your body gives you signs. so if you're frustrated with occasional bloating... ♪♪ [stomach noises] gas... or abdominal discomfort... help stop the frustration and start taking align every day. align probiotic was specifically designed by gastroenterologists to help relieve your occasional digestive upsets. so you can enjoy life. when you feel the signs, it's time to try align. in order for small businesses to thrive,

when you feel the signs, 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. 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.

>> it is a real hodgepodge of people in groups. vivek ramaswamy, the rnc, the naacp, hundred 79 members of congress, three former attorneys general. three current secretaries of state, multiple civil war historians, a group of capitol police officers, and roseanne barr, or at least someone named roseanne barr who purports to live in the same state where the real roseanne barr actually lives. now what to all of these people in organizations have in common? well, they have all signed on to amicus briefs. formally telling the supreme court they're opinion on the question of whether donald trump can be removed from the ballot in the state of california, colorado, for violating the 13th amendment. just for a fresh, or the third section of the 14th amendment disqualifies former government officials from holding office

if they engage in insurrection or gave aid or comfort to those who did. the deadline for weighing in on this case for filing those amicus briefs was today. and now that case is set to be heard next week. oral arguments begin on february 8th, which is a week from tomorrow. the eventual ruling here will have implications far beyond the state of colorado. that case will determine not just whether colorado is allowed to strike donald trump from its ballot, but whether other states could follow colorado's suit. so a big hot potato has landed on the left of those nine justices and it's not the only one. there is another case where that conservative supreme court could single-handedly decide trump's viability is a candidate in the 2024 election. today bloomberg is that with new polling. in seven swing states, 23% of republicans say they would be unwilling to support donald

trump for president if he is convicted in one of the criminal trials he is currently facing. you did not hear that incorrectly. 23% of trump's own party would not vote for trump in the swing states that will very likely decide this election. in arizona and georgia, in pennsylvania and michigan and north carolina and wisconsin in nevada, donald trump would lose more than one in five voters in his own party. i cannot underscore enough how much that statistic alone could cost him the election. but all of that is dependent on whether donald trump actually faces a criminal trial before the 2024 election. in the fulton county election conspiracy case, d.a. fani willis has asked for an august trial date. but legal experts say that's unlikely to hold. that case is complicated enough and has enough potential reasons for delayed it is

likely to be heard next year, and i'm gonna get a little help breaking down what that is later in this hour. then the mar-a-lago classified documents gaetz, legal experts say that doesn't appear to be on track for a preelection trial. the judge on, that judge aileen cannon, revise the schedule for pretrial motions. now that has, in turn, pushed all of the deadlines a couple of months. so even though that case is technically still scheduled for may, legal experts believe judge cannon has effectively structure this thing in a way that will push the trial past the 2024 election. today we have new reporting from politico that very clearly suggests yet another one of trump's criminal trials will be delayed by yet another group of judges. the ones on the supreme court. you may have figured that out merely by process of elimination,. the case most likely to be

heard before this november election is jack smith's federal election interference case. but for 50 days now that case has been frozen. the judge in that case, judge tanya chutkan, stayed the case, effectively putting it on hold while trump's claim of presidential immunity makes its way through the appeals process. trump has made clear that if he loses at the appellate level, he plans to appeal again, to the supreme court. and judge chutkan has made clear that if donald trump does appeal to the highest court in the land, she will keep this case frozen, unable to proceed until there is a decision from the supreme court. but it has been 50 days, and we don't even have an appeals court ruling yet. and as political reports, again today the longer it takes for the appeals court to rule, the likely or the supreme court would punch the issue into the fall, effectively ruling out a

trial before the election. can anything be done here? joining me now, michael schmidt, new york times investigative reporter, and our not-so-secret weapon, msnbc legal analyst lisa rubin. thank you both for being. here every night, lisa, we say is this the night? is this the night that the appeals court will reach a decision in this immunity case and granted the hearing was january nine, so far goose egg. nothing. >> refreshing. >> apple are or whatever the pc version is. what is happening here, in your estimation? >> i can only have a guess, i can only guess to me what's happening. we have a three judge panel on the d.c. circuit. my guess is that these three judges have a general agreement between them the donald trump should not be immune from federal prosecution in the federal election interference case. how they get their, on the other hand, is a different

matter. in the ideal world, all three of them would like to be in total agreement. they later issued an opinion that is not authored by any of them or all three of them get to sign on. but of course there are many different paths to getting their. one judge suggested during oral argument that what really matters to her is whether the allegations against trump are ones that affect his duties or that infect him in a campaign capacity and suggested almost they really have to parse the indictment. that would be the worst of all worlds, because that could mean sending the case back to judge chutkan to determine which aspects of the indictment are worthy of immunity and which are not, and that could even further elongate the key appellate process. i think behind the scenes the two judges would like to get there in a simpler easier way more akin to how judge chutkan ruled in her own ruling i really putting some pressure on judge karen henderson, the most

senior of these judges to try and get on board and see if they can do something anonymously. >> can i follow up on? that politico does talk about what the judges can do behind the scenes to pressure if there's a hold out can they, like, how much can they needle her? and with a needle her to come to a conclusion with whatever she's writing, given now it's still in january about sort of the judicial system this is like we are still working at relatively expeditious speed. >> well argument was only january 9th. typically the way that apologizes needle each other's different than how you and i needle each other. >> the -- way i needle you. >> i wasn't going to say. that how we needle each other. what they do is they send graphs back and forth and they're trying to see if they can agree to legal reasoning. it's a very legalistic dialogue, an intellectual argument, not a could you please pick up your laundry

bag. >> it's how i needed michael schmidt. michael, it seems to me on one hand there is a broad part of the american public well some part of american public when we getting? this but on the other hand if there was meaningful descend on trump would explode that dissent to the ends of the earth and certainly with the bounds of the legal system. do you think it's important, at least politically speaking, in terms of trump's, the utility of this decision being used as a tool in trump's arsenal that everybody basically agreed to come to a general conclusion? >> i think more important than that is the massive issue that there was a delay in the justice department investigation into trump. it's a huge deal. it didn't take liz cheney two years to figure out there was a criminal problem here. but for some reason it took the

department of justice a long period of time. we don't have the full story of why that happened. but they started at the bottom. and of donald trump does not go on trial before the election, a big reason for that will be because of that delay and because garland moves so slowly. and that's a huge deal. >> can i interrupt you? because we had katie benner, your colleague, taking about that very reason in there is some reporting that suggests there is real concern by the doj in the transition from trump to biden, the trump was too -- they wanted to back away from prosecuting donald trump the effectively started with the bottom of the january six defendants and only after the house january six committee had this public spectacle detailing all the evidence pointed to trump do they feel a sufficient amount of pressure to pursue this in a meaningful way.

work me through how you think the department of justice is responding, can respond, might respond, given the reality that we are now looking at which is maybe the earliest we can get an enclosure. >> i don't think there's anything they can. do their subject to the schedule this outside of their hands. they could control this on the front and. they could move more quickly, they could have avoided special counsel earlier, and that would've started the clock earlier. once you start the clock, i tell me if i'm wrong, you start to lose control. and they have lost control. and now they are at the whims of these judges and as you were saying in the political story, it's not really clear how we can move each other along, with the schedule really is, how quickly will the move? and if the supreme court steps in that that won't happen until potentially the fall. so it raises the prospect that, and i've said this before, but i think it's really important, you can engage in trying to, or

throw an election, and then you can avoid going on trial about that and you can run for reelection to win, to essentially had that case dismissed. >> which feels like what is happening right now. lisa, in terms of the supreme court, it's an open question when we're gonna get this appellate court decision. we know trump is gonna appeal this to the highest court in the land. what would it take for the supreme court to take this up on an expedited basis? how unusual is that, giving way the way they've behaved on other items. jack smith trying to leapfrog the appellate court and they were like no thanks. >> yeah but it took jacks mitt 11 days between asking the supreme court for -- meaning to review the lower court's decision, and asking for expedited briefing on. that took them 11 days to say no, we're not going to do that. so that's for a positive that when the supreme court wants to

it can move. in an ordinary course, this would move at a sloths pace. an appellate, a petitioner at the supreme court, has 90 days after judgment to ask for -- >> to be clear, that means the appeals court can say don trump -- >> unanimous. >> you're not immune and he has 90 days to take into the supreme court. >> in the ordinary course. and then the person who opposes that review has another 30 days to oppose, and two weeks after that, and no sooner, it can be distributed to the justices to find out whether to grant review in the first place. so that illustrates how slowly this moves. on the other hand, the supreme court is proof positive when there's a will there's a way. it's also the same court that reviewed bush v. gore in four days between the florida supreme court decision and its own written decision with oral arguments and briefing in between. just four days. it also made a decision in the

nixon case that's often use as the closest precursor to this, seven weeks from the district court opinion to the supreme court opinion. again, lots of briefing, an argument in between. this supreme court is capable of moving. whether it wants to -- >> isn't entirely from question. donald trump has two massive -- in this. one is making the basic prosecution, the basic prosecution of trump and his inner circle appear to be a partisan witch hunt. that's apparently part of the reason merrick garland said on his hands, for lack of a better metaphor, in the early days of the biden administration. the other thing he has done that has been remarkably effective, is to suggest that expediting these trials, getting the verdict, whether guilty or innocent, is somehow partisan. that idea has really seeped into the groundwater here, and it's sort of feels that even the judges are buying it. aileen cannon down in florida really seems to be slow walking

this. you will wrote, i think, the definitive piece on aileen cannon and her experience, as far as overseeing this case. and it feels like she's telling the trump line on this. >> the problem that she has is, when this all started, and it all came out that he was under investigation for the documents, she made these rulings that legal experts and judges above her looked at and said made no sense, relating to whether the government, what the government can do with the evidence they took from donald trump's from mar-a-lago. and out of all the judges that could have gotten the case, she now has the actual case. she is someone, as we detailed, it has extremely little experience, has a highly complicated case in front of her, as shown unusual leanings towards trump, and can very easily make sure that this can have this trial not happen until after the election.

>> and is skillfully not saying explicitly i'm going to push this. but it's kind of like death by 1000 cuts. small incremental delays that seem reasonable. >> and whether it's fair or not, in our system judges, and illegal folks would say this is not fair, get branded by the people who appoint them. so she's a trump appointee. does that mean that she's on the take for donald trump? or does that mean that the perception is there? whatever it is, she has that perception amongst a lot of folks who are closely watching this. >> we are seeing a lot. karen henderson, and george w. appointee, and aileen cannon a trump appointee. my friends, it's been great having you. here thank you time and thoughts this evening. coming up, nikki haley turns up the attacks on trump and biden and barack obama. more on that, coming up. but first, new subpoenas to fani willis may require her to

testify publicly about alleged affair. what does that all mean for her case against donald trump? that's next. trump? that's next. discover a different first treatment. immunotherapies work with your immune system to attack cancer. but opdivo plus yervoy is the first combination of 2 immunotherapies for adults newly diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer that has spread, tests positive for pd-l1, and does not have an abnormal egfr or alk gene. opdivo plus yervoy is not chemotherapy, it works differently. it helps your immune system fight cancer in 2 different ways. opdivo and yervoy can cause your immune system to harm healthy parts of your body during and after treatment. these problems can be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you have a cough; chest pain; shortness of breath; irregular heartbeat; diarrhea; constipation; severe stomach pain; severe nausea or vomiting; dizziness; fainting; eye problems; extreme tiredness; changes in appetite, thirst or urine; rash; itching; confusion; memory problems; muscle pain or weakness; joint pain; flushing; or fever. these are not all the possible side effects.

problems can occur together and more often when opdivo is used with yervoy. tell your doctor about all medical conditions including immune or nervous system problems, if you've had or plan to have an organ or stem cell transplant, or received chest radiation. your search for 2 immunotherapies starts here. ask your doctor about opdivo plus yervoy. a chance to live longer.

you want to see who we are as americans? ask your doctor about opdivo plus yervoy. i'm peter dixon and in kenya... we built a hospital that provides maternal care. as a marine... we fought against the taliban and their crimes against women. and in hillary clinton's state department... we took on gender-based violence in the congo. now extremists are banning abortion and contraception right here at home. so, i'm running for congress to help stop them. for your family... and mine. i approved this message because this is who we are. you may know adam schiff's work to protect the rule of law, or to build affordable housing, or write california's patients bill of rights. but i know adam through the big brother program. we've been brothers since i was seven. he stood by my side as i graduated from yale, and i stood by his side when he married eve, the love of his life. i'm a little biased, but take it from adam's little brother. he'll make us all proud

as california senator. i'm adam schiff and i approve this message. >> there's some news out of fulton county, georgia, today where district attorney, fani willis, who has charged donald trump and 18 others and the sprawling election conspiracy case, where she has been subpoenaed. d. a. willis may have to testify publicly at a hearing next month over allegations that she was having an affair with prosecutor, nathan wade, and that mr. wade benefited financially from the relationship. the subpoenas were part of a new lawsuit filed by mike roman. an alleged fake elector and trump codefendant who is trying to disqualify d. a. willis from this case. mr. roman is now claiming that d. a. willis is intentionally withholding information ahead

of this hearing, which miss willis denies. it is unclear if willis or weight will testify. they can both seek to quash the subpoenas. but if they do testify, they will do so under oath, and the hearing will be televised per georgia law. meanwhile, the judge in this case, judge scott mcafee who's also overseeing willis's election conspiracy case, has directed miss willis to respond to them the conduct allegations by friday. these allegations are merely that. allegations. and as of right now, they do not change the facts of the actual case against trump. but could they change its outcome? joining me now is anthony michael price, assistant of law at georgia state university. it is great to see you, thank you for making the time, i know that we checked and when this case was kind, of what should we call it, the situation was first unfolding down in georgia. and there is more evidence

produced of the relationship between mr. weight and miss willis. i wonder what you think happens now in terms of next steps for miss willis, and where judge mcafee may come down on this. >> well, the first thing that we will have to see is whether or not the d. a. finds the subpoenas to prevent her, to prevent special prosecutor wade and others from testifying in the hearing that is scheduled for february 15th. that is the first thing i am looking for. in addition to seeing what the filing contains, that is due on february 2nd. at least before february 2nd. i think ultimately, as a legal matter, it is very unlikely that the judge will disqualify the office, or will find that the prosecution is somehow tainted by this relationship, if all of the facts bear out as a seem to be bearing out. there are two basic claims that are an issue here. one, the selective prosecution claim, in other words, it was only pursued in advance because there was a profit to be had by the d. a. , and by the special

cues prosecutor weighed. and then there is a claim that there is a larger conflict of interest that there is a pecuniary game to be had from the conviction of these defendants. i think that that latter claim is a very unlikely to manifest into anything in terms of a disqualification. the former one is also very unlikely to get judge mcafee's attention. because it is very unlikely for these defendants to show the special prosecutor wade and his involvement in this case is really the driving force behind the prosecution. it is really hard to bring a selective prosecuting plane. ultimately, they are very likely to fail. >> but there are other efforts that the state, if not the courts can pursue, to get the a willis taken off of this case. is that right? there are various commissions that have been established, disbanded, there are various levels of evolution, but it appears that the republicans in the state are, if not eager are

interested in further examining ethics breaches in that case, it could be problematic for d. a. willis. is that right? >> it could be. there are a lot of moving parts here. there is a disciplinary body that was created last year, for prosecutors that the general assembly could not really have implemented because that is being brought to the general assembly again this weekend. that could be a source of the headache for the d. a. down the road. there's also a senate committee hearing or committee that has been formed to investigate the fulton county d. a. 's office and this particular incident. that could be potentially problematic and there will be subpoena power within that committee. it is really untested power against the state of georgia. and the georgia constitution. that could be dragged out for quite some time before any information is produced. there is also the potential for impeachment that i think would have no success, no success in the general assembly should that be pursued.

but that could also be a potential headache for the d. a. , and more damning evidence is unearthed. there are those outside forces, which would certainly create a headache, it could create a problem for the d. a. . i think we really have to separate these issues into two buckets. one, the political, the other, the legal. the legal one being does this derail the case in any significant way? that seems to be really unlikely to happen. the political side of things, the optics of it dealing with these kinds of outside institutions looking in, and engaging in oversight, that is something that i think the d. a. will really have to contend with, and it will be a major headache, again, even if the ultimate legal questions before the judge mcafee are decided in their favor. >> the headaches are one thing. but one would think that all of the swirl of perceived controversy here might undermine her ability, in the most basic sense, to get plea deals. i think in december, fani

willis said that there was a possibility that more of these codefendants would be taking plea deals with the state. we have not heard any plea deals announced, and i wonder if you would draw a line between the allegations that are in the air now, the suggestion that maybe we should take it off, or the case is weakened, which is obviously and the intention from michael roman and his allies. and the inability of the d. a. 's office, at least from the outside to secure more peels from these defendants. >> it is a very mixed bag. if i was the defendant sitting in their shoes, on the one hand this looks really good because it is creating a dialogue that is completely removed from the narrative of the case. on the other hand people have short memories. juries in the process are meant to ferret out people who come in with prejudices. there is a real mixed risk here. and the other thing is if there was a disqualification there might be the chance that this gets sent to a. d. a. 's office

and has no interest in pursuing prosecutions. or that will make super favorable deals or it could go to a neighboring office like in dekalb county which is very similar to fulton county where you have equal prosecutors and the bandwidth from purple will to do and continue this investigation. so that is a real risk as well. i do not know if it ultimately will affect anybody's calculus especially if they can get a particularly good deal, i think that what we have to see is what happens with the case on february 15th, and the evidentiary hearing, because this might be much to do about nothing. there are certainly evidence that is politically not ideal. it certainly is implicating potential ethical issues and the like. but if it is not going to derail the case or remove the district attorney's office from the case, hedging the r. i. c. o. charge, it is something that you probably don't want to do.

>> hedging your bets against a r. i. c. o. charge, never a good idea. thank you for your expertise on this matter, i really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> coming up, nikki haley unveiled a new novel theory about who is to blame for the political division in this country and here is a hint, it is not donald trump or joe biden. i'll give you the answer, right after the break. the break. >> woman: what's my safelite story? i'm a photographer. and when i'm driving, i see inspiration right through my glass. so when my windshield cracked, it had to be fixed right. i scheduled with safelite autoglass. their experts replaced my windshield and recalibrated my car's advanced safety system. ♪ acoustic rock music ♪ >> woman: safelite is the one i trust. they focus on safety so i can focus on this view. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

you can't leave without cuddles. but, you also can't leave covered in hair. with bounce pet, you can cuddle and brush that hair off. bounce, it's the sheet.

what causes a curve down there? can it be treated? stop typing, and start talking. it could be a medical condition called peyronie's disease, or pd. and it could be treated without surgery. find a specialized urologist who can diagnose pd and build a treatment plan with you. visit makeapdplan.com today. what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

you're probably not easily persuaded to switch

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

>> republican presidential candidate, nikki haley, has a new strategy. she's finally ready to attack donald trump. as long as she can attack joe biden at the same time. the new york times reports today in a new series titled grumpy old men, the haley campaign plans to start unveiling online videos, digital ads, and voter emails that will underscore the ways in which haley has argued that the two party front-runners are alike. okay. set aside the fact, for a moment, that in the kayleigh was trying to attack her opponents for being will be referencing a movie for 30 years ago. governor haley's new strategy seems to be to draw comparisons between two people, who apart from their advanced ages, have almost nothing in common. in other words, nikki haley is literally alienating almost all voters on every side of the issue as if she has no idea which people she's supposed to

be courting. and if you needed a clearer example of that, nikki haley sat down today for an interview with the breakfast club, which is one of america's most popular syndicated black talk radio shows, and on that show, nikki haley decided to blame america's division on the first black president. >> i think with obama, that was if you go back, that is when we really started to feel the division. that is when we really, it was -- >> [inaudible]. white supremacist, though. >> it was everything. everything was exaggerated with obama administration. it became more about gender, more about race, more about separating americans instead of bringing them together. >> permit me for a second, nikki haley such during the obama administration everything became more and more about separating people by gender and race. it has been nearly eight years since barack obama was president.

but it is worth remembering, what barack obama actually did on the issues of gender and race, he passed the act which close the gender pay gap. he became the first president in history to endorse marriage equality. he worked ensure health insurance coverage birth control under the affordable care act. when it came to race, president obama started the my brother's keeper initiative to help young men of color overcome opportunity gaps. he used his position to speak for grieving communities, many of them communities of color after the massacre at the church, and after the killings of unarmed black teenagers like trayvon martin and michael brown. and all of that, according to nikki haley, was about dividing americans. >> it became more about separating americans instead of bringing them together. >> that was because of the right-wing media. >> i don't think, everybody is at fault, i'm not saying that

one person did this, i'm saying under that administration, it really did cause some, you just felt, people felt like they were being put in camps. >> the obama administration was dividing administrations by putting people in camps. just take a second remember how nikki haley's actual primary opponent in this race, how he ran for president the first time around. >> donald j trump is calling for a total and complete shut down, of muslims entering the united states, until our countries representatives can figure out what is going on. >> when mexico sends its people, they are not sending their best. they're bringing drugs, there are bringing crime, they are rapists, and some, i assume, are good people. >> donald trump is now running on an immigration plan that would literally put people into camps. based on their immigration status. but it is all obama's fault?

beyond the factual absurdity here, what is the goal of going on one of the most popular black radio programs and the country to disparage the man who won reelection in 2012 with 93% of the black vote. who is the strategy for? and how long the keely keep this up? we will talk about that in the state of the 2024 presidential race, next.

i have never kissed up to trump. i've always told him the hard truth. and now he said yesterday the stock market is great because people are excited about him being president. how many more times are you going to let him lie about things that aren't true and say, you know what, something is not quite right? and this is also about a general election. this was about who can win. he can't win moderates. he can't win independents. he can't win suburban women. he lost in 2018. he lost in 2020. he lasted 2022. how many more times do you have to lose before you say, you know what, maybe that's not the guy? >> until now, nikki haley refused who after donald trump in any meaningful way. that is the primary season heats up she's finally shifting gears. from park into neutral. joining me is charlie sykes, editor at large of the bulwark. charlie, thank you. i don't know, everyone is like, here it is, it's a big nikki

haley. the arrows are out for donald trump. and it's, like she's going after him for tariffs. i don't know, do you think we're seeing the new nikki haley right now? >> well, every hour on the hour i get a text from her saying charlie, it's nikki, have you heard the latest thing that donald trump has done? he's lying about me. then she tries to sell me a t- shirt based on his threat to exile anybody from margot who contributes to her. and just when you think that maybe she has found the voice, you get something like what we heard today. nikki haley comes up to the ball, looks like she's going to kick it, and then pulls it away herself, to mix the metaphor. she's not the one we've been waiting for. even though she's willing to say donald trump is a liar, donald trump is a loser, she is not willing to say the kind of things that chris christie was saying, that he's fundamentally

unfit. i think that holdouts where she's trying to say, if the country is divided, it's because of barack obama shows how hard it is for republicans in this particular electorate to deal with the damage that donald trump has done. they just cannot take him on and placed him in the context and say look we are in this moment because that guy came the golden escalator and republicans capitulated to him over and over and over again. >> it also seems she's taking a page almost from trump's playbook trying to invoke the specter of obama. obama divided the country? don't even get into the division question if you're going to punt it to obama. this is a tried and true mechanism from donald trump to foment fear in and around the country's first black president. it seems like she's adopting the same strategy here. >> very much so. what you are seeing is the addiction to whataboutism. if you are going to attack

trump you also have to make it very clear to republican voters that you also oppose the democrats. i understand the political tactic here that you are running in a republican primary, but as you pointed out, the grumpy old man is not only tired. it doesn't make any particular substantive point. but going back to obama, i think what she's trying to do is saying this is one of the he regina he regina erogenous zones -- that reminds us how dangerous and anti-anti constitutional he is, a man who was impeached for trying to overthrow a free and fair election, and you are going in saying, yeah, he is not the cause of the division. it is this other guy that has

been gone for years. this is the problem with nikki haley. she just can't bring -- remember the hot mic, alex, the hot mic incident with chris christie? >> yes. >> said, you know, what she's going to get smoked because she's just not up to it. >> yeah. >> i think you are seeing that demonstrated again. >> i think her inability to talk about race, and she seems so disoriented and so marble mile whenever she's asked about race, i want to play this, she was asked about the way in which donald trump has tried to weaponize her her indian name nimarata -- >> you think trump mocking your birth name was racist? >> i think we can let other people decide. that -- we will let donald trump sleep with that all he wants. >> oh, he don't care. >> i mean, she can't even

defend herself and her heritage, to say nothing about the heritage and identities of all other americans of color who are maligned by donald trump. i find that shocking. >> i find it sadly not shocking because we've seen how republicans have become really gun-shy in talking about race. when she was asked, is a former governor of south carolina, what was the cause of the civil war, and she was unable to mention slavery, that was a reflection of the fact that she thinks the the republican party voters don't want to hear that kind of thing anymore. they don't want to have racism called out anymore, which shows not only that she's somewhat timid about this but she has a view of the republican electorate that may not be completely inaccurate. but here's the other point. that's kind of revealing. she's not gonna be elected president. she's not gonna be don trump. donald trump. and at this point she has to decide, who does she want to be? does she want to go down to defeat by being mealymouthed before she has to stand on the

stage behind on trump and endorse him? or does she want to make a full- throated statement of principle of who she is and what she thinks the republican party can be? and from moment to moment it feels like she is shifting. if she's been edging up to there and saying i'm gonna go out here with my integrity intact and then she says yeah, maybe not. >> it's amazing to watch the psychological push and pull or the ethical push and pull that is so clearly on display. charlie sykes, we still have 24 days to go, theoretically at least. in the nikki haley candidacy. please come back soon and talk more about this. i appreciate you. >> anytime. >> coming up, this week in congress, we've got to witness something that's more rare than a solar eclipse. in fact it has not happen in 148 years and it is not a good sign that it is happening now. we will talk with brendan buck about what it means for congress and the country in 2024, coming up next. n 2024, coming up next.

he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

gusto is easy, modern small business payroll. starting at just $46 a month. but it's so much more than that. with gusto, paychecks are deposited in just a few clicks. gusto calculates and files your payroll taxes automatically. gusto offers health insurance for nearly any budget. and gusto even connects you with certified hr experts. it's fast, easy, and affordable. gusto is payroll and benefits built for small businesses. get started for free at gusto.com

only sleep number smart beds let you each choose your individual firmness and comfort. your sleep number setting. and actively cools and warms up to 13 degrees on either side. save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus 0% interest for 36 months on select smart beds. ends monday. only at sleep number.

>> last night the homeland security committee approved two articles of impeachment against online security secretary alejandro mayorkas in a party line vote of 18 to 15. just to underscore how unusual all of this is, it has been more than a century since a member of the presidents cabinet has been impeached. the last time was an 1876, when secretary of war william belknap -- and basically prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain. in other words, taking bribes. this time around, republicans are moving to impeach secretary mayorkas for failing to uphold the law and breaching the public trust. sounds official. it is not actually a crime or a misdemeanor. by all accounts secretary mayorkas mayorkas has been doing his job, a job that allows him to determine how and when to detain migrants, to decide which migrants to prioritize, and to use his

authority to allow migrants to temporarily live and work in the united states for humanitarian reasons. someone should tell steve scalise. >> secretary mayorkas's job is to protect americas homeland. it's a homeland security secretary. when it comes before congress, he testifies under oath that america's border secure. that's a flat out lie. secretary of homeland security is the person in charge of the border. he can secure the border today. he has chosen not to. >> the articles impeachment against secretary mayorkas are now headed to the house floor for a vote as early as next week. joining me now, brendan, buck, msnbc political analyst and former press secretary to former house speaker john boehner. brandon, is the impeachment of alejandro mayorkas the big winner for republicans in 2024? >> well they certainly think it is. and you know what? it may be.

at least the issue of immigration is proven to be a winner for republicans. i think that is why they have -- it's on the gas here. last year polls show that people blame biden more than -- they blame republicans on this issue. and anything they can do to put in the spotlight they probably think is good, and i think we're probably giving them too much credit to think that there actually is a national political angle here. a lot of this is just pure base republican politics. it even just house conference politics where there's been so much energy spent convincing people at home that the administration's willfully allowing immigrants into the country for whatever agenda, and you tell people that this problem is going on for a long time, eventually gonna expect you to do something about it. this is perhaps the easiest thing that they can grasp and do. it certainly cheapens what impeachment is all about. but a lot of times you have to remember, a lot of house republicans are in their own universe, in their own heads. they think they are solving really important problems, whether or not the average

voter looks at them and take them seriously at all. >> i think it's fair to mention here, they think they have a winner by impeaching alejandro mayorkas. but the reality is, the potential that would go farther to solving the border crisis is the bipartisan immigration deal being scuffled by the republican front runner, donald trump. do you think republicans don't pay a price for that when it comes to national interest in immigration? >> they're obviously getting the president a huge opportunity. this is why it's so frustrating. we have an incredibly rare opportunity right now to do something about the border. and if you are a republican who has always rejected these compromises because democrats have insisted on legalization, this is an opportunity where that's not even on the table. you really just get a stronger border policy. this is the argument mitchell cattle has been making to senators. and yet we are walking away from that.

it is very emblematic of what the house has become. we are putting this type of theater in place of solving actual problems. i think what i'm concerned is that no one does pay a political price anymore for not putting policy first. you are rewarded for theater. that is what so much of the house has become. in 2016 there was a somewhat similar effort to impeach the irs commissioner. i don't know if you remember. >> oh yes. >> the freedom caucus was trying to impeach him because they were upset, some of his past, actions he wasn't even the commissioner at the time, some of the things people are upset, with that we made the argument that this was not serious, then impeachment should mean something, and when this was brought up for a vote, over 100 members of the republican conference voted with leadership to defeat it. we were much more serious place just eight years ago when that took place. it's a very different house now. theater is rewarded. >> i don't know whether i'm getting too deep down the conspiracy rabbit, all but the

fact that mitch mcconnell was so clear that they were going to punt on this in service to trump really felt like kind of an almost backhanded disclosure. do you think that was mitch mcconnell, if you will, getting the last laugh? >> mcconnell obviously does the politics better than anybody. mitch mcconnell was trying to find some way to send money to ukraine. that's what this is all about for him. i think he now realizes that he's exhausted everything that they can do here. it's not surprising. we've talked about this before. immigration is the single hardest thing for us to be able to do. leaving donald trump aside, this was going to be very hard to do, just because of the incentives of the republicans to cater to that base again. but donald trump walking into this day's even issue guaranteed it wasn't going to happen, and it's surprising that it took that long for mcconnell to say it out loud. >> i'll say. the only good th