don't buy this at all, but they often come up with story ideas. george had promised a friend that he would help him get into their kids school, and the george realized that he forgot and had to call his wife to come in, his ex-wife rather to come and save the day. we have an episode about that. it's about the bonds of friendship that silky thing together. >> that does it for the saturday edition of morning joe. we will see saturday at six a.m.. the weekend starts right now. t steele. the big news breaking overnight, the special counsel in the trump appointed judge in the mar-a-lago documents case, it is coming to a head. the new findings that the

center of that drama. -- it's here in the 14th amendment arguments before the supreme court. and senator alex pay as here, yes, senate still in session, to discuss capitol hill chaos. crab or coffee inside alum, welcome to the weekend. this weekend, we start with classified documents. not president biden's but donald trump's. developing late last, night special counsel jack smith filed a motion nifor judge aile cannon to reconsider an order that smith says what identify more than two dozen witnesses, exposing them to threats. after reading that motion, judge cannon order jack smith to hand nnover that evidence to trump's lawyers by today. miss nbc legal analyst mary mccord ssis with, us she is a former principal deputy

assistant attorney general for the national security division and co-host of one of my favorite podcasts, prosecuting donald trump. >> there's a lot of drama going on mpwith judge cannon. i've always thought that this was sort of a live wire with her. she's proving herself to be that. walk us through what is going on between her and jack smith right now. seemingly seemed to be very important. >> this all started when mr. trump to file the motion to compel discovery, a very broad motion saying, we need all kinds onof material from all agencies all over the entire government. they attached to that a number of documents that would reveal names of government witnesses, sensitive ongoing witnesses. they redacted that under seal for sometime jacks mitt came in with his, responds filing his attachments also under receo an saying that it would reveal and put people in danger if their

names were revealed. potential government witnesses, their statements that they've made, ongoing investigations. judge cannon then ruled earlier this week, sorry, no, you have not shown a compelling government interest in keeping that information redacted. that is narrowly tailored and you are going to have to turn it over. what jack smith did last night's came in and said move e for reconsideration saying, judge cannon, you made ata mistake of law because you applied a standard of compelling government needed to a discovery motion. that doesn't apply here. good faith basis to withhold sensitive information, including information that can put witnesses clthat risk, that is what seis the standard. 11th circuit has held, that other courts have cheld that. thing, one email clear. think, two would be a manifest injustice thif this information were made public because it could put witnesses safety at risk and compromise ongoing investigations.

>> we have a full screen of that 24-page filing in federal court in florida about that wrong standard. this comes after a texas woman was arrested already for death threats against judge cannon. we already know about when it's intimidation eaand the kinds of things other witnesses and even jurors in other cases have experienced when it comes to donald trump and his cases. i think this is going to shake out? are we going to go back to the appeals court in the 11th h circuit or will bayswater down again? >> i actually suspect that she then immediately put a ruling on hold and told enmr. trump's team they d have until february 23rd, forgive me if i got that wrong, to actually file a response. i do think that once she reads the law the jack smith has pointed out to her -- >> a judge reading the, law that's gean interesting idea. >> it reads as much more

concrete. so what he did with come in with a lot more detail about the details about what is that risk here and points s out the point that hyou just made, symone. it's not like this would be unprecedented. we don't have to wait. and tewhat is interesting, actually quote that light from the d.c. opinion and a gag order case for othe d.c. circuit, says we fdon't have t wait until someone gets physically threatened or attacked him violently to take action. where there is a record of people who are witnesses or otherwise involved with the trump cases of receiving threats, fbi has been attacked, judges have bireceived death threats, we don't have to wait for that to happen. we r can take action. jack smith sites that and has also filed a separate under seal them and ex parte pleading about a witness, potential government witness whose threats against that person have been so bad that there is an hoongoing criminal investigation. says this has got to remain under seal. i think she will change her mind. if not, i do expect that he will take this up to the 11th

circuit on a petition for -- >> their subtext to simone's question which is, what is happening with can, and do you think it is bias or incompetence? >> i think there's a little bit of both. i think there biis someone confidence here. she applied the wrong legal standard. it's not difficult to determine what dthe legal standard is. but clearly she has revealed through the very beginning of this case a bias. i don't know whether she thinks she wants n'to just make sure sr is putting the government to its burden and not showing any favoritism from the government -- >> feels like she's showing a of favoritism towards donald trump. >> to that point, to the 11th circuit, they've already smackdown once. >> twice. >> exactly, i was about to correct myself. twice. i think a third smackdown would be the final straw for her in this case. you have a lot of folks out there looking at her in the legal community. it's not just sitting outside. but in the legal community, feeling there something not write about how she's

approaching this. how do you think this plays out with the 11th circuit? if it comes up that way, where they're like, jack smith is like, we're seeking her removal from the bench in this case. what is the president for something like that? how does that play out as well? >> i don't know that jack smith will do that. i do h think, that if he does n reconsider, he's likely to take that up. because witnesses lives are at risk and he has kind of got to try to hatake it higher. i don't, know that at this point, even though i know this would be a third, time that he would ask for her recusal. because the standard is really, really hard to meet. i think there are enough things that she has done in the record that we can look at him think were unreasonable and think they show bias to trump but they should have an argument. she would have an attorney to argue on her side of this, that you have an argument that she's just managing her cases and in the way she sees fit and she hasn't done anything to show such a bias that she has to be

removed. i think would be a heavy lift for her. >> it is something to watch. that was the latest news. some other big news that happened this week was robert hur, the special counsel assigned to investigate president biden's handling of classified documents, when he was a citizen, post his vice presidency. came out with this report this weekend it was met with some fervor, if you will, from democrats, oufolks in the legal community. i want to play for you vice president harris itand her reaction to special counsel for. on those people at home who seen it or read the report, says that joe biden, there is no criminal activity. there will be no crimes to be charged. the report goes on to talk about how the president is a feeble, elderly man and a jury might be sympathetic to him and he was forgetful to some very loose characterizations.

here's what vice president harris had to say about that. >> the way that the presidents demeanor in that report was characterized could not be more wrong on the facts. and clearly politically motivated. gratuitous. and so, i will say that, when it comes to the role and responsibility of a prosecutor in a situation like that, we should expect that there would be a higher level of integrity than what we saw. >> mary, you're a prosecutor. the vice president was attorneye general of california, the second largest only to the u.s. department of justice lwhere y work. what rtdo you think? it seems . crazy for me. >> for a public document it is. i will tell you that, for an internal doj document, the kinds of things we see mr. her rock right about wouldn't be that surprising. for every case that you investigate, you write a

prosecution memo. either recommending we seek an indictment or readout. that prosecution memo sets out all the evidence that would be used to meet the elements of the crime to ethinking of charging. it also said at all of the evidence that detracts from that. we're undermines your evidence. i'm would also set for things like a witness might be sympathetic to the jury or the defendant if the defendant syto the stand may be sympathetic tot the jury. or might even mention memory issues. it's not crazy that it internal doj document would go through all of these things. but mr. herr knew he was working under the special counsel regulations, which explicitly say that he has to write a report and that report, if the attorney general approves, will be made public. he knew that the attorney general garland has said, all make it public. he gadidn't want to be perceive as hiding anything. it would have been absolutely excoriated if he had. knowing, that the fact that mr. her went nearly 400 pages and

included really extraneous ed information that was not really relevant to the key issue. which this not enough evidence bring charges. >> that's the part that is going to mean here. on two fronts. one, hur nobody was doing and he knew that, he stayed in the first paragraph, we've got nothing here folks so we're going grto move on. but for the next 399 pages, i'm going to tell you why joe biden is a feeble old -- as he put, it well meaning elderly man with a poor memory. diminished faculties and advancing age. what does that have to do with your opening statement that there are no things -- nothing here to move on for? there is that piece. the other pieces merrick garland. to allow that document to go nt into the public the way he did, to me, is another level of incompetence inside the doj that relates back to comey and clinton. what is going on there that

someone can take a pen and sit down n and go, gratuitous, not necessary, not legal, not relevant to the case in front of us. >> i want to first responders using a competent the doj with respect to comey. i was in doj at that time and my jaw was dropping when he went on television and at a press conference. >> y'all didn't know it was happening. >> he did not come see the attorney -- >> he was like, let me set the record straight. >> as a my house, like what in the world? >> that was not something that a.g. blast or anyone in the department blast. i think a.g. garland was at least he probably perceived himself as between a rock and a hard place. you're right, he could've, said these things aren't relevant, take them out. and he would have been absolutely lambasted. what are you trying to hide? why won't you be transparent? that's a decision that obviously thhe made in favor of

transparency. i'm sure there is a lot of discussions. where it might have been a better placed interject would have been earlier on, even though mr. hur special counsel, he has to report to the a.g.. maybe earlier on they could've set parameters. >> like this is going to be public. we don't want all your bases and are republican lingo up in their. it doesn't matter. did he do crimes or did he not? >> we're in the middle of the campaign. the department of justice principles or you do not put your thumb on the scale and do something that favors one side or the meother during a campaig it's early but we are in the middle of a campaign. >> we need some political sensitivity netraining over there. so they understand veexactly what's going on. got , stick, around we've more we want to talk to you about. after the, break the new deadline for donald trump's legal team in his community case and michigan secretary of state jocelyn benson awill joi us to break down the 14th amendment case and the supreme court this week. you are watching amthe weekend.

! especially for those sudden gush moments. always discreet protects like no other. with a rapid dry core that locks in your heaviest gush quickly for up to zero leaks. always discreet- the protection we deserve! there's nothing better than a subway series footlong. except when you add an all new footlong sidekick. like the philly with a new $2 footlong churro. sometimes the sidekick is the main event. you would say that. every epic footlong deserves the perfect sidekick. -we're done. -what about these? looks right. nooo... nooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty absorbs spills like a sponge. and is 2x more absorbent so you can use less. bounty, the quicker picker upper. as the world keeps moving, help prevent covid-19 from breaking your momentum. you may have already been vaccinated against the flu, but don't forget this season's updated covid-19 shot too.

with nurtec odt, i can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent migraine attacks, all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. ask about nurtec odt. bombas makes absurdly comfortable underwear. made to move with you, not on you. because your basic things should be your best things. one purchased equals one donated. visit bombas.com and get 20% off your first order. when you shop wayfair, one purchased equals one donated. you get big deals for your home - every day. so big, we'll have you saying... am i a big deal? yeah you are, because it's a big deal, when you get a big deal. wayfair deals so big that you might get a big head. because with savings so real - you can get your dream sofa for half the price. wayfair. it's always a big deal. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪

i'm daniel lurie and i've spent my career fighting poverty, helping people right here in san francisco. i'm also a father raising two kids in the city. deeply concerned that city hall is allowing crime and lawlessness to spread. now we can do something about it by voting yes on prop e. a common sense solution that ensures we use community safety cameras to catch repeat offenders and hold them accountable. vote yes on e.

donald trump has until monday to request a states federal election interference trial. that's a trial that has been on hold until an appeals court decided trump had quote unquote total immunity while he was president from any crimes he may have done. , well that court unanimously decided that donald trump did not. but trump can further delay his

trial monday by signaling that he plans to appeal to the supreme court. msnbc legal analyst mary mccord is back with us. we will know monday, the deadline. if donald trump's team doesn't file anything than tuesday kicks in and judge chuck king can then put that trial back on schedule. what do you think is going to happen here in terms of whether trump decides to go after the state so he can appeal? and even if he appeals of the supreme court, they might not take it up. >> by monday, i think it's almost a certainty that he will file a motion to stay. what he's asking to do is stay the mandate, stay the circuit sending a mandate. basically passing the ball back to judge tkachuk. well -- pending filing for sexual raleigh. i don't see what he did to the petition by monday night, because one, he was attracted. two circuits i don't have to do is file a motion to state by that time. and his lawyers have been pretty busy this past weekend

probably haven't gone the written yet. a, three they want to delay, why are they file adelie? or supreme court could grant it just based on the motion. they did that in bush v. gore. or they could grant this stay and give him a deadline to file his petition, two weeks or something like that. in something shorter than normal. or they could deny this day. i think it's entirely possible they will deny this day and deny sir even if a petition comes. it was unanimous, rolling it covered all the bases. they don't have to agree with every point made by the judges to firm. they think that there is not -- they think that the ultimate conclusion was correct, even if there are bits and pieces that are not weight bearing in that opinion that they don't agree with, they don't have to take it just to correct those. >> you put your finger i think on the salient point in this particular matter. coming before the court. they don't want to touch this

thing. they don't want to go near it. and you have an unmarked decision -- unanimous decision by the lower court. there is no need for them to open that door here. i think you're, right they deny sir and they go, you know what? live with it and move on. they have enough brewing in other areas that they don't want to dance on this one. >> especially in light of what we saw this, week where they treated the 14th amendment like a hot potato that they didn't want to touch. almost wonder if you, listening to the world arguments this week war, more importantly, listening to the questions the justices were asking, if i give you any sense of their appetite to deal with immunity. >> obviously, they didn't talk about things like immunity there. but they definitely steered very far away from getting into the substance of, donald trump engaged in insurrection? a lot of people thought they would spend a lot of time on that. their time was almost all spent another sort of technical legal

issues, most importantly, why should the state have the power to determine who is going to be on the ballot for national office or federal office like the presidency? that said, it's clear that they are not super comfortable involving themselves in cases. even though the duty of the court to see what the law is unresolved cases when they need to. cases that have a political implication, particularly during an election year. the immunity case, just like the 14th amendment case, clearly has that implication. there's one thing i wanted to mention when we talk about potential for denial of certain. this is what they did in the trump v. thompson litigation. they have shown that they don't really like taking all the trump cases when there is a reason not to. and not litigation, very similarly, this is when mr. trump had tried to prevent the archivists from senate presidential records and white house records to the house select committee investigating january six. he lost of the trial court, judge chutkan no less. lost in the d.c. circuit, unanimous opinion.

took it up to the supreme court both on a motion to stay pending search, they denied the motion today, the documents started following that very night. they denied certain. these are important issues but the circuit court opinion applied every possible test from the less restrictive to the most restrictive test. all judges concluded that he'd not entitled to executive privilege here. we don't need to review this. they've done it before. >> just in case people had not seen the thorough opinion, if you, will from the appeals court, we can put it up on the screen. they write, the judges altogether right there would be a striking paradox of the president, who learned with the constitutional duty to take care that the law be faithfully executed or the sole officer capable of defying those laws with impunity. maybe, maybe not. we'll see. >> if you are a prosecutor on one of these other cases and you hear trump's attorney this past week say, in front of the

supreme court, what happened on january 6th was shameful. >> it's crazy, are you going to play this? out because it's crazy. i think we have the sound. >> something we'll talk about on the other side. >> judge kavanaugh. >> just to be, clear under 23 83, you agreed that someone could be prosecuted for insurrection by federal prosecutors and, if convicted, could be or shall be disqualified then from office? >> yes, the only caveat i would add is that our client is arguing that he has presidential i'm unity. so, we would not concede that he could be prosecuted for what he did on january six under 23. >> understood, asking the question that the theory of 23 83. >> calling it a, rye calling it shameful, calling it criminal, that's not the party line on what happened on january 6th. if you're a prosecutor in one of the other cases, and how do you then utilize that piece of sound? >> you know, he stuck with the

party line that the president -- former president was immune. that's how he kind of wiggled out of this. yes, we would concede, that if there was a successful prosecution under the criminal statute for insurrection, which, by the way, carries its own penalty of never holding office again. that then the 14th amendment would apply. but argued that the former president would be immune. i do think though that the advocate for mr. trump was very like any of mr. trump so the lawyers. usually playing for mr. trump when they argue. a fight with the judges oftentimes and are almost belligerent sometimes in court. that was not mr. mitchell at all. he was professional. i thought he was actually -- >> trump actually got legal representation. >> excellent legal representation. >> those dollars worked. >> somebody paid for it, i don't know if it was him. >> thank you for getting up early and being with us.

i'm, next michigan secretary of state jocelyn benson joins the table. she was at the supreme court for oral arguments in this case. you're watching the weekend. th. ♪you... can make it happen...♪ ♪♪ try dietary supplements from voltaren for healthy joints. a force to be reckon with. no, not you saquon. hm? you! your business bank account with quickbooks money, now earns 5% apy. 5% apy? that's new! yup, that's how you business differently. ♪ ♪ 5% apy? that's new! is this yours? you ready? surprise! i don't think you can clear this. i got this. it's yours now.

ma, ma, ma— ( clears throat ) for fast sore throat relief, try vicks vapocool drops. with two times more menthol per drop, and powerful vicks vapors to vaporize sore throat pain. vicks vapocool drops. vaporize sore throat pain. lactaid is 100% real milk, just without the lactose. delicious too. just ask my old friend, kevin. nothing like enjoying a cold one while watching the game. who's winning? we are, my friend. we are. with nurtec odt, i can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent migraine attacks, all in one.

don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. ask about nurtec odt. ♪ i wanna hold you forever ♪ hey little bear bear. ♪ ♪ ♪ i'm gonna love you forever ♪ ♪ ♪ c'mon, bear. ♪ ♪ ♪ you don't...you don't have to worry... ♪ ♪ be by your side... i'll be there... ♪ ♪ with my arms wrapped around... ♪

(vo) if you have graves' disease, your eye symptoms could mean something more.ere... ♪ that gritty feeling can't be brushed away. even a little blurry vision can distort things. and something serious may be behind those itchy eyes. up to 50% of people with graves' could develop a different condition

called thyroid eye disease, which should be treated by a different doctor. see an expert. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com the supreme court's decision on trump's ballot eligibility will affect every single state across the country. not just colorado. at least six states have debated unclear whether or not donald trump as a right run for president because of his attempt to overturn the 2020 election. michigan is one of those states of michigan secretary of state, jocelyn benson, is with us now. she attended third fatal arguments that the supreme court. >> attended the arguments and you caught the attention of your former law professor, now justice kagan. i want to play a little bit of what the justice said as it relates to you and your state. take a listen. >> sounds awfully national to

me. so, whatever means there are to enforce it would suggest that they have to be federal, national means. if you are from colorado where you are from wisconsin where you are from michigan and really with the michigan secretary of state did is going to make the difference between whether candidate a is elected or candidate b is elected. that seems quite extraordinary, doesn't it? >> no, your honor because ultimately it's this cord that's going to decide that question of federal constitutional eligibility and settle the issue for the nation. it certainly is not unusual that questions of national importance come up. >> million questions about what she was like as a law school professor, but i will say those for another day. you filed a brief in this case, you didn't argue either way, you just said the decision needs to be swift. tell me why. >> we need clarity. you can't have a scenario which voters are uncertain or a political party is uncertain or election administrators are uncertain as to who should be on the ballot. and, yes there are times in

which eligibility for candidates is certain, this is not one of them. this is a matter of first impression, a lot of competing issues here that the court really talked a bit in this oral arguments. and when you have an issue that is an issue of constitutional interpretation with national implications, you need a federal platform like the u.s. supreme court to weigh in and provide the clarity that the states need in this moment. >> how do you interpret the approach taken by a number of the justices that sort of turned on the idea that one state making a decision that affects all states. i don't know if i necessarily buy it. because i think the constitution gives the states, last time i checked, the right to make these independent and individual decisions about how they want to run their elections. so, we have examples of states, secretaries of state, saying the candidate a, b or c, you

qualify not qualify. you can be on the ballot or can't be on the ballot. that seemed to catch a lot of justices, that idea. it's interesting to me to have listened to -- i easing these terms in the context of the court but, for purposes of the conversation, the more liberal oriented judges. sort of aligning themselves with this idea that was being made by the opponents to the colorado decision. >> to add on top of that, it is a case going before the supreme court in texas has said -- for lack of a better term. this is laying the groundwork for even that? >> it's hard to say. where federalism is alive and well it's really about balance. as it relates to election, every state has the right responsibility to determine various issues around our elections. there are also federal standards and guardrails. the date of the election is one date for the most part.

nationwide. when you have a federal national election, congress, the u.s. supreme court, the u.s. constitution does have a critical role to play to ensure equality across the states. i was really struck by various justices talking about what would happen if there were different factual determinations different states 80 to different determinations on this question of what is an insurrection and what is aid and abet. court touchdown that a little bit but really went back, to when there is ambiguity, when it's not straightforward, whether a candidate is eligible or not. stephen that provides that uniformity across the state. >> we talk about a thursday amongst ourselves just a bit how the argument was made for the plaintiffs. with the colorado voters, the attorney for the colorado voters, jason murray. you're an attorney yourself, you are a law professor, dean of a law school. what do you make up the criticism about how jason marie argue this case? and he was not as forceful, but there are lots of things on the table to support his argument

and he did not give a forceful defense of the decision of the colorado supreme court. you are in the room. did it come off that way? what do you think? >> i think there's a balance have to strike between recognizing the very legal approach the justices were taking. they're taking it very seriously and it was clear to me they wanted to provide consensus, wanted to provide maybe even union numidia no decision and wanted to be rooted in the law not politics. coming to the court with arguments that are more political than legal could be problematic in cases like that. but i was really grateful that the court kept bringing back for all of the litigants the legal issues at play. that we have to look at this, as for countless of the players on the field in this particular moment, what is the best decision not just for the country but the precedent that will be created by the interpretation of the issue? >> what we're talking about, sometimes it gets framed as being about donald trump. really this about the voters of colorado in the voters across this country who want to know if the person they would be voting for is in fact eligible to be on that ballot. it comes against the backdrop

of elections that we know already are going to be tumultuous. great reporting in the washington post about folks like yourself, what you're doing to prevent election disruptions in michigan. election workers have been trained i had to de-escalate situations. state officials are setting up a testing program so workers can quickly contact their bosses and law enforcement if they are in danger. and i.d. already blue method in georgia. they are doing even more extreme things in arizona. they have tourniquet kids in arizona. >> terrible they have to do this. >> all of us have done for engagement and voter turnout work. one of the delicate balances and that is both preparing people for the possibilities that dates will go awry but not so overemphasizing that possibility. people saying, i'm not going to show. up in, this case not just i'm not going to trump to be a poll worker but i'm not going to shove to vote because i'm not sure that risk is worth the reward. >> providing that clarity and constancy and confidence for voters and election officials and the feeling of safety uncertainty in how we run elections is critical to defend

a democracy in this moment. we know the abundance of democracy, foreign or domestic, want to sow seeds of doubt. they want to create, chaos confusion, fear among citizens that will cause us to believe our vote doesn't matter. voice isn't important, it doesn't count. nothing in reality could be further from the truth. our job this year is to hope for the best but plan for every contingency but do so with an eye towards giving everyone involved, citizens, political parties, candidates, election officials themselves the confidence and clarity that things will be smooth, that we're prepared for everything and, that at the end of the day, voters will be able to trust the results of the election to be accurate presentation of the will of the people. >> what is a coordination among your colleagues and other states, including red states? to deal with what you're talking about and deal with what alicia just cited? the level of preparation that it's going to have to go into this election, are you finding folks taking this seriously across the board? we were like we're seeing with

a lot of these issues that come before the courts, sort of a patchwork of efforts? >> robocalls to. >> robocalls. >> we're keeping an eye on the investigation in new hampshire because we know that was perhaps a shot across the bow in terms of the use of artificial intelligence to deceive voters or full citizens. in this particular election. with coordination, we know we're facing a common enemy, focusing on impacted our elections, interfering with voters confidence in our elections regardless of whether citizens are going to vote for donald trump or joe biden or anyone else on the ballot. that said, we have a common responsibility to link arms and look at this as a commission, record the severe part is it affiliation. i've seen that from my colleagues particularly in battleground states. republican leadership in georgia, democratic leadership in nevada. and yet on election day, we're all focused on -- protecting every voter and the voice of every citizen. we found that just create unity in that great camaraderie.

we've entered the fire particularly in michigan and georgia, we've done this already. remember, 2020 we are facing covid. preparation, adapting, adjusting to various changing circumstances was the norm. that adaptation has never ended. we are still in the mode of what is every contingency plan for every particular tighter challenge. and at the end of the day. give focus to the, voters do his best for, them right by them and give them confidence that their voice matters and vote counts. >> the good work. we appreciate it very much. secretary jocelyn benson, thank you so much for being here at the table. next, a potential shake up at the top of the republican national committee. really? it's because the current chair isn't enough of an election denier. apparently. you're watching the weekend, we're going to talk about it. a with nurtec odt, i can treat a migraine when it strikes and prevent migraine attacks, all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using.

most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. ask about nurtec odt. ♪♪ we're building a better postal service. all parts working in sync to move your business forward. with a streamlined shipping network. and new, high-speed processing and delivery centers. for more value. more reliability. and more on-time deliveries. the united states postal service is built for how you business. and how you business is with simple, affordable and reliable shipping. usps ground advantage.

- i got the cabin for three days. it's gonna be sweet! affordable and what? i'm 12 hours short. - have a fun weekend. - ♪ unnecessary action hero! unnecessary. ♪ - was that necessary? - no. neither is a blown weekend. with paycom, employees do their own payroll so you can fix problems before they become problems. - hmm! get paycom and make the unnecessary, unnecessary. - see you down the line.

an alternative to pills, voltaren is a clinically proven arthritis pain relief gel, which penetrates deep to target the source of pain with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicine directly at the source. voltaren, the joy of movement.

palm trump wants to remake the republican national committee in his image. two sources tell nbc news that we tyndall could lead for the role as chair after the south carolina primary in two weeks. team trump has already signaled who he wants to replace mcdaniel. michael wadley, the north carolina republican party and an election denier. the reporting of your times this morning reads, quote, wildly has gained favor with trump by embracing his stop the steal mantra. joining us, now former montana governor mark, roscoe former friend of mine -- served from 2000 to 2000. three it is so good to have you, and welcome to the table. >> governor, it's symone sanders-townsend, we often only have one chairman at the table. today we have to chairman. i have to ask, where were you and what did you think when you saw this news about ronna

mcdaniel? and frankly, early in the week, the chief of staff stepping down. what do you think? >> first of, what can i say hello to michael, it's a delight to see you this morning. miss you at the office. the fact of the matter is, i don't know how to discern what donald trump thinks or doesn't think on any given day. the consequence i am little hesitant about exceeding the vendors of propriety. but i also know that it's a cutthroat business with heat and the gang that is a part of it. this enterprise. part of his business and part of his campaign. my guess would be that there is some area performance that she did not quite measure up to. that would be, i guess, this is only a guess, that the dnc has been at raising the rnc by substantial measures. secondly, of course, donald trump needs a lot of money to

pay for all his legal expenses. seems to have picked a bit of an unusual circumstance where he solicits from all these good people across the country and then of course use of it to pay his own legal expenses. in addition to that, i haven't seen arana really waiver or move away from defense of the trump mantra. but hard to guess and be accurate that those would be the two areas of suspicion that i would have. >> can you help me understand materially what this means for the republican party to bring the actual apparatus of the party even closer into the trump sphere? especially when you're talking about some reported names being floated as the replacement being election deniers themselves. >> well, frankly, when you have

the presidential office also engaged and the president is a member of your party, it is literally controlled by the president and his staff. it's a lot of discretionary decision-making. but it has largely to do with logistics in terms of philosophy and articulation of campaign tactics and those kinds of things. president, is of your, party agreed to be engaged but not going to dictate those things. if the reverse is true and the president is not of your party, that the rnc chair it's a great deal more discretion and authority. and more reliant on its members. the way that virtually everyone in the party has flocked to worship at the temple of donald trump in a case to me that there is something remarkably different today than what i experienced, and i guess what

michael experienced as well. it is not near as clandestine, not near as involved in surreptitious the strategy. not nearly as involved in extremism politics. it was just remarkably different. it all began to change in about 2008. it's also degraded itself further to this moment in time. >> governor, it is two aspects of this that i find to be damning of this particular iteration of the republican national committee from your service in my service. we have reporting out, a guardians hugo lowell noting the issue for the rnc has been the lack of direct revenue with small dollar donors who seemed to generally prefer to donate directly to the trump campaign and large institutional donors who dislike trump. preferring to donate to challengers like nikki haley. that's problem one. where you have this bifurcation of the money.

and as you know, it makes it very hard to do the kind of fundraising that the rnc needs to do. which is why they are sitting with 1 million dollars in the bank at the end of the year. the second piece the, which is equally damning if not more so, that the guardian is also reporting republican national committee one speaking elated dropout to boost funds. you see this thing where the party is not just in a bad position financially but then, putting its finger on the scale to push the candidate out because they favor another candidate. we know the rules inside the organization, rule 11, a letter from the states saying that this is our candidate. they are not going to the process. they're just saying, we want to cash. we don't want this particular candidate. what does this tell you about where this party goes next? beyond what happens in this election cycle, as a setting a new floor for itself.

>> i'm not at all certain this party can be resurrected or reconstituted in a way that reflects its proud history in years before. because of the dependence upon the incredibly selfish and effusively focused efforts that are cruel, angry, bitter and, as a consequence of that reflecting the personality of donald trump. the litter around him. believe, me the thought of craddock methods will eventually gain him success. frankly, with what he has announced and referenced to what he intends, to do everything from suspending the constitution or terminating it i think was his word. to perhaps taking the department of justice and deciding the duties of stormtroopers, those who are's enemies will be in the crosshairs. this is a dangerous moment in the history of this united

states of america. the autocratic tendencies of this fellow and of those who follow him, the desire for power, constant and on relentless, it's just something that has to be communicated to the american people in a way that they clearly understand. and this grouping, this attraction to this kind of venom from a wide swath of people who speak will recognize that donald trump is speaking to them in a way that appeals to the worst side of their nature. it's something that runs contrary to our constitution. at the end of the day, our constitution is based upon optimism and values, honesty, integrity. focus upon what is fair and belief in each other and trust in each other. he destroys all of that and sets a bit to do it every single day to cobble together just a slight plurality that will allow him to secure the electoral post to once again be an office. i hear people, say i like his

policy. i don't think he had a policy. i don't think he has enough intellectual curiosity to be interested in a policy. this is more about power. every single day. and it is a crisis and that's why the supreme court hearing yesterday was a part of why it was so critical. and why it was a little disappointing, frankly, in my judgment. we talk about all these things that were hypothesizing about and ruminating about. that's not really their job. their job is to be a judge and article three it's a decision to judge the case in front of you and do it on the basis of the constitution. we have all these original lists on the court who believe that the constitution says what it means and means what it says. they are postulate about what might take place in alaska or some other state. that's not the case before you. case before years colorado. decide that case, do the first rate thing and everything else

will unfold as it should thereafter. it's going to be messy regardless of whether or which way the court goes. but at the end of the, day if you have a clean call and i'm just overwhelmingly impressed by the respondents, the support of their cause. if you have a clean call, we can work with everything else. we did it through the pandemic and we've done it through all of this morass of insurrection that was instigated, precipitated, incited and encouraged by donald trump. so, we can make it through. >> all right. >> we need more governors and republicans like the governor right here. >> i enjoyed my time working with governor roscoe. you see why, he's a special man. governor mark rasco, thank you so much for being on the weekend with us. we really appreciate it. at the top of the hour, california senator alex padilla will be here at the table to discuss the senate aipac. the republicans keep killing

him getting rid. if they don't want to do it. make sure to follow our show on social media. i handle everywhere is at the weekend msnbc. weekend msnbc. here's to beating these two every thursday. help fuey with bst high protein, complete nutrition you need... ...without the stuff you don't. so, here's to now. boost. oooh! i can't wait for this family getaway! shingles doesn't care. shingles is a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. ahhh, there's nothing like a day out with friends. that's nice, but shingles doesn't care! 99% of adults 50 years or older already have the virus that causes shingles inside them, and it can reactivate at any time. a perfect day for a family outing! guess what? shingles doesn't care. but shingrix protects. only shingrix is proven over 90% effective. shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older.

shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care. but shingrix protects. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today. old spice gentleman's super hydration body wash. (whispered) vanilla and shea. 24/7 moisturization with vitamin b3. (knock on the door) are you using all the old spice? oops. ♪ (old spice mnemonic) ♪ we're traveling all across america, talking to people about their hearts. wh-who wants to talk about their heart! [honking] how's the heart? how's your heart? how's your heart? - it's good. - is it? aah, i don't know. it's okay. - it's okay! - yeah. - good. - you sure? i think so. how do you know? it doesn't come with a manual,

and you like ooh, i got the 20,000-day checkup, right? let me show you something. put two fingers right on those pads. look at that! that's your heart! that is pretty awesome. with kardiamobile, you can take a medical-grade ekg in just 30 seconds, from anywhere. kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. and it's the only personal ekg that's fda-cleared to detect normal heart rhythm, bradycardia and tachycardia. how much do you think this costs? probably in the hundreds. $79. oh wow! that could be cheaper than a tank of gas. checking your heart anytime, anywhere has never been easier. don't wait. get kardiamobile today for just $79 at kardia.com or amazon.

it's time to feed the dogs real food, not highly processed pellets. the farmer's dog is fresh food made with whole meat and veggies. it's not dry food. it's not wet food. it's just real food. it's an idea whose time has come. welcome back to the weekend. your thoughts on what cresco. you could see well like him. >> he loves you he said, i love you michael.

and we are closing in, out i thought it was great. i think, get people noticed, we had a lot of questions for the governor bowie just let him talk at the end because he really understood and i think communicated the gravity in the seriousness of what the country is going through. oftentimes, we have conversations on cable news and it does not have the weight of what the country is really feeling. i really appreciated just the heft and seriousness that he brought to his comments. >> i couldn't agree with you more. i want to take the moment and tell every republican at their, you don't have to do what you are doing. you don't have to be the way you are right now. mark rasco and other republicans are trying to tell you that that's the case. this is not donald, trump this is not who we are, this is not what we need to do and i think the opportunity here for the party to move in a different direction is in front of them. but they clearly want to put the back over the, head they want to put the cotton in areas

and not pay attention to what's happening. so here we, are eminently mckinsey for the rnc chairmanship right now. >> it's a joke. >> it's another jam-packed hour of the weekend straight ahead. senator alex padilla of california will join into the table. don't go, anywhere i'm filling it the paperwork. the paperwor ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ is this yours?

you ready? surprise! i don't think you can clear this. i got this. it's yours now. ♪oh what a good time we will have♪ ♪you... can make it happen...♪ ♪♪ try dietary supplements from voltaren for healthy joints. wanna know why people are getting a covid-19 shot? i'm turning the big seven-o and getting back on the apps. ha ha ha. variants are out there... and i have mouths to feed. big show coming up, so we got ours and that blue bandage? never goes out of style. i prioritize my health... also, the line was short.

didn't get a covid-19 shot in the fall? there's still time. book online or go to your local pharmacy. salonpas, makers of powerful pain relief patches for 89 years... believes in continuous improvement... like rounded corners that resist peeling, with an array of active ingredients... and sizes to relieve your pain. salonpas. it's good medicine.