatever his middle initial is. none of this would be happening in a federal court. we saw that yesterday when trump went to d.c. he could not transform the federal court complex in d.c. into his personal theater the way he's been able to turn 60 center street downtown into his constant -- >> you have the weather working against him. >> no, but it hasn't been allowed. there are no cameras there. there's no press conferences

there. and so this -- >> he can't step into the hallway. >> it's one of his last opportunities for some time to come because next week when the car roll trial comes, it would be much more akin to what happened yesterday than what we're expecting tomorrow. >> do you think he really wanted to testify? >> no. >> no, i think it was a stunt. you made a good point a moment ago just about the -- you know, who is he speaking to? he's going to enrage the judge by doing this. he's already lost this. they're not only reaching -- there's going to be an appeal of this, but he's speaking to the people in the bleachers. this is about his base, it is about fund-raising, all the things lisa mentioned. it is not about winning an argument. >> go back to something we said, you asked did he really want to testify. i'm not sure you were talking about the decision he made several weeks back not to testify in his own defense or whether we're talking about tomorrow when he wanted to participate in arguments. >> yes. >> okay. so the idea of a defendant or

any civil litigant participating in their own closing argument, if they're represented by council, we can both tell you, i've never seen that happen. and, indeed, in the email exchange, it's very clear that based on the case law no defendant or other party has a right to get up and offer their own closing arguments. you have to choose. you either have a lawyer or you go at it by yourself pro se. if you want to speak, it's solely at the judge's discretion. i cannot overstate how rare it would be for any litigant to get up in his or her own defense in a civil or a criminal litigation where they otherwise have competent counsel. i want to assure people, chris is competent counsel when left to his own devices. >> this has already been determined. the question really here is, what the penalty is and how much damage that does or doesn't do

to trump and his brand. >> right. that's really what we're talking about and that's really why donald trump is so upset. most of it it has settled and the attorney general was looking at penalties of $250 million. that's gone up to 370 million. it's going to be very painful for donald trump. we know i was part of that group, we looked at his finances, he doesn't have that sort of cash on hand. and there's a monitor that will be going -- already over his business and part of the reason that monitor is there to make sure there isn't a sale of assets in new york because he may eventually have to sell one or two of his major assets in the state just to pay that

penalty. it's a big deal. we're going to be looking a long time out because it's going to go up to appeals. that's the reality for him and that is why he's so angry. there is so much at stake for him and for his children. it's their inheritance. and his ability to do business in new york. it's not just the financial penalty. it's a huge deal for him. >> given all of that context from sue, trump's finances, they've been a so-called red line for him, going back to robert mueller's investigation. if they have a profound effect on trump's finances, are you worried about retribution should he win in 2024? do you think he would target people like the judge out of a sense of revenge. >> there's no one he won't target out of a sense of revenge.

think of a guy with a machine gun spraying everyone. but that comes with the territory. one point to add on the last point that sue said, we can really amplify because the proposed penalties include that he, trump, be barred permanently from any job in the real estate industry. he can't even send out a flier. and he couldn't be an officer or director in any company. he can't sell his stakes in new york. and the same thing for the trump boys for five years. so it's tantamount in addition to the huge price tag to something like a corporate death penalty which engoron has already in another way tried to fashion, but that will be up on appeal. this really does put him out of business and gets him where it hurts the most, his whole brand and supposed success. >> before we go, we mentioned that ruling on immunity for donald trump, if it comes down today, tomorrow, whenever.

would that have a material effect on these civil cases? >> no. >> nice and easy answer there. i go back to where we started which is this idea that the time line is closing in. we knew this moment was going to arrive. we knew all of these things were going to crash down on each other. here we are. for both of you, where do you think the crescendo is? >> you know, i continue to think that we've already gone past the crescendo, truthfully, that this is like a t.s. elliot poem, it's going to end not with a bang but a whimper. every time he appears in court, there are diminishing reports from him. his fund-raising has skyrocketed when he's been indicted. with each court appearance in that same case, he has to manufacture a new grievance to keep the grift going and it hasn't been as successful for him as it has been the first time. he has to keep coming up with

more stunt to get people like us in the seats, to get us talking. at some point, he's going to run out. it's going to sputter, you can see that and that the demonstrators that he's counting on being there haven't shown up. it is really -- to my mind, he's already sputtering. we're already past the crescendo. the crescendo may have been the indictments last summer. expect a new climb up the mountain, but it's a new mountain, not the one we're already on. >> i don't know where it is. but he's running the clock. that's what i keep watching. just time after time. he's just going to keep playing for time to see if he wins because if he doesn't, there's going to be a real reckoning. i just can't wait to see at the end of next year, by november what exactly has gotten to court and what hasn't. it's really become something to watch, just yesterday seeing it, now where is that going to go and what will the supreme court

hear. this is made for television stuff. and here we are. >> what a treat to have you with us and your reporting here in studio. thank you so much for getting us started. harry and lisa are sticking around. when we come back, just day's before e. jean carroll's case goes back to court, that judge setting rules about what the ex-president and his attorneys will be able to see. as nikki haley pulls ahead in the polls looking like a solid number two behind trump, no surprise that he, the front-runner, is going very low. we'll tell you what lies he's trying to spread now. and later in the show as donald trump fights to stay out of jail, his rhetoric has turned even more violent to how this latest fuel to the fire is being received. all of those stories and more when "deadline: white house" continues after this. do not go anywhere.

i don't know who the woman -- i don't know -- it's marla. >> you're saying marla is in this photo. >> that's marla. that's my wife. >> which one are you pointing to? >> here. >> the point you pointed to was e. jean carroll. >> whether or not donald trump can tell e. jean carroll apart from his various ex-wives, emg edge has left a mark on donald trump and more importantly on donald trump's wallet. viewers of this show know in may of last year, a jury found trump guilty of sexual abuse and definition to the tune of $5 million. that was the first e. jean

carroll trial. but next week, round two gets under way whe dald trump goes on trial for comments he made in 2019 when he said carroll accused him of raping her just to promote her memoir. but the question of whether he did it, it's settled. the judge determined that trump is liable for defamation and so this trial is primarily for damages. a new ruling say the material facts concerning the alleged sexual assault have already been determined and this trial will not be a do-over of the previous trial. he detailed all of the many, many, many things that are off limits for trump and his legal team to bring up in court. donald trump may not bring up e. jean carroll's choice of lawyers or her past romantic relationships or her sex life or her sexual orientation. he can't suggest or imply that he did not sexually abuse her.

can't even suggest or imply that e. jean carroll fabricated her account of the sexual abuse. he can't say he didn't lie about sexually assaulting ms. carroll. if you thought the first e. jean carroll trial was juicy, well, the sequel might be even juicier. joining us, joyce advance as well as harry and lisa. >> because trump was found liable for definition last year and because trump's statements that are at issue in the suit are the se as the one found in a trial, this will be about damages. there's no need toetermine whether trump defamed carroll

because a jury already did that. there should be no space for trump to raise his denials of the sexual abuse claim. the only question is, how much will his words cost him. is that the long and short of it and how is that answer reached? >> first of all, that is the long and short of it. as harry and joyce both know well. when two parties are engaged in a prior litigation together, they can be stopped from making contrary arguments to the verdict that was reached. so with respect to the damages, there are two types of damages, one is compensatory damages meant to compensate e. jean carroll for her injuries, the other is punitive. this trial is about statements that trump made when he was president. the last trial was about statements he made when he was no longer president and it was faster to trial because he didn't have the defense of i'm immune from lawsuit because i was president. when someone says something damaging about you, think about how much more costly it is the

first time it's uttered than it might be several years later. so the punitive damages that e. jean carroll is seeking here will be magnitudes larger. in addition, there is a legal doctrine that says punitive damages can increase based on the defendant. after the jury verdict in the last e. jean carroll trial, trump had that cnn town hall where he went on tv and repeated all of the same things that the judge has already ruled he can't say here. that he didn't know her. that he didn't have sex with her. that she wasn't his type. all of those things he said on tv in may of 2023 and then as recently as last week, he went on a tirade on his social media accounts and posted about her some multiple dozens of times saying the same thing. so you should expect robbie kaplan in her team to seek punitive damages here based on trump's lack of repentance, his

financial resources and to give him and others incentive to stop lying about e. jean carroll. >> and that brings us to the ultimate question. does any of this get him to stop? >> that is the question. because one of the problems that animates this lawsuit is that immediately after trump suffered the first $5 million judgment against him. he went on a cnn town hall the following night, repeated the comments and so now as lisa points out, robbie kaplan who is e. jean carroll's lawyer, will be able to go to this jury and say $5 million was not enough to keep him from doing it again and she will be able to ask this jury to penalize the former president in a mount of money designed to protect e. jean carroll in the future. >> all right, trump has tried, he has failed to wiggle out of this case. he tried to get this case delayed. he tried to argue he had immunity.

all of these attempts, they have failed. now we have this scathing new ruling from the judge about the things he cannot say in court or as the daily beast puts it, the judge signals trump is doomed in the new e. jean carroll trial. is that fair? >> i think so. kaplan is being awfully tough. he's trying to get it delayed asking most recently because melania's parent has died. he has been completely -- 32 social tweets in 30 minutes. i wonder what joyce and lisa think about this, sometimes roberta kaplan is a great lawyer, but she can maybe be pretty aggressive. the one holding of the "access hollywood" tape, he says it in 2005, the attack was in 1991, and then the defamation is in

2019. kaplan says it comes in for his state of mind. it's possible that that would be the thing that you win the battle and lose the war on. everything else is impeccable. that might be something that robbie kaplan comes to regret. i wonder how lisa and joyce feel about it? >> joyce? >> i think what harry is referencing is the possibility that any verdict that kaplan gets for e. jean carroll could be reversed on appeal. if a court was to find that it was unduly prejudicial to present this tape in evidence. harry makes a great argument. this happens years ago. i suspect where kaplan is headed with this is that she will argue that based on the date of the rape which preceded the "access hollywood" tape, the tape is a pretty good barometer of trump's attitudes towards women over a period of time and, of course, when you're looking at punitive damages, they are meant to

punish, not to compensate. and so part of what kaplan has a duty of establishing for this jury is whether or not trump, in fact, was acting in a way that was out of bounds when he made these repeated comments. i agree with harry, it's a dicey evidentiary call. i'm not sure she needs to go this far. given the amount of evidence at her disposal. we'll see whether she actually offers it to this jury. she has the ability to do that. that's how the judge has ruled. the strategic decision will be hers to make in the courtroom. >> lisa, i'm going to invite you to weigh in on this. as we're talking about just in the last spot, trump has made a habit of showing up in court, trying to collect both media attention and fund-raising dollars. his attorneys have dangled the possibility that he would testify in this case, your sense if that's real. >> i went to -- every day i think but one of the last e. jean carroll trial and donald trump threatened to show up repeatedly and he never once

entered the courthouse. he has since blamed that decision on his former lawyer who is no longer involved in his defense. i don't believe that donald trump will show up at this trial, particularly after the ruling that we're talking about. it doesn't really give him any room to testify about anything that would be helpful to him. given all the things that he can't say or talk about or argue about, the risk of him particularly given his impulse sievety of violating that order is high. and so i think it's unlikely that he'll come to the trial, maybe he comes for the first day for opening argument. i don't think he will testify. as to the ruling, i tend to agree with joyce here, that judge kaplan is trying to allow the plaintiff some latitude to establish that trump is a misogynist. he gives the dictionary definition in a footnote to reflect, that's the import of his state of mind, that this is

a lifelong misogynist who has been unrepentant and the jury is in their right to take that into consideration. i also agree that this could be dicey on appeal. we'll see what they do. >> thank you all so much for spending some time with us. coming up for us, donald trump questioning the eligibility of nikki haley's presidential run. it is a desperate and gross attack he has already used before. also a bit of irony too. that story is next. f irontoy o. that story is next are the greatt joy and our best hope for a better future. friends, they are the future. but did you know that millions of kids right here in our own backyard are facing hunger every day without healthy food? it's harder to grow, to thrive, to feel their best. the impact when children don't have enough to eat is tremendous because when you're hungry and your basic needs aren't being met, you cannot learn. that's why i'm here now, asking you to join me

in helping end child hunger in america. this is a problem we know how to solve, and we can do it better by supporting no kid hungry for just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month. you can help provide healthy meals like a good breakfast in class to power kids through their days. breakfast in the classroom contributes to kids being more focused, which leads to higher grades. test scores, and simply just their well-being. ensuring all kids get a good breakfast and other nutritious food is a beautiful thing. it's a game changer and you can help make it happen. when you join me in supporting no kid hungry today, that food is not just food. it's energy, health, confidence, hope and even love. yes, love. so please call now or go online to helpnokidhungry.org, right now. give $19 a month, only $0.63 a day.

and when you use your credit card, you'll get this special team t-shirt to show that you're helping kids build a brighter future for themselves. thank you. families are struggling to make ends meet. these are hard times, but together we can help connect america's kids with meals. so please call now or go online to give. thank you.

there is one thing you can count on when donald trump feels cornered, there's no limit to how low he will go. with nikki haley closing the gap on the former president in the latest poll out of new hampshire, trailing him by just seven points according to new polling, trump has resorted to an familiar and disgusting line of attack. nbc news reporting, quote, trump posted an article on his truth social account from a right-wing outlet that claimed nikki haley is ineligible to be president because her parents were not u.s. citizens when she was born. haley was born in south carolina and has lived in the u.s. her entire life. her parents were immigrants who became citizens after her birth in 1972. as we know, haley is not the first victim of trump's racist birtherism. she's the latest. trump has questioned the citizenship of former president

barack obama,ed cruz and vice president kamala harris. nikki haley joked back in 2016, it won't feel like i made it until donald trump demands to see my birth certificate. joining me at the table symone sanders townsend, the weekend kicks off in just a few days, saturdays and sundays at 8:00 a.m. >> yes. >> sir, it looks like nikki haley has made it. >> she made it. they like her. they really, really like her. you know, it's -- but what do you expect at this point? donald trump is looking at these numbers. i'm sure his internal pollings where firming that seven-point gap. other polls have the numbers larger. but i think the seven is closer to what's at stake. there are real efforts under way right now in the state of new hampshirely to get republicans to rally around haley.

trump sees that writing trying to be written on the wall for him to have a challenge in new hampshire. what is his go-to? she wasn't born here. she's other. she's not one of us. and that actually will have some resonance with some of trump's supporters who may begin to look at nikki a little bit differently than they did. not that they were ever aligned to go and support her outright to begin with because they were with trump. but what it does is it feeds the echo chamber, it starts the back talking, and then you see these stories popping up on right-wing media that will play further down the line. >> the irony is so rich, simone, given that we're currently having a national conversation about donald trump's own eligibility. certainly that has to play in. >> truly, the 14th amendment, we know it well at this point. i think what the chairman said about the polling is absolutely correct. and oftentimes in my experience when you get the polling like that and the candidate and

campaigns have decided they would like to attack, the kind of attack that you use also really matters. and i don't know necessarily know if this is the thing that donald trump should have hung his hat on here, but it's familiar to him, right? he said this about barack obama, it's the thing that launched his campaign on the back of, he said it about vice president come harris. this is in his playbook. i don't know if it's as effective. i'm from nebraska. there's racism all over this country and it definitely exists in the midwest and in new england and new hampshire as well. i don't know if this is the thing. it does, though, to me say that he believes that haley is a threat and i think nikki haley's campaign welcomes these kinds of attacks. she has not leaned into hher heritage by any means. it's not like she's been saying i'm -- it is not as though it's

something she's viewed as a strength. i just think it's -- she thought a long time ago or decided a long time ago that this is who -- that part of her identity she was not going to lean into or even ignore. she's not going to acknowledge it. >> we're talking about a tactic, though, that is not just ugly and hateful and lazy, it's dangerous. this is part of what we've seen from donald trump. not politically dangerous. i'm saying it fits into great replacement theory. it fits into this general grievance that america is supposed to look a certain way. if it doesn't, that is part of your discontent, sit with me. >> it feeds the beast that we did not kill during reconstruction. it feeds that beast. >> come on, now. >> this thing has been with us since we allowed the -- that element that wanted to break away from us because of issues -- an issue like slavery, because of slavery, and because

later on of how the country tried to reconcile itself with the very people that they had enslaved. that through line still exists. it's a modern day iteration of that through line. he's -- it started with obama, for sure, questioning his ability to be here, questioning birthright citizenship. yeah, okay, so her mama and daddy were immigrants but she was born here, right? >> he doesn't believe in birth rights. >> i think it's interesting. there's another piece that has been less reported on and that is this, donald trump is accusing nikki haley of being soft on terrorism. he's attacking haley for opposing his 2015 proposal to ban all muslims from coming to america. there's no mystery about what trump is doing. he has always distrusted muslims. he believes that some republicans share that feeling and he has n problem using it

against haley. in a party full of anti-muslim sentiment, she can't afford to make that point and so far she hasn't. it says something about the state of the party that that is where they find themselves. >> the state of the party. i just really think people are making a gross miscalculation. we talked about it before. the fact that these candidates have been unwilling to compete because campaigns are about a -- primaries -- >> thank you, thank you, come on. >> they've been unwilling to compete because they're scared of what they think donald trump is going to say about them or the maga base. the maga base is 30 or 40%. yes, those are people that will vote in a republican primary. but correct me if i'm wrong, that leaves about 60, 65% of people that want to hear something else. >> thank you. >> cheers. >> that's it right there. >> they're sticking with me. up next, with chris christie

not on tonight's debate stage, will the two remaining candidates finally hit back at donald trump. we're going to answer that question next. mp we're going to answer that question next. do you like that bone? i got a great price on it. did you see my tail when that chewy box showed up? oh, i saw it. my tail goes bonkers for treats at great prices. sorry about the vase. shop and get a $30 egift card through january 14th, at chewy. hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. shop and get a♪$30 egift card through january 14th, i don't ever want to go back to wearing a 4xl shirt or not being able to climb up stairs without taking a break. so i'm committed to golo for life. - "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.

that first time you take a step back. i made that. with your very own online store. i sold that. and you can manage it all in one place. i built this. and it was easy, with a partner that puts you first. godaddy.

♪ ♪ charlotte! charl! every day can be extraordinary with rich, creamy, delicious fage total yogurt. we are just hours away from tonight's republican primary debate in iowa. donald trump, once again, refusing to participate and no other candidates qualifying, it is down to a head-to-head matchup between nikki haley and

ron desantis. it is their last chance to make their case to voters before the caucuses this monday. let's bring into our conversation ali vitali live from des moines at tonight's debate. michael and simone are here as well. you got chris christie failing to qualify. can either one of the two candidates take on his role and attack trump head-on. >> reporter: not in the way that cristy has been doing it. the way we've seen haley and desantis go at trump is nibbling around the edges of the criticism of the former president. nikki haley has added to her speech this idea that chaos follows trump, saying the quiet part outloud, speaking to the obvious outgrowth of what it looks like to have trump in the white house and for ron desantis, he has been critical of the fact that trump has been a loser on the national stage, referencing both past midterm

elections during the trump white house era and going back even recently to 2022 when trump was still selecting his favored candidates in the states and watching those candidates sometimes fall to democratic rivals. those are the arguments that they've been making. but frankly, even as their competing against each other in second, their attacks are much sharp sharper for each other than they are for the former president. it comes down to the sort of delicate dance that every single candidate has had to do this entire time which is try to get trump voters to their cause without alienating them but somehow telling them they're the better candidate despite the fact that trump is front-runner. it's a firing squad that gets them nowhere and it's why we're watching another debate stage where trump is not on it and they're picking at each other even though it's not going to fail the front-runner at all. >> late last week, nikki haley said that she would potentially consider desantis as a vp pick. as you noted, donald trump is

leading overwhelming in the polls. do you think we're going to hear any of that on the debate stage tonight and has there been any talk about consolidation to try to blunt trump's lead if it's even possible? >> look, desantis shut down that float by haley very, very quickly, making clear he doesn't want to be anybody's vice president, let alone the former south carolina governor's. of course, everything is possible until it's completely not possible, if that makes sense. people always say no to being a vice presidential candidate while they are actively running and then, of course, the calculus changes after. when you talk about consolidation, though, the conversation is less about haley and desantis and more about what happens not in iowa, but in new hampshire where we're watching polls start to tighten between trump, of course still at the top of the pack, and haley sometimes polling within 8 or 10 points of him. it's the closest polling margin that we've seen in any of these early states, certainly

something that the haley team is keeping in mind, but the dynamics on the ground in new hampshire are also heavily influenced by the fact that chris christie is running there and frankly only there. he's centered his candidacy at going at and attacking trump as someone who should be disqualified from holding the white house again, but he's centered that message and campaign events on the granite state. the fact that chris christie is still in the race, it's something i hear all the time from strategists, donors, everyone saying there's a pressure campaign on chris christie right now to drop out of the race because if the goal is to make sure that trump is not elected and if the goal is to make sure that it can be somebody else, they feel he's standing in the way of the way haley's attempt to try to show that she can block trump's momentum and he does not have this air of inevitability. if she wins in new hampshire,

christie dropping out many believe would help that effort. our polling says voters see haley as the likely second choice. but right now christie remains in the race so it's a pressure campaign at this point. if there's any talk about consolidation, that's where the conversation is, because as all my sources say, haley has momentum, yes, but she's got to win a state somewhere, and it looks like the state she's likeliest to do it in could be new hampshire. >> we take ali vitali away from reporting and in that time, we're learning that chris christie will have a 5:00 p.m. event in windham, new hampshire, where, according to several sources including the associated press, he plans to make a major announcement. does your analysis square with what we just heard? >> absolutely. perhaps depending on what christie has to say, that pressure campaign will have worked. here's the rub, folks, nikki haley is losing her home state of south carolina to donald

trump. winning new hampshire, the thought is there will be a groundswell of support. say christie drops out, haley wins in new hampshire, the party has to be prepared for what comes next from donald trump. it will not be clean, pretty, or nice for nikki or any other republicans out there. this is what happens when you dance with the democrat. at some point, he'll step on your toes. other times, he'll take your legs out. this could be that moment where he's now stepping on her toes with what we were talking about before with the otherism. the next move will be taking the legs out, and the party has to be ready for that. >> we told ali vitali about that news and she went straight to her multiple phones to figure out what she missed. you had a question for her. >> my question was the focus on desantis and haley tonight.

meanwhile, donald trump is over at fox doing a town hall meeting. what's the vibe on the streets of iowa about that? and what are you hearing from the campaigns about how they intend to blunt that, if at all? >> reporter: she knows me well. i have my phones here. the first thing i did is pick them up because we have that news that governor chris christie, the former governor of new jersey, will suspend his long shot presidential bid during an event that's coming up at some point in the next ten or so minutes, so that could have serious impact on the dynamics in new hampshire. i think it's also important to note that, while he might be leaving the race, he is not going to be, at least as far as our reporting goes, making any kind of endorsement now. i think some people thought that maybe he could endorse someone like nikki haley, a fellow former governor, who he had a lot of overlap with, while he was the held of the republican governor's association. they served as governors during

the same time. so, they have a close relationship. but you watch the way, for example, that he has talked about her on the campaign trail, even just this morning saying something to the effect that she says things nicely but doesn't actually take positions on things. so, christie, even on his way out the door, still attacking the people who could be heir apearns to trump and who are attempting to be the trump alternative here. i think when you talk about the desantis narrative on this debate stage, michael, desantis needs to continue to make the case that he can win iowa despite the fact that the polls here show that that's likely not to happen. you talk to voters here on the ground, and the assumption really is that this is trump's state to lose. for desantis, he had made the promise early on, iowa suz going to be his key springboard to the rest of the early states. he went all in here, all of the cash, all of the resources, all the people on the ground, doing the grassroots motivating, and it doesn't seem to have turned into the first-place finish he's

hoping for. of course, we all live for caucus nights and election nights, because that's when the voters actually say what they're going to do. but for desantis, this is viewed by my sources at his attempt at a land stand for for haley, it's her attempt to use second place as a springboard into new hampshire. this chris christie news changes the dynamics on the ground there, especially independent voters who can vote in this republican primary if they're unaffiliated. that's going to be important to the way that haley mounts her turnout operation. of course she has the group on the ground doing all of that grassroots and door knocking, sort of supplementing the work her campaign is already doing. that will be critically important. one final point here, although it is a real disservice to voters that trump is not on a debate stage airing his ideas and defending his time in office for them to sort of assess his candidacy now, politically i think the decision looks smart because it allows him to

continue to stay above the fray. the fact that desantis and haley will be in a slugfest tonight and trump will be able to continue to float above it on fox news for a friendly interview really tells you everything about this primary and the way that even voters seem to be looking at. even if they want someone else, most of the republicans i've spoke tonno at the end of the day they're still going to come home to the republican party even if it's trump. >> michael, less than a minute left. you alluded to something i want to pull the carpet back on, which is the party infrastructure in new hampshire trying to pressure christie to drop out. >> it's an important aspect of this. people are saying if christie is out, to the point simone made earlier, that support will go to nikki. what i think will be important to watch after this moment is what they do -- whether they capture that 70% that's out there. they can do that and create that sort of momentum downstream going into south carolina and

nevada, but a 50-point lead, you know -- >> the role chris christie has played in this primary is very important. and history should record that his role was very important and what he said about donald trump. and i hope people do not forget that. >> ali vitali, thank you so much for your reporting. i am sending you a pair of hand warmers. michael steele, symone sanders thompson, thank you both. if you want to see more of the three of us together, you are in luck. we are teaming up for a brand-new morning show, "the weekend," airing every saturday and sunday premiering this weekend, 8:00 a.m. eastern. tonight we're hosting a youtube live 2024 kickoff at 6:00 p.m. yes, they keep us busy. we'll be answering all of your pressing political questions live. check it out and youtube.com/msnbc. we'll see you again tonight at midnight.

in the next hour of "deadline: white house," we'll be watching new hampshire for that expected chris christie announcement. nt

your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire at bombas, we're obsessed with socks. tees. and underwear. because your basic things should be your best things. one purchased equals one donated. visit bombas.com and get 20% off your first order. ♪ you were always so dedicated... ♪ we worked hard to build up the shop, save for college and our retirement. but we got there, thanks to our advisor and vanguard. now i see who all that hard work was for... it was always for you. seeing you carry on our legacy— i'm so proud. at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner.

setting up the future for the ones you love. that's the value of ownership.

it is 5:00 in new york. we are currently monitoring the 5:00 p.m. event for chris christie as he reported in the last hour he will suspend his candidacy in the 2024 presidential race. meanwhile, a topic that has been top of mind and that is political violence. easy to denounce, right? in a democracy, we speak with our votes and voices, not with fighting and aggression. that fact is apparently to everyone. the gop does not denounce it and indeed reveled it. he used it as a threat should he face prosecution over one of his dimes. take a listen to donald trump in

the federal election subversion case. >> there will be bedlam in the country. it's a very bad thing. it's very bad precedent. as we said, it's the opening of a pandora's box, and that's a very sad thing that's happened where this whole situation, when they talk about threat to democracy, that's your real threat to democracy. >> he walked out the door just as a follow-up question was shouted. >> you used the word bedlam. will tell yao tell your supporters now, no matter what, no violence? >> as we have been discussing on this program for a while, this is not just theoretical violence. weaw people lose their lives on january 6th and in its aftermath. election workers have faced barrages of death threats that have driven them from their jobs. just recently, there's been an uptick in swatting incidents, calls for emergency services to made-up issues for law enforcement. "the washington post" noted, some of t right have been

affected, and many targets share a common attribute. they have done or said something that has earned trump's ire. two major targets of that ire, special counsel jack smith and judge tanya chutkan, overseeing trump's election interference case. when it comes to smith, the threats and vitriol against him have reached such a pitch that nearly a third of his investigation expenses go to security. political reports between april and september of last year, the justice department spent more than $14.6 million on smith's work. according to a spending report released friday, more than $4.4 million of that money covered the u.s. marshals service, which provides security for smith and his team. that is where we start this hour with writer from the bulwark tim miller, plus former assistant director for counterintelligence at the fbi, frank figliuzzi, and

the co-host of msnbc's "prosecuting donald trump" podcast, mary mccord is back. speak to trump's words, about there will be bedlam. he is only adding fuel to the fire. he knows what he's doing. >> we're having flashbacks back to january 6th. things will be wild -- be there. it's happening again. this is not random. it is an all-out effort to intimidate anyone he views as a threat to his power and campaign, and people are heeding the call. the rise in swatting incidents, in bomb threats is not something that's just the work of a lone actor here or there or copycats here or there. it's people heeding the call. what i've learned from law enforcement is there's enough commonalities, particularly in

swatting incidents, to believe pool are similar in origin. i'm hoping soon that law enforcement will bring to justice or at least identify the people responsible. but there's a much larger picture here. every time one of these threats is issued, our democracy is eroded again, our constitution is weakened. what do i mean by that? i mean these threats are coming out for people who speak out and exercise their constitutional rights. you can't claim to be for the constitution and then attempt to intimidate people who are exercising free speech and freedom of assembly. you can't to be for the rule of law and for the police when you're trying to intimidate a judge or jack smith. a judge isn't going to table a case. a prosecutor is not going to dismiss an investigation just because you're trying to threaten them. that's what's going on here. it's an attempt to intimidate people who speak out freely and exercise constitutional rights. a beginning of a tough year.

>> to that point, mary, there's reporting on how 5,000 rounds of ammunition were found in the house of a man in arizona who was arrested on charges over threatening to kill fbi agents. also in his home, three firearms including an ar-15 and body armor. talk about it just takes one person to get inspired from the violent rhetoric for something terrible to potentially happen. >> that's right. we've seen it over and over again, online threats, the heightened polarization, offline threats, as well, swaufting incidents, and importantly, disinformation. let me just say and lies about people and about processes including our election systems. these things result in real-world violence, right? after the mar-a-lago search warrant was executed, we had an attack on a cincinnati fbi. each one of the judges you mentioned, prosecutors in all of

the cases involving mr. trump have been threatened. it just takes one, as you say, to carry out a threat, and in this country, you know, we have got to realize that firearms are ubiquitous, including assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines which are used in mass shootings. we've had, in addition to the targeting of individuals we've been talking about, we've had multiple bomb threats against statehouses across the country. last march, multiple bomb threats in the course of one week against schools, not just colleges and universities but even middle schools, elementary schools. we have had shootings before and school shootings occurring on a regular basis. the easy access to weapons is part of also what makes people intimidated by these threats, because no one knows if they're threatened online if someone is going to show up at their house

and carry out that threat. people will travel to carry out threats. people came to the u.s. capitol on january 6th from the entire country to engage in acts of political violence. even those who didn't intend to attack the capitol still came to protest an election because they'd been lied to about that election, lied to by mr. trump and those around him claiming there was fraud in the election. like frank said, i feel like we are watching the same movie again. he's starting early this time, nearly a year before the election, seething already. and even a year before the election. he's saying there will be fraud, he's not prepared to accept the results, and these prosecutions, if not halted by the courts, will result in bedlam.

it's like frank. be there, be wild. it's calling on his supporters to do something. too frequently over the last six, seven years, they have done something. >> president biden said you can't be proinsurrectionist and pro american. that seems like a pretty simple dichotomy. >> yes, absolutely right. >> sorry. >> no, it does. i'm happy to see that the biden campaign, president biden has been out there aggressively prosecuting that case. i think looking that the with a political hat on, you know, there's some who have argued that pro-democracy is a little too ephemeral of a topic and that, you know, some kitchen-table issues, and i don't think that's true. that didn't bear out in the midterms. i think when it comes to the threats to our democracy, president biden has been strong on this. also political violence affects everybody.

this was not common in the country since the early '70s and '80s. we went through a period this was not top of mind with exceptions. now day in and day out, the threats for domestic political violence. didn't mention another story this week, roger stone audio, the media reported, roger stone threatening that working with a police officer, threatening allegedly and threatening to assassinate members of congress. roger stone worked with the proud boys, we know. these are people that are with close ties to trump. i think these threats are real, and i think everything that mary and frank have said about the reasons to take them seriously are accurate. i also think from a political standpoint, you know, president biden carrying that message and

saying look at what is happening on the other side, look at how un-american it is, is something that is hopefully going to be as successful as it was in 2020 and 2022. >> frank, you had former fbi director james comey with an op-ed in "the washington post" talking about this heightened threat environment. he says, "i think we have a much bigger problem with threats of violence than actual violence. public officials at all levels regularly receive threats by email, mail, social media, or quaintly, even voi mail. but i know from professional and unfortunately personal experience that people mostly tend to threaten bau they want to live rent free in your head, impacting the way you live, even if they never come near you. it's a difficult thing to ask of frightened poll workers, school board members or judges, but they must find a way to take prudent precautions and lot let them own you. as a country, we need to strike

the same balance by refusing to let our imaginations give threats power over our life. we must not let the idea of trumpian violence be a boogeyman." i think that is an idea that i understand in theory. i think in practice, especially if you are a private person, not a public person, if you're a poll worker, if what you signed up for was to be just a part of baseline democracy, it's a pretty tall order to say don't let them get to your head. >> yeah. crossing your fingers and hoping this last threat isn't real is interesting, but it doesn't work for most people. the biggest takeaway from what comey is trying to say sh i believe, is this -- if we succumb to the threats and intimidation, the only people left to take these positions, election workers, prosecutors, fbi agents, will be people who don't fear threats because they're on the side doing the

threats. so, that's the concern that we can't walk away from our responsibilities as citizens or our profepgss because of threat and intimidation. the problem, of course, is law enforcement is being tied up endlessly these days with response to these threats, and they must take each one as a viable threat, lest they show up and someone is dead because they didn't take it seriously. my biggest concern, and i hope i'm wrong, is that inevitably somebody is going to get hurt. the fbi and law enforcement cannot every single time get out in front of the threat and stop it before it happens. it's a numbers game. so far they've been successful. sadly, we have to spend over $4 million to simply surround a prosecutor and his family with 24/7 security? that's the world we live in? but they can't do that for everybody at all times. >> i'm glad you landed there. i'm struck by that number, the justice department spending $14.6 million on smith's work, about a third of that

investigation expenses going to security. that is not an efficient use of government funds, right? and it is very clear why it is necessary, but it also, as with many of the things that surround donald trump, get to this idea of making just basic governance harder. you shouldn't need to spend that kind of money needing to protect a prosecutor. >> you would think the conservatives, for example, that are worried about excess government spending, would be upset about this, but you don't hear anything about that from the supposed fiscal kefb conservatives on the republican side because they need to stay in donald trump's good graces. what came to me, this feels like the kind of protection a prosecutor should have for a mob. a prosecutor that's doing, you know, a mob prosecution. in a lot of way, he kind of is. like a rico case in georgia. that's pretty alarming when you think about it like that, that

prosecutors who are prosecuting donald trump need to be treated the same way a prosecutor would somebody that has mob violence at their disposal. one other thing to add on the jim comey op-ed, because i thought his points were interesting on moving forward, i wish that comey had specifically called out republican congress people. you do here a lot of republican congress people using these threats and the fear of threats from their own voters as a reason to act cowardly. and i do think that it's interesting that they get to use these threats as an excuse and meanwhile, you know, people that have far less privilege, far less access to security, poll workers, et cetera, they don't have that same ability, right. they're out there doing the work of the government without fear or favor. i think, you know, jim comey's message is one that needs to be

heard in congress, republican members of congress. >> tim miller, you are split screen with an event in windham, new hampshire. we are expectinger governor of new jersey chris christie that he'll suspend his presidential campaign. what are you looking for in these remarks? >> i don't think we'll except that chris christie is going to endorse nikki haley, but i think it will be something that i would look to in the next two weeks, is he going to swallow his pride and criticisms with nikki haley to help someone that has the most conceivable chance to defeat trump even though that's a very, very outside chance at this point. i think that's something people will be watching. i'm looking for hints of chris christie talking to gettable republican voters about donald trump and about how they should look at the general election. i think chris christie could conceivably be an important messenger for joe biden.

i don't know if he'd ever endorse him. but maybe he can speak to the gettable soft republicans, a small number of people, honestly, but the 2%, 3%, 4% of people in the swing states that have been traditionally republicans that don't like donald trump that don't want somebody that's borderline constitutionally ineligible to be the president. can chris christie carry a message that will land with them in the speech about just how unfit donald trump is and how that is the rationale for his decision today and for his candidacy. i hope he can do that effectively. >> tim, what do you think about the time og of this? why today? does it have anything to do with the debate tonight? >> my sense is he's been getting pressure. i think there are a lot of people in christie's ear of good faith. i think it's been a judgment call, right? do you keep him in because he's been the one person speaking truth, or is the right thing to

do if the highest and best purpose is to do anything to stop donald trump to get out and get someone that could conceivably beat trump. it would be better to have his voice in the race, but my guess is that a lot of folks in that world and people and friend he trusts have been kind of nudging him towards this now at a time where, you know, you don't want people to -- if you were going to do it before new hampshire, you don't want people who are going to vote early or vote by mail to throw their vote away. >> i want to bring in nbc correspondent ali vitali. i haven't seen you in about 15 minutes. what have your two phones told you in that time? >> reporter: too long for us to be apart. it's good because i was able to get on the chris christie campaign's official live stream for his event. it hasn't started, but that doesn't mean he is not talking. in fact, as our team was

listening to the beginning of the live stream, it appears there was some kind of a hot mic moment where he was talking about the impact of getting him out of the race and what that impact could be on the other contenders. this is in the last few minutes. we overheard that christie said desantis called him, in christie's words, petrified. and another brief hot mic moment, christie said, you and i both know it, she's not up to this, referencing nikki haley. at another point, he said she was still 20 or points down from donald trump in states like new hampshire. if we had any question about what our sources were saying to us about christie not being expected to endorse, certainly that seems to underscore if not likely he'll go in for any of his opponents at this stage. that's notable. we'll see if he's as candid as

he was during our hot mic moment that our team listened to in real time. if you think about the political ramifications of this, which are equally as important, if not as juicy as us listening to the candidates talk about each other, the political implications are much like 15 minutes ago, christie dropping out is why many of my haley sources are feeling like they have a little extra pem in our step. this is good news for them, because not only is the field winnowing, but our polling data shows that corpus christiie dropping out does benefit people not named trump. the trump team would push back on that, but look at the numbers and the data, tim miller knows new hampshire well, the role of independents will be important in new hampshire and they don't typically have the knee-jerk reaction of just backing trump. i think the other part of your conversation is why do this now?

i'm not sure i understand the political thinking around why you should do this on a day like today as opposed to once you see the results in new hampshire and once you see who's strong, who's not, can you have an impact as it gets closer in the granite state. i would love to hear from michael or simone who could explain the logic. but when you think about the role that christie as played in this race, he's been the only one willing to stand up if quite unpopular fashion within his party and say, hey, donald trump should be disqualiied from being president again because of things like january 6th, which are fundamentally anti-small-d democratic and what it means to be an american and disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. he's been unequivocal. it's a shift because he ep dorsed trump in 2015. he helped him prepare for things

like the debate, even got covid during debate prep with the former president in the lead-up to one of the 2020 general election debates. it was a serious about-face but a moment where the call was coming from inside the house, a former trump ally running a campaign steeped in saying this man is not fit for office again. when we write the story of what 2024 looks like, it seems at this point the assumption is that trump will be the nominee again. but i think it's important for us to note that there are people trying to stand in the rift and try to show the party there are other alternatives. not just liz cheney anymore. >> we are waiting for chris christie to take the stage at an event in new hampshire where he is largely expected to announce he is dropping out. i want to bring in the co-host

of "the weekend," simone and michael. your eyes went big when you heard there was a hot-mic moment. >> i could not believe it. this is the most important speech that chris christie is going to give in the lead-up before voters start voting. and to have his speech mired by internal conversations where he -- it looks as though the governor is about to take the stage -- but internal conversations, that's punditry. i know him very well. he speaks truth. what he was saying on that hot microphone he truly believed. i don't think he meant for the world to hear those conversations. >> answer the question about why now. >> why now is he's got leverage going into a very important race in iowa, and more importantly in new hampshire. he can be a player in nikki haley's world in a way he otherwise would not be as a

candidate. so, there are any number of combinations of thinking around how does christie position himself in a race he knows he won't win to still be an effective player in that race and to have a role to play. >> he greeted the crowd. i'll be quiet because he's speaking. >> all right. happy to be here. thanks for coming. we're having better weather than yesterday. we were in rochester yesterday, and it was snowing, like real new hampshire snow. it was good to experience that. thanks for coming tonight. i appreciate you being here, appreciate your support. you know, we start these town halls the same way ever since we were up at st. anselms in june to tell you why, why we're in this race. and we're in this race to tell the truth. from the beginning, we've been

in this race to tell the truth. the fact is, as we were watching this race come together from where mary pat and i were sitting at home in new jersey, we were really concerned that nobody would tell the truth in this race about what's really at stake and that no one would tell the truth about donald trump, no one would tell the truth about his divisiveness, his stoking of anger for his own benefit, him putting himself before the people of this country, myself included, who gave him the honor of being president of the united states from 2017 to 2021. personal ambition is a necessary element for any political candidate. your've got to get out of bed in the morning and believe in your heart that you have something to offer the folks that's better

and different. so, i have no argument with people who are involved in politics being ambitious. you need to have it. but it can't be what governs your decisionmaking. ambition can't be what makes you decide how to do things as a public figure. it can just be the fuel that gets you out of bed, that gets you in front of a room like this, that gets you on the phone raising money, that gets you working for people who you believe in and gets you working for yourself. i made a political decision eight years ago when i dropped out of the race in 2016. i looked at the polls, and i decided that donald trump was going to be the nominee, and that, since i'd known him for 15 years, that i could make him a better candidate, if he won,

maybe a better president. i knew his flaws, but i also knew he was going to win the nomination, so i decided that i would get behind him and support him. i let the ambition get ahead and be in control of the decisionmaking. and after i figured that out, i promised myself and i promised many i -- my wife that i would never, ever do that again. and i'm not going to. so, for all the people who have been in this race, who have put their own personal ambition ahead of what's right, they will ultimately have to answer the same questions that i had to answer after my decision in 2016. those questions don't ever leave. the facts are really stubborn. they stay. and so i know how i'm

answering those questions. i never believed that donald trump was a forgone conclusion as a nominee in this race, and i knew that the case had to be made against him. now, there are people in our party who are resigned to the fact that he was going to be the nominee, resigned to the fact that the case didn't even need to be made because it would be a waste of time. they sat on the sidelines. and automatic they did was voice their opposition in private, behind closed doors, quietly, so no one could hear. and that's not leadership, everybody. that's cowardice. it's cowardice, and it's hypocrisy. as a party, we need to be willing to take the responsibility for the part we've played in getting here. our country is angry.

it's divided. it's accomplishing little. and it is leading our citizens to be exhausted. an you just look at what's happening just in the last few days. good people who got into politics i believe for the right reasons, people like senator john barrasso, people like congressman tom emmer, stand up and endorse donald trump. they know better. i know they know better. people who continue to deny the results of the 2020 election. people in leadership in the house who go on tv and say that the people who attacked the capitol on january 6th are hostages.

i'll tell you who hostages are. the israelis who are still being hidden in tunnels in gaza against their will out of no fault of their own. these people speak louder for the folks who attacked our capitol on january 6th than they are willing to stand up and speak for the people of israel who are in tunnels in gaza. that's not leadership. that's ambition and cowardice, which has outstripped their otherwise good judgment. we want to change the party, and if we want to change this country, it's hard work. it's not easy. from the moment i got into the race, the decision that i made was really simple. i would rather lose by telling the truth than lie in order to win.

and i feel no differently today because this is a fight for the soul of our party and the soul of our country. why have we resisted the calls to drop out of this race? because, unlike some of the other candidates, we're fighting for something bigger than ourselves. we're fighting for something bigger than self-interest. we're fighting for something bigger than the next title. i've got plenty of titles. i've got enough title tolles last me the rest of my life. u.s. attorney, governor, husband, father, son, brother. i have enough titles to last me for the rest of my life. we are fighting for something bigger. but it's something that conventional wisdom thinkers can't possibly understand. and so, they've been saying for weeks and weeks and weeks

because of polls i should drop out of the race, that i should get out for that reason. the smallness of the campaigns who spend more time arguing and worrying about who should get out of the race than they have spent going after the front-runner. they spend all their time saying, oh, christie should get out, scott should get out, pence should get out, hutchinson should get out, bergen should get out. they and their donors have a different target every day to try to minimize the attention to their own campaign, how their own campaign is a campaign that doesn't play to win. it's a campaign that plays to not offend.

problems in our country, the divisions and influx at our border, the problems with our enormous debt, the failures of our education system. all of those things and much more will not be solved by people who are too afraid to talk about what the real problems are. if we ever have a hope of restoring this party to be a governing party of principles, we have to be willing to do the hard work and take some of the heat that comes with it. we have candidates in this race who have run away from forums where they were afraid they were going to be booed. i run into the forums where i know i'm going to be booed because being booed for telling the truth is a badge of honor. i'm proud of everything we've

said and done so far. and i'm proud of all the people who have supported us and are willing to do what needs to be done to restore the soul of our country. in the end, all these issues we've talked about at all the town halls, they're all really important. but they're no more important than the most important issue. and that is the character of the candidate. you don't know what's going to come across the next president's desk. you think you can predict it, but you can't. no one asked george w. bush or al gore what they would do if four airliners were hijacked and flown into symbols of american power and killing thousands of americans. no one asked them that in new hampshire in 2000. but i was glad we had a man of character sitting behind the december income the oval office

when that attack came, because i knew george bush would do everything he needed to do to protect people of this country and put them first and not himself. imagine if 9/11 had happened with donald trump behind the desk. the first thing he would have done is run to the bunker to protect himself. he would have put himself first before this country. and anyone who is unwilling to say that he is unfit to be president of the united states is unfit themselves to be president of the united states. campaigns are run to win. that's why we do them. i see the chairman here in new hampshire. he knows. we run campaigns to win. my goal has never been to be just a voice against the hate and the division and the selfishness of what our party

has become under donald trump. it's also been a win the nomination and defeat joe biden and restore our country to a new place of hope and optimism in this country. i've always said there came a point in time in this race where i couldn't see a path to accomplishing that goal, that i would get out. and it's clear to me tonight that there isn't a path for me to win the nomination, which is why i'm suspending my campaign tonight for president of the united states. i know, and i can see it from some of the faces here, that i'm disappointing some people by doing this. people who believe in our message and what we've been doing. i also know, though, it's the right thing for me to do. i want to promise you this -- i am going to make sure that in no

way do i enable donald trump to ever be president of the united states again. and that's more important than my own personal ambition. [ applause ] so, we have to decide now, we have to decide in the next ten months who do we want to be as a country. we forget that people are walking thousands of miles still to get here. we talk about the problems in the border, and there are problems, and we have to fix them and we have to secure our border and do it in a way that's

smart and sensible and will work, because it's not right to have a porous southern border in this country. but i want you to remember something. those people who are coming over that border, many of them are walking hundreds if not thousands of miles to get there because here the where they see hope. here is where they see freedom. here is where they see success. here is where they see that flag, which means for them, thousands of miles away in other countries, all of those principles. we are still the indispensable nation to the rest of the world. we need to be the indispensable nation once again to each other. we need to believe in america as much as they believe in america.

right now, they believe in america in a way that this country, angry, divided, with selfish leadership who puts their own ambition first, isn't doing for our country anymore. we need to change that. and every election is an opportunity to change it. we have people in this race, all they will do is tell you how bad everything is, how angry we should be, and there's certainly sufficient reason for anger at the failures of the leaders we have selected. but they're doing it not for that reason. it's not a moment of honesty and transparency. believe me. it's not. it's because they believe, when we get angry, what we'll do is

naturally relate to the angriest voice in the room. donald trump wants you to be angry every day because he's angry. he wants you to be angry so that you'll relate to his anger and then to vote for him. please understand this. i have known him well for 22 years, more than anybody else in this race as known him. and i can promise you this. if you put him back behind the desk in the oval office and a choice comes and a decision is needed to be made as to whether he puts himself first or he puts you first, how much more evidence do you need that he will pick himself? and if that is what we have

there, then people are going to remain angry, remain divided, and become even more exhausted than they are today. the country that i think we should choose is the country that recognizes that our differences have always been our strength, not a weakness, not something to divide us and anger us, but our differences have been our strength. we've come from different countries at different times to different places with different skills with different religions. and yet only here can those people become an american. then go to germany and become a german. go to great britain and become british. but you can come here and become an american, a real part of this country. the moment we become a place

where people no longer want to come in search of a better, freer, stronger nation, that will be a real problem that will be harder to solve. we back our allies around the world. they shouldn't have to think twice about having america's support. yet we have petty politics interfering with supporting freedom fighters in ukraine. we have petty politics interfering with defending our friends in israel. we have petty politics interfering with making sure taiwan is armed to fight off the chinese. they use the border as an excuse not to do those things. how about we have a country where we can do all those things because leadership aspires to something greater, not to appealing to the lowest common denominator. that's what the leadership of

the last decade and a half in the white house has done, including the current president. we need a country that once again feels like everyone has a stake in what we're doing, that we bring people together. and it's hard. it's hard to do that. i did it for eight years in new jersey, in a democratic state with a republican governor. and it's hard because we have real disagreements, but those disagreements are small compared to the things we have in common. but it takes effort. we have to work at it. we have to believe that the other person has a rightful place in our country. we have to believe that whether we agree with them or not, they got elected too. and they have a right to have a voice and to be heard and to have a vote and to have it count. this race has always been bigger

than me. it's bigger than any one person if you do it the right way. i tried to change conversation in this race. i tried to force a conversation in this race. a conversation about the real thing that's going on here. i stood on those debate stages, every one of them, the pundits in the media and the professional politicians who work for other campaigns said i wasn't going to make any of them, right. before every debate, christie won't make this one, won't make this one. i made every one of them. but when i stood on there, i watched the other candidates arguing with each other as if the race was between us, pretending as if the guy who's in front and wasn't there wasn't to be spoken about, like in the

harry potter books, he who shall not be named, because bringing up his name would make him appear with his magical mystical powers to end their political careers. so they say ridiculous things, make ridiculous points. and let me tell you, if donald trump becomes the nominee of this party, the moment that it happened was when nikki haley and ron desantis and tim scott and mike pence and doug bergen, and ramaswamy today on that stage in milwaukee in august. when we were asked would you support someone who was a convicted felon to be president of the united states, they raised their hands.

give ron credit, he had to look at everybody else first. to see if he wanted to raise his hand. but then he raised his hand. kind of like cheating off somebody's paper in high school. they raised their hands. and i did not. and will not. and i cannot countenance that behavior. i want you to imagine for a second that jefferson and hamilton and adams and washington and franklin were sitting here tonight. do you think they could imagine that the country they risked their lives to create would actually be having a conversation about whether a convicted criminal should be president of the united states? i can't tell you how many people in new hampshire have asked me, why isn't there a law against that? the answer is because nobody ever thought that someone would

have the audacity to run for president as a criminal, and they never thought that any american electorate would actually support him. it's not their fault that they didn't put it in the constitution along with 35 years old and a natural-born american citizen. they didn't think, let's throw in here, and not a criminal. they thought maybe we'd get that part. we're going to show them now whether we do or we don't in the next ten months. do we get it or don't we? i'm out here saying what i'm saying for the last eight months because i didn't want to take the chance that you might not get it. i wanted to be the voice that was telling you this is

unacceptable. we deserve better. and now there are some people who want the courts to save us. it's not up to the courts to save us. i remember what benjamin franklin said. i'm sure many of you do too. when he was walking down the street in philadelphia after the constitutional convention and a woman approached hill on the street and said, mr. franklin, what kind of government did you give us? and he said to the woman, "a republic, if you can keep it." benjamin franklin's words were never more relevant in america right now. the last time they were this relevant was the civil war, which of course we know was caused by slavery. . in laughter ] the last time those words were

that relevant back in those days, and now we are confronted 160 years later with that question again. a republic, if we can keep it. it's up to you. i've been running ads all over new hampshire ending it, saying, "it's up to you." and it is. it's not up to me. i've done everything i can. and it's not about me. every candidate, some have made it about them. it's okay. but you forget that the privilege to serve a public office is not about you but about the people who give you the privilege. then you lose your way. >> with that, former new jersey governor chris christie dropping out of the 2024 race, not endorsing either of his main two

rivals and warning of the danger of a second trump term. simone, who was this speech for? >> a couple of things. the speech was for republicans, moderate republicans, i would argue, who don't like the vitriol from trump, people who don't like the chaos, but maybe they like the policies. right? i also think this speech was maybe for the biden campaign. if i know joe biden like i know him, i'm sure chris christie will have a phone call from him when he gets off of that stage. he used language saying this is a battle for the soul of this country. he qualified himself in this conversation and noted that eight years ago he endorsed donald trump because of personal ambition. he thought he could make him a better candidate, perhaps make him a endorsed donald trump because of personal ambition. he thought he could make him a better candidate. perhaps a better president. he says that he in his speech talked about how he's proud of that decision and said he would never let ambition control his

decision-making again. that'll also spoke to a couple democrats who say, i hear what chris christie was saying. he was with trump before and i do believe this was the first time we've heard him so clear say that. joe biden won with a particular coalition. it was a biden coalition. that included base democratic voters, progressives with whom are on the other side of the president for a number of things. the president was saying, he's the most progressive president ever. they are still not necessarily with him but they voted for him and got in on the coalition. independent voters and moderate republicans. cindy mccain was out there. and as the chairman knows all too well, the campaign made a concerted effort as an adviser. a concerted effort to court that bloc. chris christie, i wouldn't be surprised if you saw him at the democratic national convention in chicago this summer. >> the fact that you have him saying, if you're not willing to say donald trump is unfit to be

president, then you yourself are unfit to be president. there was a lot of buzz around whether or not he would endorse nikki haley. >> he can't now because he set the bar. he set the standard if you can't say this guy is unfit, then you're unfit. now that's a question of the two remaining candidates against donald trump. do you think donald trump is unfit to serve as president of the united states? yes or no answer. you can't deflect that way. what i was struck by in this moment was that was the chris christie that sat in my office when i was national chair and we talked about his race for becoming the governor of new jersey. what it would take for him to get into that race. >> 2009? >> 2009. those same qualities, those same attributes of leadership, definition of vision and understanding the moment in front of him. that's what you heard here.

i was very struck that, okay, let's all rally to do the primary thing. this was a general election conversation he's starting to have with the country. you're right. if the biden team was smart, some would say mr. president, i've got him on the line for you. that is what it will take that coalition, and christie in my view, particularly for those of us who took that risk, that leap in 2020, i think he may be prepared to do that in this cycle. we'll see. i don't want to get ahead in the conversation. this is his moment to set that stage. it's an important one for him and an important one for this campaign going forward. >> watching along with us, our friends tim miller, special correspondent at "vanity fair." also, nbc news correspondent ally vitali. what did you learn watching that speech? >> well, this was certainly a

scorched earth way to leave the race. especially when you look at the way he spoke about the former president donald trump. really blistering criticism that we've heard from christie before but certainly septembering the fact that he views him as innately selfish. that trump would go hide in a bunker on a 9/11 style moment if he were present at a time of crisis is truly damning and sets an indelible image for the way christie wants his fellow republicans to look at this moment and this election, but also speaks to the very reason of why christie ran in the first place. i think it is important to underscore, even though christie is telling folks, do not vote for donald trump, he's certainly not necessarily making a case for biden there either. and christie himself has reiterated over the course of the campaign that he doesn't, at this point, see himself voting for joe biden. we all know that things change in politics. one of the things that really

set the tone for this speech is what was happening on a hot mic if he were watching the live stream like we were, before the speech even started. christie during that hot mic moment appeared to be talking about his rivals, nikki haley and ron desantis. we know from that hot mic that he spoke to desantis at some point today. the desantis team now confirming that to those of us here who cover desantis at nbc news. the fact that they spoke, christie described that call as desantis being petrified. but our desantis team at nbc saying they spoke to a source familiar with that call and that christie in this source's words, went after haley pretty hard on the call, calling her a joke, saying she has performed terribly, that she's not up to the task. that might have been what he said on the call with ron desantis, according to this source, but it's partly what he with heard christie talking about on the hot mic before he got on that stage. certainly, the fact that he was making digs at haley on the phone with apparently ron

desantis or hafr he was talking to backstage tracks with the fact that he got a very public dig in at her, making a joke about the way she let slavery out as an explanation for the civil war a few weeks ago. he made that dig right there on stage and in public. as much as the haley team is seeing this as something that could help them and our polling bears out that it might, less people in the field means less people to choose from and less splintering of the nontrump vote. at the same time, chris christie is not trying to make it easy for the former south carolina governor. an absolutely scorched earth way to go out of this race. and underscore the stakes here of what republicans are truly deciding on. not the politics, which christie admits himself he has played before in the past but very much the small d democratic values that are very much at play in this election. >> you always remain me. i wonder if you think given the fact that there be a republican

debate whereron desantis and nikki haley will face off if the stakes have pushed front and center by chris christie. >> i was struck by chris christie had an opportunity to really explain that this was about democracy. and he didn't quite do that. right? he said you'll be unhappy. you'll be angry. no. this will be the last election, right? i mean, we saw what happened with donald trump last time. he would not leave. he had the fake electors. he still gave so much cover to other republicans. right? we are in this situation because republican senators refused to vote to convict. after the january 6th insurrection. this is why we're in this position. the law does say there shouldn't be a criminal president. and republicans decided not to do it because they were scared. they were cowardly. in my mind, it's very nice that

chris christie gave this long speech where he was, by the way, so self-congratulatory. i've never seen anyone quite so self-congratulatory. he still did work in the administration. if he wants to put his money where his mouth is, he should talk about the stakes and then endorse joe biden. >> i want to know if you saw. this i thought at the beginning it sounded like chris christie was offering penance for past errors and also was calling out by name some of his fellow republicans. i think you're muted which is a real shame because i want to know what you have to say. >> sorry. i think it was a little self-congratulatory. overall, chris christie, i think, sounded very frustrated with the republican party. sounded frustrated with a lot of the other contenders in the race. the others endorsing nikki

haley. he seem to be quite upset with nikki haley and ron desantis. he heavily implied talking about elise stefanik. those are all staunch republicans, at one point, if not now, had a good relationship with chris christie. i thought it was meaningful that he did that. i was struck by the line you had which was, anyone who is unwilling to say he's unfit is themselves unfit. that's going to be the big question. is he going to put his money where his mouth is? yes. that means that nikki haley is unfit, and ron desantis, but it also means there is no choice in a general election except to support joe biden. will he go that far? he hasn't yet. i think he put himself in a box where he's going to have to answer that question. i have one more phone call to add tom list. mary pat christie. she will be an important person in determining whether he does

continue to go all the way and live up to the implications of that sentence that anyone unwilling to say donald trump is unfit is unfit themselves. that will be a question used to look at himself when he decides what to do in the general election. >> the call lists the briefing books being thrown out the windows by white house aides in favor of all these new names. thank you all. thank you. so for joining us on this very, very busy day of news. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. >> hello. welcome to "the beat." we're tracking developments in the final countdown to iowa. candidates canvassing the state. the debate is tonight. as mentioned, another republican dropping out. governor chris christie, if you've been watching msnbc, you just heard, the most strident trump critic is o