voters who either didn't turn out or switched their vote to biden might look again and say, hey, listen, it wasn't really that bad, i want to take a chance on this guy again? it's risky. >> yeah, i do think you're right to make that point. the exhaustion factor in 2020 was a big one. that's kind of faded, obviously, with time. ironically, so has the outrage factor over january 6th. you would have thought after january 6th there's no way a person who instigated a mob and attacked the capitol to stop the transfer of power could ever be elected again. that does now seem to be the case. i think you're right to say that, you know, out of sight means that he has -- he's less, you know -- a lot of voters might be willing to give him a second chance. if not give him a second chance, maybe stay at home because they won't see it as bad as they saw in 2020. >> peter baker, thank you very much. that's going to do it for me today. "deadline: white house" starts right now. hey, everyone, it is 4:00 in

washington, d.c. i'm in for nicolle wallace. we begin with the one thing that has consistently haunted the disgraced, twice impeached, four times indicted vice president, something that has time and again kneecaped donald j. trump, in the way his adversaries, even the legal system has struggled to do. we're talking about donald trump's own words. today we're reminded that words do, in fact, matter, particularly when they are uttered during a deposition under oath. it's part of the $370 million civil fraud suit brought by new york attorney general letitia james. as viewers of this show know well, that trial has not been short on fireworks between trump grandstanding outside court or grandstanding inside the court. time and again, trump has turned this trial into a cross between a maga rally and a wwe wrestling match. whether he's sparring with the judge or delivering last week's

blistering six-minute soliloquy in open court, or final day of proceedings. this is not the first time donald trump has been deposed in this case. trump's first deposition was more notable for what heid not say. voking the fifth amendment nearly 450 times, answering one question, only one, what is your name? but if he stonewalled letitia james and investigators last time, that is not what we see here. just listen. >> my most valuable asset, i didn't even include on your statement. and that's the brand. i didn't even include that. the brand, if i wanted to create a statement, i would have put the brand on it. you look -- i became president because of the brand. okay? i became president. i think it's the hottest brand in the world. i think my brand value is probably my greatest asset, even though it gets tarnished by people like this suing me. maybe it gets hotter.

>> donald trump tipping his hand as to why this case, more than almost any other, and he has a lot of cases to choose from, has gotten under his skin so badly. why this case seems to be keeping him up at night. that's because it's a lethal threat to his brand, a brand that as you just heard him say on the record, under oath, he believes got him elected. a truth bomb that is both poignant and potentially legally very powerful. that's where we start today with "new york times" investigative reporter sue craig, plus former lead investigator for the january 6th select committee, and democratic strategist and director of the public policy program at hunter college, basel michael sue. i want to ask you about donald trump talking about how his brand helped get him elected. why is that important here? >> yeah, i have to say, you said something i think off the top, i think he's become a lethal threat to his brand. and i think it's really important to talk about his brand because when you think

about his brand, for years it was a consumer brand, and it was very valuable. i've seen a lot of studies of the trump name went on a building, it would increase, you know, the price of the building. to high net worth. the hotels are really nice. that's how it was always measureded. experts say now when you think of the trump brand, it's a political brand. that's not to say there's not worth in it, but once you go down that route, you've got detractors and it becomes something else. it was interesting just in some reporting i've been doing, i talked to somebody repeatedly who got a call from the trump team saying, would you testify in this civil case for us? and they wanted to have this individual talk about the consumer brand and the value of it. and the person declined because

they are no longer tracking it as a consumer brand. so, i would argue for donald trump to talk about his brand now, there should be a reset about exactly what it's worth. it's not to say that it doesn't have value, but it is worth a lot less when he was a hot commodity coming out of "the apprentice" years in 2004, '06 and '07. >> there's a question of what is the brand itself, a consumer brand, a political brand? he does not seem to have come to the reality that there's been a price to pay in the evolution. tim, last time trump was deposed, he took the fifth nearly 450 times. this time you hear him talking. as a former federal prosecutor, what is the legal strategy here? >> hard to tell. the legal strategy was probably -- the wise legal strategy was the first one he chose, which was to assert fifth amendment privilege. it generally does not go well

for charged criminal defendants to talk openly in response to questions about some of the things that overlap with those criminal charges. i think as always, this is more of a public relations strategy than a legal one. i'm really struck thinking back to january 6th about his description of brand. a brand is a commercial product. and we spent on a committee a lot of time developing the fund-raising apparatus and how so much of the narrative was motivated by a desire to cash in, to make money on it. he acted as a business person more than the president of the united states by raising money on the big lie. he continues to raise money on the big lie. and surprisingly, it continues to work. i think it transparently democrat straights poor motivation, at least a large part is greed and grit. >> because he himself and conflating the brand. sue, i want to play a little

more from donald trump's deposition. take a listen. >> you were too busy for the company? >> in a way, yes. yeah, i think you could say it. it was another way of saying it. i was very busy. i considered this the most important job in the world, saving millions of lives. i think you would have had nuclear holocaust if i didn't deal with north korea. i think you would have had a nuclear war if i weren't elected. and i think you might have a nuclear war now, if you want to know the truth. >> is it too cynical or giving trump too much credit to say that, perhaps, one of the reasons he did answer questions in this deposition, didn't invoke the fifth, is because he understood that this is tantamount to what he's been doing outside of court, as tim just said, not a legal strategy, a political strategy? >> i don't know. i see it that he realized the risk of taking the fifth and that that could be used against him. who knows really what was in his mind. but that would be my guess as to

why that happened. you know, i'm open to sort of debate on that, though. >> then let me ask you a question, sue, which you definitely can answer. we've heard trump, his legal team argue this is a victimless crime, that the banks accrued their money. healks about that in this deposition. he said, quote, it is banks are shocked by this case. do you know the banks were fully paid? do you know the banks made a lot of money? sue, your response. >> well, that sort of reminds me of a piece of, well, everybody does it. everybody does it seems to me to be an admission. doesn't make it legal. this case has been, when i think about it, it's been difficult in terms of, i think, some people to process it because the victims, you know, in quotation marks were the banks and they got paid in full. but there's a larger thing at play to me here. that's that he submitted false business records to financial institutions in the state of new york to get better rates. and that's a crime. and i think that when you look at it, they don't need to be a

victim. i understand why some people have a hard time getting their head around it. but i still think you can't really get around that. i think that that is a serious crime in itself, what he did. >> sue just referenced those financial statements. i want to read you tsrom what he said. he never felt these financial statements would b taken very seriouy. he added that the only reason he even had them prepared was for elf, quote, just to see the list of properties, quote, i think more for myself than anything else. nobody does that, right? i mean, clearly there is a lot of ego motivating what it is he's saying. >> no, that's absolutely right. and, you know, it's interesting because remember when he ran in 2016, people used to be so upset at the things he said and did. folks would say, don't take him seriously. none of it really matters. clearly, he felt that about his own business dealings, none of this really matters. and it really does go back to

this point about branding. the interesting thing about a brand is that it's two things -- it's both -- it's a psychological construct, first and foremost. it depends on the person or entity trying to deliver that brand that we develop -- that they develop a psychology around that brand. think about everything he does and says to and in support of his followers. he remains consistent and he repeats things over and over again, which is sort of the other part, the consistency and repetition. everything that existed, whether it was trump the really magnate, trump the apprentice host, or trump the presidential candidate, it's all about creating this brand where none of what i say actually matters as long as it feeds and allows me to burnish this brand. so, you can't ever take him seriously. you can't think about his policy positions as at all stable.

god bless tish james for being able to suss a lot of this out. sadly, go back to 2016 when hillary clinton was saying the same thing. all of what he pretends to be is just a lot of fluff. sadly, we didn't take it as seriously as we should, perhaps, at the time, but he is actually making that plain for us right here and now. >> tim, i have to put up this calendar. it's worth remembering we're in e legal bumper cars portion of next week the carroll indicate wraps up. a judge in this case said he'll rulehe end of the month. a.c. circuit court of appeals on the question of presidential moment.y could come at any we feel like we're waiting for that descend. early next month the supreme court wlegin hearing arguments in the 14th amendment case. you have a ruling from a federal appeals court on presidential immunity could come at any time. the confluence of all these trials, tim, does it help or does it hurt defendant trump? >> look, i think he thinks it

helps him, that's why you're seeing the sort of hetoric from the campaign trail coalesce with the rhetoric in this deposition, in the courtroom, in the civil case the other day, and his statements outside of court. he is running as an enemy of the system, of the deep state, which includes the judiciary and politically motivated prosecutions. so his defense in these cases very much dovetails with his argument as a candidate. that may work in a press conference. it just doesn't work when it comes to evidence, jurors, the application of facts to law. it is a very risky strategy when you are charged with very, very serious criminal offenses. and the jurors will be evaluating the evidence presented in court. that is the risky strategy. i suppose there's a sense that maybe he will win and make these cases go away, but when you, in

fact, pursue a political strategy in courtroom, really, really dangerous. >> i want to go back to that quote i was reading where trump said he never felthese financial statements would be nery seriously, that he only had them prepared for himself. again, that just -- that can't hold any legal water, right? >> i'm sort of laughing because if that was the case, why did they go ahead and submit them to financial institutions? i mean, just on its face, it's -- you know, it's silly. you know, he always says that, he just wanted to look at them. he likes looking at the mona lisas and all these words he has for his properties, but the bottom line is whether or not that's true, he submitted them and he got preferential rates from banks based on -- in part or in full, from those documents. >> so it strikes me we've been talking about the trump brand

and part of the trump brand is he would like people to believe he's a money genius but there's a looming question how much money trump will be forced to pay in this case and others. the other question, does trump have it? here's trump talking about money. take a listen. >> have you considered any other development on doral, apart from the golf course? >> not really. it's doing great. i don't need the money. you probably see the cash. we have a lot of cash. i believe 400 plus and going up very substantially every month. my biggest expense is probably legal fees. we have a lot of cash. we have great assets. we have a very valuable company. forbes doesn't know about us. i read forbes, you know, they -- they are owned by china. they are owned by the chinese and they have their own agenda. >> how truly worried about money do you think donald trump is right now? >> i think he's really worried about this civil case in new

york. i can't see how he's not. you know, he is facing -- the fines could go up to 300, $400 million, and there's no evidence based on both the information we've seen from the attorney general and the analysis they have done, and in addition, "the new york times" has had access to his taxes going up to 2018. there's no evidence that he's got that sort of free cash. he's looking, if this goes against him, if he has to write a check down the road, it will go to the appeals court. there may have to be an asset sale at the end of it to meet the fine. there's some cash that he has that's tied up in joint ventures that he has, that he doesn't necessarily have immediate access to. but even that wouldn't likely be enough to cover this fine. i mean, it's real for him. >> it is real. if we go back to this question of brand and what he has built his brand on, it would seem to me this is where the consumer brand and the political brand

collide, which is the consumer brand would be undermined by the reality that donald trump does not have the assets at his disposal, that he has proclaimed to. the political brand would suffer by the fact that he has tried to make himself inevitable. he has tried to make himself a person who has never held to account, to actually see accountability begins to chip away at that inevitability. >> well, you want -- you would think that the political brand suffers. we can understand why the consumer brand might. if you don't like -- for a lot of folks who may have thought of donald trump as arrogant, annoying, but, you know, for all intents and purposes, helpless, just hapless, if you will, prior to 2016, he may have stayed in his residences, you may have golfed on his golf course. subsequent to that, people take a much harder look, obviously, at the man and the properties, and what they decide they want to access. we can understand why the consumer brand may take a hit. that's why i go back to this

issue of the psychological construct. the psychological construct is important to the political brand. if we look at everything that's happening so far, has it actually affected him, politically? among his core supporters, the answer is no. even nikki haley, who is trying to walk this line between, you know, courting some maga republicans and creating some level of independence from them, is having a difficult time doing that because that brand became so important to his politics, it gave his supporters, in many cases, a pathway, a vehicle where they could see themselves, you know, sort of having the same level of success that trump did. and right now they still feel that way, clearly. but whatever that means to them, they still feel that way. and what i think is going to be important going forward, as we start to see these cases unfold and he has to pay a fine, you know, even if he has to go to

prison, there has to be republican voices to call out and say, this guy's a fraud. but we haven't really seen that thus far. from anyone that, you know, where the public and the voters are really buying into that message. >> and that is why we are waiting and we are watching. thank you for spending time with us. tim and basil, you are sticking with me. when we come back, rare public remarks from attorney general garland at the federal election case, just as questions loom about when the case will actually go to trial. we'll have the latest. plus, nikki haley keeps coming up with different answers to the question -- is america a racist country? we'll talk about just why she's struggling to answer it. later in the program, if there's one thing everyone agrees on in the 14th amendment case before the supreme court, is that scotus has to act and fast. the latest on that. that and more when we continue after this. [car door slam] [camera shutter sfx]

introducing ned's plaque psoriasis. [camera shutter sfx] he thinks his flaky, red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. [ned?] it can help you get clearer skin and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing it for nearly a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. [crowd gasp] ♪♪ with clearer skin, movie night is a groovy night. [ting] ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla.

get over here kids. live in the moment. time for today's lesson. wow. -whoa. what are those? these are humans. they rely on something called the internet to survive. huh, powers out. [ gasp ] are they gonna to die? worse, they are gonna get bored. [ gasp ] wait look! they figured out a way to keep the internet on. yeah! -nature finds a way. [ grunt ] stay connected when the power goes out, with storm ready wifi from xfinity. and see migration in theaters now.

the cases were brought last year. they have urged speedy trials, with which i agree. and it's now in the hands of the judicial system. special prosecutor followed the facts and the law. they brought cases when they thought they were ready. >> attorney general merrick garland making rare public comments on jack smith's cases to cnn this week, urging a speedy trial. garland hitting on the big question of the moment, which is when or even if jack smith's cases go to trial. the federal election interference case remains on pause while trump's attempt to get the case thrown out over claims of presidential immunity makes its way through the

appeals process. a decision on that from an appeals court could be imminent, but every day that goes by without a ruling throws that march 4th trial date further into question. adng to the doubt over the trial date, the judge overseeing this case, tonya chutkan, acknowledged in a ruling yesterday it would likely get delayed. we're back with tim and basil. it's not every day we hear from merrick garland. what do you make of his comments? >> prosecutors generally can't make out-of-court statements about the evidence in a case, make any sort of prediction. they can, though, talk more broadly about the fact that a case needs to be resolved and defend the integrity of the process. merrick garland walked that line in his comments. what was also interesting to me in that clip that you played is that he kept talking about the special prosecutor has decided, the special prosecutor has brought the case. the special prosecutor reports

to him, but has a great deal of independence. the whole reason why he appointed jack smith as special counsel was to ensure that this was completely distant from the traditional role at justice because of his appointment by president biden. he wanted to insulate this matter from politics as much as possible. and that is really what informed his appointment of the special prosecutor. in that interview he kept saying, the special prosecutor has made these decisions. he has the power to overrule those decisions, but i don't believe he has. i think what he is saying there is jack smith has been running this investigation, making charging decisions, urging a speedy trial, and, again, reinforcing jack smith's independence. >> i think we all understand the sense of urgency, and for trump, of course, it has been about the opposite. it's not about winning this case. it's about delaying this case. even the fact that we're still waiting on a decision from the appeals court, it theoretically works in his favor, right?

>> oh, sure. it absolutely works in his favor. the delay tactic is really important here because -- for a number of reasons. one, you know, obviously he can condition to incite his base, motivate his base, mobilize his base as he talks about all of these people coming after him. you know, you heard in the deposition in the earlier segment saying, i would be a rich man, i would be able to do all these things were it not for everybody coming after me. he'll continue to make those arguments the longer these processes drag out. but to tim's point, one of the things i think merrick garland did and did very well is to walk that line and sort of areassuring to the american public that we're moving forward. it may not be as quickly as some might like. it may not be as long as others might like, but we are moving in a steady and forthright path here. and that's supposed to be

reassuring to everybody. i would also say that when we think about march 4th -- that march 4th deadline, right around super tuesday, so we would know that this nomination for the president has wrapped up at that point. it will be really interesting how, as these two sort of events converge, if at all his language changes. >> tim, to remind us of what is at stake here, you have trump doubling down on his claims of just absolute immunity for presidents in general. here's what he said on fox last night. >> the president of the united states, and i'm not talking about myself, i'm talking about any president, has to have immunity. look at president biden, what would happen to president biden. what he did in afghanistan is the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country, giving him $85 billion worth of equipment, killing our soldiers, wounding horribly or soldiers and leaving people behind. when he leaves office, if he

doesn't have immunity -- now, i think it's horrible what he did, but he probably, i don't know, it's hard to believe, but he probably meant well. it's hard to believe he meant well. but the man is incompetent. but you have to leave -- you have to leave immunity with a president. >> so, a few things there, tim. one is just comparing the afghanistan withdrawal to donald trump's attempt to overturn election. it would seem as one of those things is within the scope of the presidency, whether you agree with it or not. the other is not. i also think the other big tell here is that he's trying to say, he wants this to apply to all presidents because he doesn't assume that joe biden would operate with the criminality with which he himself has operated. >> yeah, it's just an absurd argument to suggest that an honest policy difference, like whether we should or shouldn't have withdrawn from afghanistan, the manner in which that decision was effectuated subjects a former president,

some day when president biden is a former president, to criminal responsibility. again, criminal responsibility requires both a criminal act and some level of intent depending on the statute. and we are not going to criminalize good-faith policy discussions. this is very similar to what you're hearing in the mayorkas impeachment debate. some people in congress believe secretary mayorkas should be impeached as high crime or misdemeanor because they don't agree with his approach to the border, that he isn't being aggressive enough. again, that's not a crime. a policy disagreement. a crime requires evidence like jack smith has put in that indictment, the president specifically intended to interfere with, obstruct or impede an official proceeding, the joint session of congress. conspired with others to defraud the united states out of the lawful function of government and deprive americans of their civil rights. that's a high burden for a

prosecutor to sustain that the special counsel will be put to when this case is ultimately tried. i don't see any path to which a withdrawal from afghanistan or an argument that someone has failed to do enough to secure the border is in any way close to that. it's just an absurd argument that everything the president does suddenly in the future, if if the supreme court or court of appeals find no immunity, is not found to prosecution. >> it's one he hopes his supporters will buy and repeat. it strikes me what we didn't play there was the question that was asked that triggered that answer on presidential immunity. he was asked what his closing pitch to new hampshire voters is. to him it's about the cases he faces. >> it's part of the campaign platform. i need immunity to -- if i'm going to govern properly. this is the path to authoritarian government. for him to say, all presidents,

but especially me, right here and right now, i need immunity because i have to be able to operate beyond the checks and balances of government. and it's incredibly scary stuff. it's an absurd argument. it's part of this long-standing call and response that trump does with his supporters because i bet that within the next couple of days you'll hear a lot from his supporters saying, you know, this is a guy that needs to be able to operate freely and not have everybody looking over his shoulder. he said that time and time again in many different ways. now he's trying to -- he's trying to sort of couch that in legal terms in these league proceedings. it's incredibly scary stuff. i would just say one thing very quickly. i always try to flip it to say, what if a black person, in this case barack obama, had been on camera saying the exact same thing? he would have been in prison or laughed off the seat by now. but we're in this period of time

where there is a significant portion of the country that believes what donald trump is saying and that is what's so scary. >> indeed. tim, thank you much, as always, for spendgime with us. for more lal headlines and analysis se you sign up for theeadle legal newsletter. it isered to your inbox every day. you can sn that qr code you see right there to subscribe. basil is sticking with me. up next with her campaign facing a do or die moment in new hampshire, gop presidential candidate nikki haley stumbles through questions about race. feel darkest before dawn. with caplyta, there's a chance to let in the lyte™. caplyta is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, caplyta treats both bipolar i and ii depression. and in clinical trials, movement disorders and weight gain were not common. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts.

antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. caplyta can help you let in the lyte™. ask your doctor about caplyta find savings and support at caplyta.com. some people have minor joint pain plus stomach problems. they may not be able to take just anything for pain. that's why doctors recommend tylenol®. it won't irritate your stomach the way aleve® or even advil® or motrin® can. for trusted relief, trust tylenol®.

oof. you are busy for trworkingelief, parenting, problem solving at new chapter vitamin's we have been busy too innovating, sourcing organic ingredients testing them and...fermenting. fermenting? yeah, like kombucha or yogurt and we formulate everything so, your body can really truly absorb the natural goodness that's what we do so you can do you

new chapter. wellness well done four short days to what could be the most important days of nikki haley's political career, at least so far. the new hampshire primary, to which her campaign pointed as a potential display of viability, of electability, and, yet she's stuck getting a third, fourth, fifth crack at splabing why she doesn't think the united states, which allowed slavery for the first 90 years, is ever going to erase this country. watch. >> first of all, i will tell you, when you look at, you know, the declaration of independence, it was that men are created equal, with unalienable rights. my parents would i, you may have challenges and, yes, there are people who are racists but that doesn't define what you can do in this country.

>> you're talking about the ideals of america, but america was founded institutionally on many racist preceps, including slavery. >> when you look at all men are created equal, i think the intent, the intent was to do the right thing. now, did they have to go fix it along the way? yes, but i don't think the intent was ever that we were going to be a racist country. the intent was everybody was going to be created equally. and as we went through time, they fixed the things that were not all men are created equal. >> still trying to fix them. joining our conversation, president of the national action network and host of politics nation here on msnbc, the reverend al sharpton and former democratic congresswoman msnbc political analyst donna edwards. basil is back with us. rev, evaluate that answer, from your point of view. >> it's absurd. i mean, first of all, before they wrote the declaration of

independence, or even got to it the u.s. constitution, blacks had been enslaved in this country since 1619. she jumps to the late 1700s. when they wrote all men are created equal, they only saw white men as men. blaction were three-fifths of a man, women were subjected to subhuman status. she knows better. why do i say she knows better? she was the governor when our group and others fought in south carolina for her to take down the confederate flag. and the whole history of racism that went down. she wouldn't do it until after the massacre in charleston at mother emanuel a.m.e. church. she's playing to a crowd that wants to deny the racial history of this country. no one could be governor of south carolina, take down confederate flag in front of the

capitol and confederate statue and then try to pretend like they thought that they were the swent of people in the late 1700s that formed this country that already had slaves and they themselves had slaves, their intent was we were all equal. this is absurd in the most cynical kind of political sha containry i've seen in a long time. >> donna, i think part of what makes this additionally interesting is the fact that you have seen trump go after her for being -- he misspells, mispronounces her name. our colleague ali asked those questions. >> do you think the attacks trump is waging against you are racist? >> i'll let people decide what he means by his attacks. look, he's clearly insecure. if he goes and does these temp tantrums, if he's spending

millions of dollars on tv, he's insecure. he knows something's wrong. i don't worry about whether it's personal or what he means by it. >> i want to know what you think about that as a strategy. >> well, look, i spent all of last night after i listened to her response, and i tried to find a word. well, the word for me is flummoxed, completely perplexed as to why nikki haley is taking this strategy given where donald trump is coming from, because it's not winning her any voters. it's not as her dancing around the issue of slavery or around the issue of racism or even her own personal life and experience is gaining her any support among those trump supporters. so, i don't really get it as a political strategy. look, she's from south carolina. it's the first state that seceded from the union because it was deemed hostile to slave-holding states. so, i don't really get her. i don't understand her.

and i don't understand what she hopes to gain by it. >> i'll layer onto that history that haley is the former south carolina governor who removed the confederate battle flag from the state's capitol, and yet she won't say what is plain. is it a matter of fear or is it delusion that she's going to have access to those voters? >> yeah, as i said before, i don't really understand the strategy here because who do you think you're going to get by saying all of this? some of trump's supporters? they're going to vote for trump no matter what, so what's the point of all this? i would say to any person -- and i have to say this. if you're black, certainly, but any person of color that is even thinking about supporting her, rest assured, she doesn't even see you. she's looking past you to her own ambitions, because when you make statements like this, all you're trying to do is sanitize america's history. that's incredible for her as we've discussed here because her father, who is sikh, who had a

turbine when they were out shopping, and she tells this story, police were called on him when they were out shopping. as the rev said, she presided over the taking down of the confederate flag from the state capitol after a white supremacist shot up a church and killed multiple people there. so, if you are looking for any history or any context for why this country could be racist, you've already got it. but also, consider the fact that donald trump is doing to her exactly what he did to barack obama. the person who created birthism is now also trying to single her out because of her ethnicity, and yet she wants to say none of this really matters. by the way, historically, ten of the first 12 presidents were slave owners. if you try to get into the head of the framers, look no further than that to understand how important slavery was to the

history and economic vitality of this country. i don't understand the strategy. it gets her no one. and it just -- it actually diminishes pretty much her entire presidential nominating process by having her in there talking about this. >> one of the other big pieces of political news today is that fellow south carolinian tim scott going to come out, endorse donald trump. does that move the needle at all? >> well, i think that especially in south carolina, nikki haley is running the risk of going to south carolina and losing her home state where she was governor. and i think she's going to have to make a decision after new hampshire about where she's looking to the future, maybe to 2028, and whether she wants to go into her home state and lose it given that her senators are endorsing donald trump. i just think that's a bad look for nikki haley. it's a bad look for her future. donald trump is going to wrap up

this nomination because he's going to secure every single elected republican who's going to come in line with the donald trump base. and he will be their nominee. >> basil, as always, thank you for spending time with us. donna and rev are sticking with me. after the break, donald trump revisits a story that made people question his mental fitness. that's next. to advance the future of golf, pga of america chose t-mobile for business. with a 5g powered innovation hub to analyze player performance and expand coaching tools. take your business further with america's largest 5g network. she found it. the feeling of finding the psoriasis treatment she's been looking for. she found sotyktu, a once—daily pill

for moderate—to—severe plaque psoriasis... for the chance at clear or almost clear skin. it's like the feeling of finding your back... is back. or finding psoriasis can't deny the splendor of these thighs. ♪♪ once—daily sotyktu was proven better, getting more people clearer skin than the leading pill. don't take if you're allergic to sotyktu; serious reactions can occur. sotyktu can lower your ability to fight infections including tb. serious infections, cancers including lymphoma, muscle problems, and changes in certain labs have occurred. tell your doctor if you have an infection, liver or kidney problems, high triglycerides, or had a vaccine or plan to. sotyktu is a tyk2 inhibitor. tyk2 is part of the jak family. it's not known if sotyktu has the same risks as jak inhibitors. find what plaque psoriasis has been hiding. there's only one sotyktu, so ask for it by name. so clearly you. sotyktu.

♪ students... students of any age, from anywhere. students in a new kind of classroom. ♪ using our technology to power different ways of learning. ♪ harnessing ai to plant new beginnings.

♪ so when minds grow, opportunities follow. 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 first they say, he wants to

take over the world. he's going to take over the world. he's a dictator. >> this guy is so brilliants, he's going to take over the world. >> the next day they'll say, he's crazy. the next day they'll say he's incompetent -- >> this is one of the dumbest human beings. i didn't like that one. >> i said to the doctor, dr. ronny jackson -- >> i did say, what about a cognitive test? he said, well, you know, it's not that easy. >> it was 30 or 35 questions. >> i think it was 35, 30 questions. like a giraffe, a tiger, a this, a that. a whale. >> person, woman, man, camera tv. they say, that's amazing. how did you do that? >> because nothing says mental acuity quite like retelling a story about a cognitive test you took four years ago. if you're one of those americans with, frankly, more important things to do than listen to all of donald trump's recent

rallies, you might not realize just how backwards it is that president biden, not donald trump, has to defend himself from accusations of cognitive decline. from this week alone. wait, what? >> we're also going to play strong protections to stop banks and regulators from trying to debank you from your -- your political beliefs, what they do. they want to debank you and we're going to debank -- think of this. we have more liquid gold, oil and gas. more liquid gold. i just meant nonliquid gold. you know where it was? iowa. it's called corn. it's nonliquid. you have more nonliquid gold. they said, what is that? i said, corn. they said, we love that idea. that's a pretty cool thought, isn't it? that's a nickname in its own way but we came up with a new word -- a new couple of words for corn. >> we are back with rev and with

donna. rev, it is like a crazy mad libs and it would be funny if it were not for the fact that this man is on the precipice of potentially winning a second term. a very stable genius, no? >> very unstable man that, unfortunately, is on the precipice of being nominated again by the republican party. one of the two major parties in this country. and could win if we don't see the kind of turnout that the democrats are going to need. when you look at a man who obviously has to brag and probably misquote a cognitive test, a man that, as in the last several months mistakenly said publicly more than once he was running against obama, not biden, and a man who under that pressure is facing four trials, 91 felony counts.

i don't know how we would think he would not have some serious problems under those circumstances in terms of his thinking and in terms of his behavior because of the pressure that he's under, yet someone will make him president of the united states again. >> i do wonder, donna, as we get closer to a general election if he is to be the nominee, the extent to which democrats want to go after this argument. i know folks don't love when we play the tape. the tape, though, does speak for itself. >> i think it is a real challenge because those are some of the accusations that have been against joe biden, but we get to see joe biden every day as president joe biden every day as president of the united states, negotiating with foreign leaders, conducting the nation's business. donald trump seems to be in another zone. if he were at a family reunion, you would say that's just the crazy uncle.

the problem is he wants to be president of the united states. it's going to be important to figure out what the lane is to try to go after, you know, some of the statements that he makes that are just, you know -- he makes up words. he makes up ideas. he's a danger to democracy. there has to be a way to suss that out. >> rev, that's part of the conundrum. there are things that he says he means and he's dead serious about and there's a lot of talk time filling the air. >> the problem is you can't distinguish between the two because i think his mentality is he believes a lot of the absurdities he says when he says them. the ultimate conman is that he cons himself. >> reverend al sharpton, donna edwards, thanks for being with me. we'll take a quick break and be right back.

the justice department is seeking a six-month sentence and the $200,000 fine for former trump of adviser peter navarro after he was found guilty of ignoring a subpoena. prosecutors arguing, navarro thumbed his nose at congressional authority and refused to comply. the defendant chose allegiance

to former president donald trump over the rule of law, even after being apprised that executive privilege would not excuse his default. navarro is scheduled to be sentenced january 25th. coming up, echoing his language, trump's attorneys warn of bedlam if the supreme court keeps trump off the ballot. that story right after a quick break. are we talking singlecare? i saved 40 bucks with singlecare. -that's cool. - yeah. i have all my customers check the singlecare price first. good job. whenever my customers ask me if there's a cheaper price on their meds. i always tell them about singlecare. you just search your prescription, find the best price and show your coupon, in the app, to the pharmacist. i found a cheaper price with singlecare! i know. download the singlecare app free today. 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.

not just any whiteboard... ...katie porter's whiteboard is one way she's: [news anchor] ...often seen grilling top executives of banks, big pharma, even top administration officials. katie porter. never taken corporate pac money - never will. leading the fight to ban congressional stock trading. and the only democrat who opposed wasteful “earmarks” that fund politicians' pet projects. katie porter. focused on your challenges - from lowering housing costs

to fighting climate change. shake up the senate - with democrat katie porter. i'm katie porter and i approve this message. by the supreme court, it will be the single most important constitutional decision in all

of our history. yesterday's decision by the colorado supreme court was masterful. it was brilliant, and it is an unassailable interpretation of the 14th amendment disqualification clause. it is 5:00 here in washington, d.c. i'm alicia menendez in for nicolle wallace. the decision that judge michael ludwig hailed as brilliant will soon be before the supreme court. oral arguments begin february 8th. ahead of that, both sides are laying out their case. the most recent coming from the ex president just last night. he put out a 15-page brief that was filled with over one dozen

arguments as to why the u. supreme court should reverse the decision out of colorado. from that brief, quote, the court should put a swift end to these disqualification efforts that threaten to disenfranchise millions of americans which will surely release bedlam. one of the most absurd points argued by the former president was over wording. saying that section three of the 14th amendment does not apply to presidents because he never swore to support the constitution, which is what it says in section 3. the presidential oath he took was to preserve, protect and defend the constitution. meanwhile, over in maine, the only other state to rule that trump's role on january 6th disqualifies him from running,

the secretary of state filed an appeal to a judge saying her ruling should be paused until we hear from the supreme court. she writes, i welcome a ruling from the u.s. supreme court in the colorado case that provides g guidance as to the important 14th amendment in this case. maine law provides the opportunity for them to seek review from the maine supreme court. this appeal ensures maine's highest court had the opportunity to weigh in now before ballots are counted. while maine and colorado are the only two states that ruled trump is ineligible to be on the ballot, there have been challenges to his candidacy in three dozen states. a decision in 17 are still pending. we start with former u.s. attorney joyce vance, plus former acting assistant attorney general for national security at

the department of justice mary mccord and back with us today msnbc legal analyst lisa ruben. lisa, let's talk about the trump filing. i consider it in the wave of amicus briefs that have been filed and the shear volume of arguments before the justices, how do they sort through them? >> well, alicia, how do they sort through them is up to them. to the extent this supreme court wants an offramp it can take one of those things before it dispenses with some of the more complicated arguments. for example, if the supreme court were to hold that the colorado plaintiffs don't have standing to sue colorado's secretary of state, jenna grizwold, for neglecting her duty, they could do that.

by doing that that would aye alleviate their need to work through the other arguments. they could decide questions of standing for example. >> joyce, let's talk about the former president arguing he didn't take an oath to support the constitution, just to preserve, protect and defend. jordan ruben calls the argument, quote, too stupid to consider. do you agree, joyce? >> yeah, i think that's the converse of too smart by half. this is the sort of argument that's well suited for argument before the supreme court because it's a purely legal argument. one of the problems frankly that trump faces here is that he really wants to put all his eggs in the i didn't commit insurrection basket. but the supreme court is not a trial court. it doesn't hear evidence. except in cases where it can say the finder of fact just got it completely wrong, no reasonable

judge or jury could have reached the conclusions they did, the supreme court accepts the fact that it's given from the lower court and makes its decision based on those facts. these sort of legal convoluted arguments about the language of the constitution have a certain amount of appeal. this one is sort of crazy when you think about its implications. judges tell juries they don't leave their common sense at the door. it defies common sense to think about the fact that the president along has no obligation to uphold our laws, to uphold the constitution. i think lisa's right when she says the court will look for a procedural off-ramp. i don't think this will be it. >> mary, there's something that trump argued that his challengers agree with. a ruling that reverses the colorado security while remaining agnostic on president trump's eligibility will only

delay the ballot disqualification. there's this sense whatever they decide has to be applied broadly. speak to this moment of very rare agreement and whether you think the supreme court ultimately decides this issue completely. >> well, i think, you know, the challengers knew that the resolution would have to come from the u.s. supreme court. i think that's why they did not oppose the court accepting review of the case. they opposed on a few of the issues, but not on the court taking the case to resolve the overarching issues, the issues that would apply in all 50 states. they recognize, as do most litigators and people looking at this, that if the court sidesteps the legal issues, you could have a different application of section 3 of the

14th amendment in all 50 states. that would be chaotic. even the challengers, now that we're in the supreme cour they're the respondents, they were the initial filers in colorado. even they agree that the supreme court should resolve some of these legal issues that joyce was just pointing out. i think one distinction is that the challengers would, as joyce pointed out, not think that the supreme court should review factual findings made by the court in colorado, and that it is certainly the case that courts of review rarely will undertake making factual findings as a judicial matter. some of these issues like did donald trump engage in insurrection have some combination of facts and law.

one question is what is an insurrection under law? it's not defined in the section 3 of the 14th amendment. it's not defined elsewhere in the constitution. what does engage in mean? here we look at other applications of other statutes. the court give some rulings about those legal questions, what's an insurrection, but i don't think we'll see the court really reviewing other than for the clearest of error application of that law to the facts. >> i wonder, joyce, what you make of the fact that the word bedlam made it into this document given the conversation we have about is donald trump listening to his lawyers, are his lawyers listening to donald trump, are they making a legal argument or political argument, who's the dog and who's the tail here? >> well, i think here, unlike what we've been watching in new york, the spectacle we've seen

there, donald trump has people who understand how to handle a case in front of the supreme court. they've written a pretty straightforward brief. i don't think lots of donald trump's direction has led to this particular filing. you know, the bedlam argument, alicia, is disturbing, especially since donald trump is asking the court to make the finding that he would never promote an insurrection. how odd to make that argument, but at the same time say if you take me off the ballot, there will be disquiet in the country. this speaks to who donald trump is. if he really believed this argument was true and if he really believed in the constitution, he would tell his followers we will tell whatever decision the courts of law make. there will be no bedlam. there will be no violence. we will follow the law. donald trump never says anything that approaches that. instead he resorts do these threats. >> lisa, i want to read you this

from the "new york times." the colorado case is one of several involving mr. donald trump on the supreme court's docket. an appeals court i expected to rule on whether he has absolute immunity from prosecution. an appeal to the supreme court from that ruling is likely. the justices have agreed to decide on the central charge in the federal election interference case with a ruling by june. lisa, talk about the multiple questions about donald trump that the highest court will have to weigh in on. >> when this court term started and people asked, what's the supreme court going to decide this term, what's going to be the big thing? my answer would have been mifepristone or the chevron doctrine which has major repercussions for federal regulations as we understand them. what this term is going to be

known for is the donald trump term. i think you're right that the immunity case that's with the d.c. circuit is headed to the court. doesn't mean it has to take it. a well-reasoned decision from the d.c. circuit may give the court an opportunity to say, that's okay, we don't need to decide this. us believe given the importance of that decision that the supreme court will take a pass at it. with respect to the charges that are at issue, it's 18 usc 1512 c. the question on which the court granted consideration is not really the question that impacts former president trump. still i think that he'll be watching that case closely and so will folks like me. >> mary, i'm just so struck by something i read to you in the

brief which is his team trying to make the argument that, if the court doesn't put an end to these ballot disqualification efforts which threaten to disenfranchise tens of millions of americans, it's so rich given the reason we're talking. we're sitting here talking about donald trump because he and a team of his allies put together a plan to rob people of their votes, to overturn their votes, to install fake electors. the circular logic here is wild. it's part of why we worry if he's allowed to stay on that ballot, it could potentially give a permission structure for another january 6th to happen. >> well, it's interesting because -- i think i maybe said this when we talked last week. i feel like we've seen this movie before. you're absolutely right, it's completely irrational and circular, even though that's not the first time mr. trump or his

lawyers have said something irrational or circular. for him to essentially have himself through his efforts in a lead up to january 6th and every day since then to disenfranchise the votes of the 70 however many million people who voted for joe biden, that's what he attempted to do on january 6th. here he's saying by keeping him off the ballot that would be disenfranchising millions of voters. that's not logical to the argument mr. trump makes. what's scary here is that almost everything we're hearing now out of mr. trump's mouth oftentimes on the courthouse steps, you know, talking about the court system, the judges, prosecutors, lawyers, everybody who's part of the judicial system and the parties who use that judicial

system to adjudicate rights and responsibilities, the daily demeaning of that system and the daily thinly veiled calls for violence, i mean this is started earlier than it did in 2020. 2020 in april some of the first tweets that, if he didn't win the election, it would mean that it was rigged. this was before we even got to the point of anyone thinking about the fraudulent electors scheme. he was saying already, if i don't win, it's rigged. now he's saying we have a corrupt justice system that i'm not victim to. we have corruption in our election systems with corrupt election officials who cheated last time and there was fraud last time and there will be fraud this time. anything that doesn't end up with me as the winner is a fraud. we've been down this road. we have no excuse as an american

people if we succumb to this again. >> joyce, he may be the one planting those seeds, but you have republicans who are watering those seeds. yesterday we saw a brief put out by 179 republicans in congress supporting the former president in the colorado case. i just wonder how we got to this point where the party puts a man above the constitution, where there's no mechanism in their minds eye for accountability. they didn't want to see it through impeachment. they don't want to see it through legal challenging. they're not picking and choosing. they're saying none of the above. >> this is the question we struggle with. perhaps it will be a question that historians will look at through a more sophisticated lens than what we can look at it why we're living through it. it seems unconscionable that the republican party, the party of small government, the party of

family values, the republican government i grew up with, that they would somehow come to support a petty man like donald trump who can barely control his personal behavior and certainly isn't fit to lead a country. i think what we have to be very cavalier about understanding is that there are people in this country who value power more than they value country, who would rather be powerful than live in a rule of law based democratic society. that's what makes this coming election so important. i think this isn't a political principle. this is a principle of how we want this country to look going forward. do we want to continue to have a rule of law or do we want a dictator? i don't know any other way to put it. it may sound alarmist, but that's the question. will we let donald trump become a dictator in 2024? >> it sounds like you are

tethered to reality here on earth. lisa, we talked about a development from the maine secretary of state. can you speak to her argument that her decision doesn't need to be put on pause until the supreme court rules? >> part of what's animating that is because, if the supreme court rules, either way it rules, there's a school of thought that it won't be binding on other states. if the 14th amendment is self-executing and secretaries of state or state election officials can make those decisions for themselves based on facts before them, either administrative hearings or trials, then those facts wouldn't be binding on other states. if colorado's decision is upheld, there may be other states where litigation ensures and they say the president had a full and fair opportunity to litigate. he lost on that. that should apply here. it's not as if somebody is going

to flip a switch and what the security decides about colorado will govern in every other state in the country. that may be what's animating the maine secretary of state's decision to say i can go forward now and i don't need to wait for the supreme court. >> no one is going anywhere. court is dark today in the e. jean carroll case. there are two critical developments in that case just in the last hour to tell you about. we'll have those next. plus, law enforcement sounding the alarm on the growing number of threats to members of congress, already rising even before this year's super charged election. as anti-abortion rights activists march on washington why the real momentum has been on the side of those fighting for access to reproductive health care.

"deadline white house" continues after a quick break. ite house" s after a quick break. scans with social sentiment help you find and unlock opportunities in the market. e*trade from morgan stanley. for moderate to severe crohn's disease skyrizi is the first il-23 inhibitor that can deliver remission and visibly improve damage of the intestinal lining. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to. liver problems may occur in crohn's disease. control of crohn's means everything to me. ask your gastroenterologist about skyrizi. ♪ control is everything to me ♪ learn how abbvie could help you save.

♪ control is here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today.

court proceedings there's a lot happening in the ex president's defamation trial. donald trump is planning on testifying. brand new filings in the last hour will help shape what the jury is about to consider. it comes after powerful testimony from e. jean carroll about the threats she faced. from an expert witnessut how much money should pay in damages. trump's lawyer before a frustrated judge kaplan suggested that carroll benefited from coming forward. in briefs ordered, trump's

lawyers argued that e. jean carroll had an obligation to mitigate her damages. carroll's team writes, quote, neither precedent nor common sense supports that claim. it will be shocking to hold that survivors of sexual abuse keep silent as their abuser defames them public. we are back with joyce, mary and lisa. lisa, talk us through these new arguments and what judge kaplan has to decide. >> alicia, as we discussed, the issue of whether or not e. jean carroll had to mitigate her damages was an essential them. their position was that donald trump didn't damage carroll at all. they argued she was more famous after the fact than she was before. if she was damaged, their argument amounts to it's your

own darn fault because you didn't take it upon yourself to mitigate your damages by staying silent. instead you amplified your voice and told the whole world, you brought the death threats and all the egregiously ugly statements that people made about you upon yourself. in these briefs both sides are talking about a particular new york court case from 1919 that addresses this issue squarely. whether a victim of defamation or libel has to mitigate their own damages. alina habba's brief, while it contains a quote from that case, it misquotes the rest of the case which stands for the proposition that, a victim of defamation has the right to mitigate, but doesn't have the duty. it is exactly as the lawyers for carroll describe it.

it would be perverse if somebody who has been defamed has to stay silent in order to refer damages in future litigation. i'm stunned here by the perversion of this precedent. judge kaplan was clear earlier this week, there's a single binding precedent in new york on this issue. again, it's this case from 1919. both parties know it, but only one cited it correctly. >> joyce, lisa name checked alina habba. she filed a motion for a mistrial. any argument there? >> no. this mistrial request won't go any place. we've had this conversation before, alicia. you know that e. jean carroll and i are friends. you don't have to be friends with her for this argument to sting all of us as women, this notion you're supposed to remain

quiet. she said, you know, i was tired of staying quiet. i'm 80. i wanted to be able to speak. we'll see that come forward when her lawyer responds to this motion for a mistrial. in essence it criticizes carroll for destroying some of these hateful, painful communications she received long before the lawsuit was filed. in essence what alina habba has argued is that e. jean carroll is not entitled to her humanity. i think the response of this jury will say, yes, she is. she's entitled to reclaim her dignity. >> that's why this is so confounding, mary, unless you look at it through the lens of his desire to make a political argument rather than a legal argument. it's hard to see how the argument they're making does not turn off that jury. >> that's right. i mean, just as a matter of human nature, the jury is listening to the testimony in this case. i can't imagine they wouldn't be

put off by what alina habba is arguing and certainly anything that they say mr. trump doing while he was sitting there in the trial this week. you know, this question that joyce was just getting to about the motion for a mistrial, of course this letter to the judge will not be something the jury gets to see. when you read it and see the accusations that e. jean carroll right at the beginning, when she first was subjected to death threats, at that point had an obligation to say to all those death threats when she hadn't conceived of filing a lawsuit against mr. trump, to suggest she had an obligation and she violated that obligation and the penalty should be reason for a mistrial, it's outrageous. as joyce says, it denies that human dignity that you have to sit there, take it, read it over and over as it's coming in

through your social media, through your emails what have you. there are rules, discovery rules that apply when litigation has been filed that says you have to preserve everything that might be evidence. a lot of what we're talking about predates litigation and again is about a woman who was getting death threats, who was being vilified daily, day in and day out, and continues to be vilified by mr. trump who has gone off during this trial and made the same accusations, the same false accusations, that he's already been found liable for in one previous trial. >> next the jury will hear from e. jean carroll's boss. then it's the defense's turn. what will you, lisa, be watching for? >> the first thing is whether former president trump shows up. in the first e. jean carroll case and the new york civil

fraud trial, trump threatened to show up and hours before he was expected in new york he chickened out and didn't show up. on monday i'm looking to see whether he comes, particularly when prior rulings put some stringent limits on what he could possibly testify to. as joyce and mary noted, this case is just about damages because the question of whether he defamed her has been established by that jury trial last may. given that, it's not clear to me what, if anything, donald trump could credibly testify to other than hurting himself. i guarantee if he shows up and testifies, one of the things that will become an issue is his net worth. you may be asking why that matters. in awarding punitive damages a jury is entitled to consider what a person's resources are.

if i want to punish you who only has $10 versus donald trump who has millions of dollars, it matters. in that deposition that we saw today, donald trump says a number of things about his net worth, the value of his brand that could be withering material for cross-examination. i don't want to say break out the popcorn because i don't think these proceedings are joyous, but that's what i'm watching. >> they're hugely consequential. lisa and joyce, thank you for spending time with us. mary, you're staying. the sky rocketing number of threats against congress. why the latest tally has law enforcement concerned about what's to come.

did you know... 80% of women are struggling with hair damage? just like i was. dryness and frizz could be damaged hair that can't retain moisture. new pantene miracle rescue deep conditioner, with first-of-its-kind melting pro-v pearls... locks in moisture to repair 6 months of damage in one wash, without weigh down. guaranteed or your money back! for resilient, healthy-looking hair... if you know, you know it's pantene. life, diabetes, there's no slowing down. each day is a unique blend of people to see and things to do. that's why you choose glucerna to help manage blood sugar response. uniquely designed with carbsteady. glucerna. bring on the day. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. 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

this is a moment of threats and unease for public officials ahead of a super charged election in which the leading gop campaign is relying on misinformation. the u.s. capitol police says threat a expected to rise after they investigated more than 8,000 statements concerning direct threats against lawmakers. while in federal co a new hampshire man was sentenced to three years probation for leaving a threatening voice mail

at an office for a member of congress. joining us now former chief of staff for homeland security, miles taylor. miles, your reaction to this report. is this a reflection of what's been building for years? >> it finally puts the data to what a lot of us see in washington and know to be true. it's a stark reminder of how serious the threat environment is. again, what we're not talking about here is political vitriolic rhetoric getting worse, we're talking about threats getting worse. eric swalwell had someone call his office the other day threatening to kill him. i want to talk about how significantly these numbers spiked right before donald trump was president. i remember when he got elected president of the united states i was working on these homeland

security issues. the threats to members of congress were in the vicinity of 1,000 to 2,000 a year. take stock of this 8,000 number and after january 6th it was close to 10,000. there's been a roughly five-fold increase in the number of threats to members of congress from before donald trump was president to after. that's not just a correlation without a causation. the causation is clear. the figure head of the republican party has endorsed, embraced, promoted political violence as a legit means of engaging the other side. i would say it's one of the biggest concerns we have going during the election. >> mary, miles said the causation is clear and it' stressing certain agencies. capitol police say these threats came through mail, through email, on the phone, on social

media. how does law enforcement track these threats and how challenging is it in this environment? >> well, you know, i hope that the infrastructure is a little better than it was at the time of january 6th. i was honored to serve on the january 6th task force to examine u.s. capitol security. this is not the house select committee that did the extensive report on january 6th. this was a group of mostly former military generals and others where we looked into some of the security failures. one of the things we were most concerned about even back then -- this was a prevent. we issued our report on march 5, 2021. dignitary protection services, that's the part of the capitol police that are supposed to protect the members, they already noted a four times

increase in threats to members in just those two months of the beginning of 2021. we recommended in that task force a substantial increase in capacity in dignitary protection services. we recommended that all members have access to heightened security protocols and that includes physical security in their homes in washington, d.c., as well as their homes in their offices in their districts, heightened travel security, all because of how much we were seeing the increases in those threats. i don't know the data to what extent all those recommendations were implemented from that task force. this was a significant concern we had then and when we fast forward to now, we know that this is not just a problem that faces elected members of congress. election officials, we've talked before on this show and elsewhere, have been subject to unprecedented threats ever since the 2020 election.

these threats continue. the attorney general of the united states actually set forth a task force of fbi and lawyers to investigate those threats and bring cases when they could substantiate true threatsthreat. we have seen an increase in the number of cases the u.s. government has brought. it's just a fraction of the threats that exist. we talked about swatting incidents and hoax bomb threats at u.s. capitols and people's home, former government officials, election officials, elected officials. this problem well exceeds what's happening to members of congress. the atmosphere in this country that political violence, threats and intimidation are acceptable is just at a level i've never seen, i never thought i would see. i think miles is right. a lot of it, the vast majority, is driven because of what donald

trump started, giving permission for people to engage in this type of behavior. he continues it every day. >> miles, to under what you have said, the capitol police report reads, quote, people continue to have a false sense of anonymity on social media. decreasing violent political rhetoric is one of the best ways to decrease the number of threats across the country. they're making it clear, the language -- you can take the language from donald trump and draw a direct line to these threats. there's no mystery. there's no question of why this is happening. the problem is their recommendation, which is bring down the rhetoric, is impossible to do when the person who needs to do that is moving in the opposite direction. >> yeah, absolutely. you know, this has become so jarring for people in public policy because, as mary noted, it's affecting all levels. most folks go into politics and

public policy expecting there will be things that are obnoxious about their jobs and obnoxious about the experience, but they're not expecting near death experiences for going into this line of work. that's now becoming common. that's not an exaggeration. it's becoming common as you know because it's -- the taboo has been broken at the highest levels. the reason we would track chatter is because a higher level of chat about a threat often correlated to criminal agents. you saw that with al, quaeda and i.s.i.s. we're seeing in terms of the domestic terrorist threats in this country an uptick to unprecedented levels.

the worry is that will lead to actual violence. i don't see a lot of indicators that the leader of the gop, donald trump, any time soon will dial that back if ever. it's again a very big worry going into this election. we have to make sure that state and local election officials are aware and prepared. >> and prepared, that's the critical part. miles taylor, mary mccord, thank you. when we return, new optimism in reproductive rights. ive righs

at humana, we believe your healthcare should evolve with you, and part of that evolution means choosing the right medicare plan for you. humana can help. with original medicare you're covered for hospital stays and doctor office visits, but you'll have to pay a deductible for each. a medicare supplement plan pays for some or all of your original medicare deductibles, but they may have higher monthly premiums and no prescription drug coverage. humana medicare advantage prescription drug plans include medical coverage, plus prescription drug coverage. and coverage for dental, vision and hearing. all wrapped up into one convenient plan. plus, there's a cap on your out-of-pocket costs! humana has large networks of doctors, hospitals and specialists across 49 states. so, call or go online today and get your free decision guide. humana - a more human way to healthcare.

so... i know you and george were struggling with the possibility of having to move. how's that going? we found a way to make bathing safer with a kohler walk-in bath. a kohler walk-in bath provides a secure, spa-like bathing experience in the comfort of your own home. a kohler walk-in bath has one of the lowest step-ins of any walk-in bath for easy entry and exit. it features textured surfaces, convenient handrails for more stability, and a wide door for easier mobility. kohler® walk-in baths include two hydrotherapies— whirlpool jets and our patented bubblemassage™ to help soothe sore muscles in your feet, legs, and back. a kohler-certified installer will install everything quickly and conveniently in as little as a day. they made us feel completely comfortable in our home. and, yes, it's affordable. i wish we would have looked into it sooner. think i might look into one myself. stay in the home and life you've built for years to come. call... to receive 50% off installation your kohler walk-in bath. and take advantage of our no payments until 2025 financing.

♪ ♪ wake up, gotta go! c'mon, c'mon. -gracie, c'mon. let's go! guys, c'mon! mom, c'mon! mia! [ engine revving ] ♪ ♪ my favorite color is... [ imitating trombone ] because, it's like a family thing! [ engine revving ] ♪ ♪ made it! mom! leave running behind, behind. the new turbocharged volkswagen atlas. does life beautifully.

the anti-choice activists who will descend on washington, d.c., should know they're a shrinking minority in america. every year they have less and less weight with the american people. >> senator majority leader chuck schumer on the truth that some refuse to acknowledge. they descend on d.c. to defend stripping women of their right to abortion access. the anger and energy at the ballot box stronger than ever. a campaign on legalizing missouri raised money on the first day it launches.

president biden and vice president harris seeking to capitalize on that energy ahead of 2024 holding a rally in virginia tuesday as part of an effort to make abortion a defining issue in the 2024 election. they're reminding voters exactly what's at stake for reproductive freedom in 2024. joining our conversation msnbc contribuor erin haines. we have often ask about the sal yen si of this issue, will it drive voters to the election. you have to remind voters of this and they need the biden campaign out there saying this issue is on the line. >> it's so important for the biden campaign to be doing these events at these big moments.

we have to keep reminding folks this is the america that the trump administration brought. it's really important to drive the contrast. the trump administration and trump himself overturned roe v. wade, have been bragging about it, have been calling it a miracle. he called it a miracle, right? they've owned it. we have to make sure americans understand we have to reelect joe biden and kamala harris in order to pass a law at the federal level to enshrine abortion rights nationwide, but also roll back the incredible damage that's been done to this country. i'm excited to see kamala harris launch this reproductive freedom tour. the president is out there on the stump himself. it's going to be eye opening and important. >> erin, inasmuch as this is about donald trump, it's about republicans who have followed in his steed. the orlando sentinel reporting this about the florida state house thatlipped from red to

blue. tom keen won the house district special election tue because of a strong ground game and laser focus on abortion rights. his supporters said those are types of issues that ron desantis and the republican party are going to have a reckoning with. this is what ron desantis was pushing so he could go to iowa and lose by 35 points. putting that aside, you see in these races already, we have proof positive that people are coming out and voting on this issue, even in ron desantis' florida. >> you are absolutely right, alicia. in 2022 we said abortion was on the ballot. you saw that women were galvanized by this issue and wanting to make their voices heard at the ballot box and reject the idea that they should

not have body autonomy making the connection between reproduction freedom and overall freedom, making the point that their granddaughters are less free than their mothers and grandmothers. you're seeing that energy headed into 2024. we see these ballot measures to your point about missouri. you have candidates up and down the ticket. this is not just about former president donald trump or president biden. this is about candidates and voters wanting to know where they stand no matter what office they're running for on this issue. they're making the connection between the people they elect and the policies pass that will daily lives. so, abortion, again, i don't make many predictions in elections, but i do predict abortion will 100% be on the ballot in 2024 and women will be deciding this election. >> i want you to help me understand a headline i read. you have the biden

administration touting its efforts to protect women's health access, including rules requiring hospitals to provide women with stabilizing care, including abortions. butwashgton post" is reporting -- shining a light in gaps on enforcement. jackie sat in her c last winter, shocked the doctors at an oklahoma hospital instructed her to wait in the hospital until she became sick enough to qualify for an abortion under the state's near total ban. when she later filed a complaint with the biden administration about how her case was handled it, they rejected it and said the hospital had done nothing wrong. help me understand how these gaps are happening. >> you know, this is a really critical -- this is critical coverage. so, what the biden administration is doing right now, and they will be doing with the supreme court, is defending this law that protects patients in these emergency cases. but what happens sometimes from an administrative point of view and how enforcement happens and how laws are interpreted can be a little bit murkier, right,

with the federal government. so what i will say is this, joe biden and kamala harris, to the extent they have the political wherewithal and the administration support to push abortion rights are doing what they can. yes, there are gaps. we have to keep pushing government to be accountable and to work on these gaps. i will also say post-dobbs, we're seeing use of these laws in a way that -- and are muscling exercise with the federal government we haven't seen before, and that's also part of the challenge. >> as always, thank you both so much for joining us today. we're going to take a quick break. we'll be right back. ht back.

- "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.

timely this friday, a new dose of accountability forho who attempted to overturn the 2020 elections. d.c. bar have filed disciplinary charges against three lawyers to mount discredited legal challenges to the 2020 elections. the attorneys are accused of making false knowingly false about a number of lawsuits they d in the weeks after the 2020 election. mike john and jenna ellis and rudy giuliani before them, they will now face the music. in consequences from the committee, if they're found culpable ranging from reprimand to suspension to disbarment. to suspension to disbarment.

that's why visionworks gives you 100 days to change your mind. it's simple. anything else i can help you with? like what? visionworks. see the difference. why would i use kayak to compare hundreds of travel sites at once? i like to do things myself. i can't trust anything else to do the job right. kayak... aaaaaaaahhhh kayak. search one and done. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ choosing a treatment for your chronic migraine - 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting 4 hours or more - can be overwhelming. so, ask your doctor about botox®. botox® prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine before they even start. it's the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. so far, more than 5 million botox® treatments have been given to over eight hundred and fifty thousand

chronic migraine patients. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they'd talked to their doctor and started botox® sooner. so, ask your doctor if botox® is right for you. learn how abbvie could help you save on botox®. when you walk up to the counter at the pharmacy and you have a new prescription, you don't know what it's going to cost. that's why i always recommend you check the singlecare app before you go to the counter. i found the cheaper price with singlecare! yes, you did. see. give it a try. go to singecare.com or download the free app today.

in order for small businesses to thrive, see. they need to be smart, efficient, savvy. making the most of every opportunity. that's why comcast business is introducing the small business bonus. for a limited time you can get up to $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet. yup, $1000. so switch to business internet from the company with the largest fastest reliable network. give your business a head start in 2024 with this great offer. plus, ask how to get up to $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet.

thanks for spending part of your friday with us. you can joine tomorrow morning, 8:00 a.m. eastern along with my co-hosts for "the weekend" some guests include congressman jim himes, rohit chopra and senator tammy baldwin. "the beat" with katie phang in for ari melber right now. >> thanks so much and have a great weekend. everybody tune in to watch "the weekend" starting tomorrow morning at 8:00 a.m. welcome to the rest of you to "the beat," i'm