>> and clark for self is profiting from her prowess. >> shoot. >> okay, i will shoot. >> yet many records belong to lynette withered who scored 3649 points as a four-time all america at the university of kansas in the 1970s. before the ncaa included women sports, and before the three point -- though that record as well seems well within reach for clark. >> clark for the win. >> harry smith, nbc news, i was city. >> and it is caitlin clark's history making game that will take us off the air tonight. with that, i wish you a good night. i am simone sanders-townsend, in for stephanie, roll you can catch me on my new show the weekend with my co-host alicia menendez and michael steele. this week our guest include congressman pramila jayapal, and french ambassador to the

united states laurent billy. we hope to see you idiot eastern this weekend, right here on msnbc, i will have the coffee. but for now, from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you so much for staying up late. ♪ ♪ ♪ e. ♪ ♪ ♪ today was a massive day of development in the world of trump legal. tonight we got the news that trump's defense team has filed a response before the supreme court. remember, right now the federal election interference case is frozen, while the supreme court considers their through trump's lawyers to keep this case on ice as they planned their next step. yesterday the special counsel asked the high court to unfreeze the case, or barring that, agreed to hear it right away. get things moving as soon as possible. tonight, trump's legal team filed its response to the

special counsel requests. we are going to get into that in detail in just a few minutes. whatever the court does now whether the court decides to hear this case or not, and on what timeline could have a huge impact on whether or not the federal election case against trump actually goes to trial before the november 2024 election. now, somehow, that is just one of the several inches major pieces of news we got today about donald trump's legal peril. today, in fulton county, district attorney fani willis's election conspiracy case, there was a hearing about miss willis herself and her relationship with a fellow prosecutor, nathan wade. , a hearing that has the potential to up and that case entirely. and in just a minute, we will bring up the high drama that unfolded in georgia today and break down what it means for a case against trump. but the news we start with tonight is this.

the first criminal trial of an american president. that would be manhattan district attorney alvin bragg's hush money case against donald trump. today, trump showed up to court in manhattan, where the judge in the case dismissed an effort by trump and his legal defense team to delay the trial. instead, trump set a march 25th start day. that is the date that the jury selection will begin. just about a month and a half from today. and the judge said that the trial should last about six weeks. now, on the surface, this case is about trump's affair with an adult film star named stormy daniels, and the hush money trump arranged to pay to keep mishandles quiet. but at its heart, the a bragg is saying that this case is about something less salacious and actually something quite serious, election interference. >> it is off the shore and it to hush money, as we've laid

out in public court filings. the case is not, you know, the core of it is not money for sex. we would say it's about conspiring to corrupt a presidential election and then lying in new york business records to cover it up. >> maybe the most memorable moment from the 2016 election, filled with memorable moments, but this one stood out. the access hollywood tape. it was a sort of dictionary definition of an october surprise. one month before the election, the washington post published a video of a republican candidate saying absolute viable things about women, things like, when you're a star, they let you do it. grab them by the, you know, you can do anything. the post published that tape on october 7th, one month before the election. the next, day october 8th, stormy daniels contacted david the editor of the national enquirer. daniels was looking to southeast horry that back in 2006, when trump was already married to melania trump and months after she had given birth, daniels and trump had an affair. the editor of the enquirer then

pulled trump's lawyer michael cohen about daniels story, and cohen and daniels immediately began negotiating about how much it would cost for that story to just go away. by the end of the month, at trump's direction, michael cohen had wired stormy daniels $100,000 for her silence. here was michael cohen testifying to congress in 2019, about the purpose of this payment. >> were you concerned about this new story becoming a -- public right after the access hollywood story in terms of impact on the election? >> i was concerned about it. more importantly, mr. trump was concerned about it. >> that was my next question. what was the president's concern about these matters becoming public, in october, as we were about to go into an election? >> he was concerned with the effect that it had on the campaign, on how women were seeing him and, ultimately, whether or not he would have a shot in the general election. >> when you finally completed that deal, as it were, on

october the 20th, days before the election. >> now, the ultra trump part of this story is that it would not be illegal for trump to pay off an adult film star to stay quiet about an affair. it would be a scandal, yes, but not illegal. what makes these story truly trumpy, and what makes this all allegedly illegal is how trump paid for it. after the election, month that there month, donald trump paid michael cohen back, by pretending the money it was part of a pre-established legal retainer. that is where the crime part comes in. >> under new york state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to fraud and intent to conceal another crime. that is exactly what this case is about. >> now, we can expect to hear a lot more for michael cohen, once the trial begins. he is the prosecution star witness. as for the defense and it's super witness, that is a bit more complicated. former trump cfo allen weisselberg, who basically took

the fall for the trump organization in a different criminal matter, is reportedly in talks with the a bragg to plead guilty to perjury in yet another trump related crime place. that's a lot of crime being in a lot of different trump related matters. what this means is that trump just lost his most important witness here in the first criminal trial of an american president, that remains to be seen. all we know right now is that this case is going to trial, and at the implications of that are profound on a number of levels. march 25th is after super tuesday. donald trump will likely be the republican nominee for president by that day. and, wow, that will make campaigning for president interesting. >> i'll be here during the day and campaigning during the night. i will have to sit here for months going to trial. i think it's ridiculous and unfair. >> joining me now, lisa rubin, msnbc legal correspondent and melissa murray, law professor at nyu law and msnbc legal analyst. no two better people to have,

as we unpack all of this. first, i want to get your reactions, first to you, melissa, about this being the a bragg's case, the first criminal charges, the first criminal indictment of a sitting former president, is the one that is going to go first, apparently, in terms of how the american public with this is the judicial system, hold to account one of the formerly most powerful people in the world? >> again, this is the first indictment to hear, and it got attention because of that. but it hit the shadow in terms of other indictments. for example, jack smith's indictment about the january six election interference. funny wilson's indictment about january six interference. but i think it's interesting that bragg talks about this as a species of election interference. that raises the stakes. it's not about hush money payments, it's about the idea that these tawdry, hush money payments were going to defraud the american electorate about who this man was when he was a candidate. again, placed in the context of the other indictments, it

paints a really damning portrait. this is a man who before he was president, while he was president and after he was president in the mar-a-lago document indictment, was doing crime. those are the allegations, before, during and after. i think if you take them altogether, this may not be the most consequential one in terms of democracy, but it is part of a larger pattern that is deeply disconcerting. >> a suite of election interference. >> sweet. >> the people to other once. really interesting logic, because i think some people upset, oh, but the other ones are so much more serious. this will undermine the gravity of the other ones by starting with something trivial, but if you look at it as kind of the open, or if you will. >> this is at the -- >> is that how you see it, lisa? >> i do now. i will tell you, there are a number of us that oh alvin bragg and apology to say, we discounted the importance of the case because as melissa

said, it's been popularized as the hush money case. even though the crimes that are being alleged here are falsification of business records, in order to commit or conceal another felony, and he's always been clear about the fact that the other felony could either be state or federal election law, notwithstanding, that all of us are like, this is insignificant, not that big of a deal. but, actually, the way that is framed now, it is. the opener to a much larger -- of election interference and fraud that persists throughout donald trump's political career and persists throughout his

life. alex, as you know, i have been following the whole fraud case that is criminal imager right now. the consequences -- as least as far as donald trump is concerned. >> we're about to find out more on the engoron case tomorrow but i do wonder though, that old chess not michael cohen will see center stage and what you make of that, given his sort of idai fix in the popular imagination, and how that much that helps or hurt the a bragg's case? >> yes, michael cohen has a pass. this is probably something that is not unusual for the prosecutors office. they have to have as witnesses, individuals who have unsavory records. this is not going to be a big deal. will it be sensational for the public or what we talked about in the press, undoubtedly? the idea that you have as a star witness or part of your star witness, is someone who has a criminal pass, that is not as big a deal, i think. more importantly, what michael cohen will be testifying to is not necessarily the things for which he has already been punished. he will be talking about and

making the connections between donald trump and this catch and kill strategy that was coordinated with the national inquirer company with david in order to conceal these acts from the public. i think that is slightly different. yes, he has a pass, but this is something that he can draw a connection that is unrelated to in his. bass >> i would say, the looming specter of allen weisselberg, the poor man that keeps taking the leave and going to records for. i say this, as if it is happening repeatedly, but it's always looming out there, right? defected this individual may be the defense star witness and maybe pleading in the -- does not undermine the gravity of his testimony? >> first of all, i don't think he will be the defenses witness at all if he pleads guilty to perjury, because i think that he will be susceptible to is having to confess to the jury that not only has he pled guilty to an unrelated criminal tax fraud scheme and had time for it, but he had recently been convicted for perjury and yet another unrelated matter. that is not a good setup for a witness. i think, actually, if weisselberg is able to negotiate that are completed for the start, that is a big win for the d. a. office.

why, because a number of the meetings that allegedly took place in furtherance of the scheme or between the people. the defendant, donald trump, michael cohen and allen weisselberg. guess what, when we compare the alleged crimes of those three people, guess who looks at the best, michael cohen. >> yeah, right, true. one at the things that they're asking for in this, lisa, is a change of venue. they're saying that trump can't get a fair shake in manhattan. do you think that there is -- is that within the realm of possibility in all of this? >> they have not asked for it yet. one of the things that i came up with today's talking about jury selection. todd blanche, one of trump's lawyers, essentially said, i need to know why people who raise their hand and say, i

can't be fair in this case, are saying that, because their answers may be a fool to me, and my plan a venue change motion. but the judges answer to that is the risk to pre trial publicity surrounding air conflict poses to justice in this case going to be any less a few months for now, a year from now or by an algae, in a different jurisdiction, no? as our colleague endorsement was saying today about the enron case that he was involved in, two decades ago, it was not the problem that the case is being tried in houston, when enron was headquartered. it would have been a problem anyway, because everyone nationwide at the time understood that and run was a front page, headline making fraud. >> melissa, jury selection, as they point out, it will start march 25th. can we talk about the reality of the calendar moving forward here? it is, in a word, bunkers. you have this case that is six weeks. who knows what the supreme court does on the immunity claim. but increasingly, based on conversations i've had with random people, but many legal experts, that this case could go to trial, as a federal

election interference case. we -- what happened in the summer, right? >> yeah -- >> if you're in a criminal case. you had to be in the courtroom. if you are a defendant, you had to be there. the practical implications when the campaigning or catastrophic, aren't they not? >> again, this is part of his defense to -- his arguments towards the supreme court, merging them to freeze the proceedings below and cannot allow the trial to happen. he wants the d. c. circuit opinion state, and it wants to be put on ice. he says it is imperative that he people an eye so that the american public has the chance to weigh in on his candidacy, and he gets the chance to campaign. again, this was always a tight timeline. it's the reason that jack smith made such a concerted decision to only charge donald trump and only levy for criminal charges against them to keep this moving. donald trump has done his level best to delay this, and it has

worked so far. the fact that we got to the d. c. circuit, the fact that the d. c. circuit took more than a month to issue its very methodical, very deliberate but very late unanimous opinion means that donald trump has pushed the counter back. we're not just running up against the campaign. we're also running up against the doj's own internal divine -- >> does that apply though? you say no, the 60-day rule -- >> no, but i think if we keep getting further and further out, that will be a discussion. can we get so close to the election that the entire process gets to be played by it? >> yeah, i think the policy as it stands applies to investigative steps. it does not apply to a trial, per se, but i think melissa is right that the policy concerns animating the oj's own policy about how to treat legal proceedings before an election,

well, at least prompt a wider scale discussion about how appropriate a trial is, as you are bumping up against the election. it went beyond september. >> of a presidential candidate, which has never happened. >> let's not lose sight of the store of, it's a day for history, we know that the first criminal trial of an american president will be starting next month, in a little over a month from today. lisa rubin, melissa murray, don't go anywhere. we'll talk about the rest of all of it in just a few minutes. coming up, fulton county d. a. fani willis took to the stand today to forcefully argue against her disqualification against the election interference case. it was really something. but first, trump has dropped the immunity of potato in the supreme court's lap. what do they do now, don't go anywhere. go anywhere.

what causes a curve down there? is it peyronie's disease? will it get worse? how common is it? who can i talk to? can this be treated? stop typing. start talking to a specialized urologist. because it could be peyronie's disease, or pd. it's a medical condition where there is a curve in the erection, caused by a formation of scar tissue. and an estimated 1 in 10 men may have it. but pd can be treated even without surgery. say goodbye to searching online. find a specialized urologist who can diagnose pd and build a treatment plan with you. visit makeapdplan.com today. have you ever thought of getting a walk-in tub and build a treatment plan with you. for you or someone you love? now is a great time to take a look at getting a safe step walk-in tub. with safe step's standard heated seat and new fast fill faucet, you can enjoy a nice warm bath up to 20% faster! and the convenient touch pad control is right at your fingertips. each tub comes standard with a dual hydrotherapy system. the ten water jets can help,

increase mobility, relieve pain, boost energy, and improve sleep. while the microsoothe advanced air therapy system oxygenates and softens skin. safe step walk-in tubs are built to maximize safety. so you can stay in your home and enjoy the comforts of bathing again. so call now for more information and a free no obligation consultation. call now to receive our best offer of the year! a free shower package plus $1,600 off! with the purchase of your brand-new safe step walk-in tub.

in san francisco, two people a day are dying from fentanyl. this is a national crisis that demands new strategies. prop f requires single adults receiving cash assistance to enroll in treatment if they use drugs. i know what it's like to lose family to drug addiction. it's too late for some families. but our city needs to do what's necessary to save lives.

please vote yes on prop f. is it possible to count on my internet what's necessary to save lives. like my customers count on me? it is with comcast business. keeping you up and running with 99.9% network reliability. and security that helps outsmart threats to your data. moaire dida twoo? your data, too. there's even round-the- clock customer support. so you can be there for your customers. hey billy, how you doin? with comcast business, reliability isn't just possible. thanks. it's happening. get started for $49.99 a month. plus, ask how to get up to a $1000 prepaid card with a qualifying internet package. don't wait, call and switch today! at any moment now, we could conceivably get a ruling from the supreme court about whether or not donald trump is immune from criminal prosecution for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. the clock started tonight after trump filed his final brief to appeal, responded to special counsel jack smith, who yesterday, urged the nine justices to reject trump's repeated attempts to delay the

trial. in his filing this evening, trump accuses the special counsel of playing politics, saying that there is no mystery about the special counsel's motivation. the special counsel 60 bringing president trump at the trial and secure a conviction before the november election, in which president trump is the leading candidate against president biden. back with me is msnbc legal correspondent, lisa rubin. i mean, i found, i am not a lawyer, lisa. which i say, ad nauseam. this is plainly not very much of a legal document. in the addictive. >> parts of it are a legal document, but the very first point, and the first thing you get to as absolutely nothing to do with the law. it is just trump's election interference posts disguised as a legal filing. >> on truth social -- >> correct and adjust up citations. he is not only saying that the special counsel's hyperpartisan, of which there is no evidence, who was appointed to avoid the appearance of a partition ship. but somehow, the special counsel's interests and having

this tried before the election is itself evidence that the special counsel as a thumb on the scale about who becomes president. that's ridiculous to me on its face. the special counsel wants the american voters to have all of the information before they vote, and he understands that he's up against the clock because the very prospect of bringing this person to trial could evaporate if he is reelected. >> it's also a tell to, isn't it? trump is effectively saying, if there is a trial, but there will be a conviction that helps biden. the logic is revealing, i think. they also make the case that is not the american public that has a vested interest in seeing the conclusion of the trial. the american public has an interesting donald trump campaign so anything that would stop that from happening is somehow counter to the interests of the americans. >> look, there are two parties here both staking a claim about what is in the best interest that the american public.

i guess at the question is, who do you trust to best represent the interest of the american public, the candidate who wants to see himself elected, or the person representing the united states government in the interest of justice? i would stake my claim with him. >> i do wonder if you have four people out there, including myself, who are thinking and white-knuckle-ing it through the next couple of days, or should we be looking for in terms of response from him at the supreme court, whether a state or granting -- effectively taking the case up, saying nothing at all, what is her expectation? >> my expectation is that we hear something from the supreme court in the next few days. of course, monday is a federal holiday, so you can count that as part of your weekend in all

likelihood. if the supreme court does not grant these say that trump is asking for, then all bets are off. judge chutkan goes back to pre- trial proceedings, even if that point they were to grant a review, it would not impede her from turning the case to all of the motion practice and other things that need to happen to schedule a trial, or just setting that jury questionnaire emotion, which was supposed to happen in february. if on the other hand, we are waiting a few days, there is a school of thought on what we are waiting for, is that there are a few folks that will dissent from what will happen. the court is giving those people time to write. those could be the sent to the search? those could be dissent from a state. the longer it takes to get to the ruling, no more likely it is that it will go and donald trump's favor, i believe. >> tiktok, the longer it takes, the better it is for trump. on its face, it is, but in the

long term, as well. >> that is absolutely true. >> immediately useful information from our favor -- you're the best, thank you, lisa. lisa rubin. we have a lot more to get to tonight. so much more, including the hours long, hours long hearing in fulton county georgia about the district attorney in charge of the racketeering case against donald trump should be removed from their case over a relationship with one of her prosecutors. it was a bombshell hearing, the definition of bombshell, but what does it mean for the former president, that is next. former president, that is next. let's be honest... all: cidp sucks! voices of people with cidp: but living with cidp doesn't have to. when you sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com, you'll find inspiration in real patient stories, helpful tips, reliable information, and more. cidp can be tough. but finding hope just got a little easier. sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com. all: be heard. be hopeful. be you. why choose a sleep number smart bed? can i make my side softer? shiningthroughcidp.com. i like my side firmer. sleep number does that.

now, save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add any base. ends president's day.

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. now, save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add any base. ends presidents day. only at sleep number. growing up, my parents wanted me to become a doctor or an engineer. those are good careers! but i chose a different path.

first, as mayor and then in the legislature. i enshrined abortion rights in our california constitution. in the face of trump, i strengthened hate crime laws and lowered the costs for the middle class. now i'm running to bring the fight to congress. you were always stubborn. and on that note, i'm evan low, and i approve this message. democrats agree. conservative republican steve garvey is the wrong choice for the senate. ...our republican opponent here on this stage has voted for donald trump twice. mr. garvey, you voted for him twice... as your own man, what is your decision? garvey is wrong for california. but garvey's surging in the polls. fox news says garvey would be a boost to republican control of the senate. stop garvey. adam schiff for senate. i'm adam schiff, and i approve this message.

they're the former president of the united states conspire with 18 other people to overturn a legitimate election? that is the question at the heart of the election conspiracy case in fulton county, georgia. today's hearing in fulton county it was about none of that. instead, we got what you might call the most consequential side show in the history of aside shows. right now, several of trump's co-defendants and the georgia election conspiracy case is trying to get the a fani willis turn off the case, by accusing her of having an inappropriate romantic relationship with a special prosecutor on her staff, nathan wade. they accuse the a willis of hiring mr. weighed in order to enrich herself with lavish vacations and other gifts mr.

weight bought from miss willis. in a legal filing two weeks ago, the a willis admitted to having a relationship with mr. wade, saying it began on the after she hired mr. weight to work on the case in 2022. today's hearing began with an explosive allegation from a former friend of the a willis, who claimed that willis had lied about when the relationship began. >> you had no doubt that their romantic relationship was in effect from 2019 to the last time that he spoke with her? >> no doubt. >> did you observe them doing things common among people having a romantic relationship? >> yes. >> such as, can you give us an example? >> hugging, kissing, just affection. >> that was a bombshell for fani willis and nathan wade apparently lied to the court in the filings about when the relationship began. the that the hearing was the revolved around the question, did fani willis benefit financially from her relationship with nathan wade. mr. weight was next to take the stand, and he told the court in no uncertain terms that fani willis was not the kind of day

that let you pick up the tab. >> if you have ever spent any time with miss willis, you understand that she is a very independent proud woman. >> i object. >> overruled. mr. weight? >> she is going to insist that she carries her own way. >> after mr. weights testimony, we got our second big surprise of the day. the lawyer making the case that the ableist needed to come in and testify herself. >> we need her to go over all of this about exactly what happened. we need to ask at the court that the court allowed miss willis to be called and interrogated. >> i will decline. >> the eighth willis showed up to take the stand. your hours testimony, the dea went all the way to establish that she is in fact very independent, and that she is not afraid of getting angry or taking on adversaries, or calling out what she believes are outright lies. >> let's be clear, because he lied. let me tell you about which one you light. i think you lied right here. right here, i think you lied right here. this is the truth.

it is a lie. it is intrusive into peoples personal lives. you're confused. you think i am a child. these people are on trial for trying to steal a 2020 election. i am not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial. >> throughout the testimony, the ableist portrayed herself as a strong, independent woman, and the relationship between her and mr. weight was one of equals. that was a posture that cut to the heart of the allegations against her. >> nobody gave me anything, i am sure that the source of the money is oh yes the work, sweat and tears of me. there was never any money that he gave me. that was not the nature of our relationship. we would have brutal arguments about the fact that i am your equal, i don't need anything from a man. a man is not planned, a man is a companion. so, there was tension always in our relationship, which is why i would give him his money

back. i don't need anybody to foot my bills. the only meant that foot my bills completely is my daddy. >> that was fani willis's defense today. she is not taking money for mr. wade, and she is not benefiting financially from their relationship, because that is not the type of person the funny we'll see is. question is, how will the judge understand those arguments and what does her testimony mean for the future of the case against donald trump and the 14 others still facing charges? melissa murray is back with me to talk about all of that coming up next. up next.

♪ 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... ♪ have you ever considered getting a walk-in tub? well, look no further. i'll be there... ♪ proudly made in tennessee, a safe step walk-in tub is the best in it's class. the ultra-low easy step helps keep you safe from having to climb over those high walled tubs, allowing you to age gracefully in the home you love. and now, back by popular demand, for a limited time, when you purchase your brand-new

safe step walk-in tub, you'll receive a free shower package! yes! a free shower package, and if you call today, you'll also receive $1600 off. now you can enjoy the best of both worlds. the therapeutic benefits of a warm, soothing bath, that can help increase mobility, relieve pain, boost energy, and even improve sleep. or, if you prefer, you can take a refreshing shower all in one product! call now!

this is the greatest sleep innovation ever created. (♪♪) it's the patented gelflex grid inside every purple mattress. only purple passes the raw egg test because only purple cradles your body and simultaneously supports it. memory foam doesn't come close. purple conforms to relieve pressure from hips and shoulders while supporting your spine and instantly adapts no matter your position. sleep on a purple risk-free for 100 nights. save up to $800 during our president's day sale. visit purple.com or a store near you.

>> it's ridiculous to me that you lied on monday and yet here we still are. you're saying today that a lawyer rights ally and then it's in front of all the world to see. let's be clear right here? i think you lied right here. no, no, no, no. this is true. it is a lie. it is a lie. >> during a contentious hearing in atlanta, georgia today fulton county district attorney fani willis spent more than two hours sparring with defence lawyers for donald trump and his codefendants over what she calls lies, smears, and innuendos about her relationship with prosecutor nathan wade. wait is a special prosecutor

willis hired to manage the sprawling election interference case for former president trump and his associates. back to discuss is nyu law professor melissa murray. thank you for sticking around. there are levels of this. we talked about coming into this, about how willis asserted herself as independent woman, incredibly strong, a vocal advocate on her own behalf, not someone who in fury would be wanting a free ride from a man. she also went part of the way in explaining that she paid nathan wade back for a lot of these quote unquote lavish trips. i want to play a bit of sound in terms of her general argument on that front. >> so he is the one that would book the travel, but we need to be clear when we are talking about, just because he booked it doesn't mean, i don't consider him having taking me any place. he did not, though. because the reason i consider that he did not, is i gave him

his money back. for the cruise in for a room. yes, i gave him the money before we went on the trip. >> you gave him trash cash before you went on the trip? >> the reason replaying this is because at the heart of this allegation is that she somehow profited financially from their relationship. do you think that kind of testimony, which is clear, if not specific, she's not pointing to atm withdrawals, is that enough to satisfy the judge? >> it could be. again, this depends on how this appears to scott mcafee. he's going to be the ultimate determinant here. it doesn't strike me as odd that the professional woman is in a relationship with someone who also is in the profession and they reimburse each other for expenses, for things they do jointly. this isn't foreign to me, i have done this in the past. i imagine it would not be entirely foreign to the judge that this is something that happens. what might be more unusual to individuals is the fact that she professors to have paid for all of this in cash, and that might strike some individuals

as odd. how much cash do you have on hand? again, didn't strike me is entirely odd. there's a long history within the black community of distrust to financial institutions, -- has written a terrific book how the other half banks that talks about how certain minority communities just don't have the same relationship with the traditional's financial institutions and are more likely to have large quantities of cash on hand for expenditures like this. but again, it might not resonate with someone like scott mcafee, although other aspects of her story would. >> to those other aspects, i do want to know what you think about generally the posture that she adopted today, which was combative, strong, assertive. if the contention here is this

woman is looking for a free ride from the man she hired to get over on the system, i would think that was a fairly effective rhetorical tool, if nothing else. >> the defiance, the independents, the i don't need someone to pay my way, i pay my way, in fact a lot of the difficulties in our romantic relationship came from the fact that i was independent and he was looking for a different kind of woman. that may have played out. but let's also put out there, this is a prosecutor in a major case against a major public figure, and we are talking about her dating strategy and whether a former, current, whatever romantic partner believed that she was too independent should be in to be in a relationship. that's not where we want to be in this case. >> especially a case of this magnitude. on that note there were moments when she was sparring with the judge, who is going to be the same judge in her case. >> there's a comfort there. they have worked in the same office before. so perhaps this is an aspect of the familiarity. this is a relatively small legal community. many of these individuals are key players who have interacted with each other before. but yeah, this was a lot of

drama. not necessarily a lot of clarification. >> do you think it matters, i mean there is a lot of back and forth about when the relationship started. her ex friend said relationships started years before both wade and willis signed an affidavit saying it did. does that matter? i mean it's independent of the charges here but if there is lying on an affidavit, how significant is that in terms of whether she's taking on this case? >> an affidavit is sworn testimony, a writing under oath submitted to the court. if it is the case that what was represented in that affidavit was not true when advice relationship started much earlier as her former friend testified isn't she has lied to the court, effectively, and that does, i think, become grounds for qualification, in this is as he said, she said, real housewives of atlanta, who knows. but everything hinges on the qualification as she and waited are disqualified in this trial is kind of up in the, air which

is exactly what donald trump wants. >> that is why this all matters. fani willis and nathan wade can go off into the golden sunset together, but in so far as it affects the actual people, holding people accountable and a large number of whom are very involved in american political system, it all matters. melissa murray, thank you so much. great to see you. coming up, a war of words. new details of how behind the scenes biden lawyers fought with the doj over disparaging remarks about biden's age prior to the publication of special counsel robert hersh. that's next. that's next. okay, so here's my most requested hack for stubborn odors.

you'll need vinegar, a large salad bowl and... oh, hi! have you tried new tide fabric rinse? it works after your detergent to fight deep odors 3 times better than detergent alone. i love that. try new tide fabric rinse. voices of people with cidp: cidp disrupts. cidp derails. let's be honest... all: cidp sucks! voices of people with cidp: but living with cidp doesn't have to. when you sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com, you'll find inspiration in real patient stories, helpful tips, reliable information, and more. cidp can be tough. but finding hope just got a little easier. sign up at shiningthroughcidp.com. all: be heard. be hopeful. be you. why choose a sleep number smart bed? can i make my side softer? shiningthroughcidp.com.

i like my side firmer. sleep number does that. now, save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add any base. ends president's day.

what causes a curve down there? is it peyronie's disease? will it get worse? how common is it? who can i talk to? can this be treated? stop typing. start talking to a specialized urologist. because it could be peyronie's disease, or pd. it's a medical condition where there is a curve in the erection, caused by a formation of scar tissue. and an estimated 1 in 10 men may have it. but pd can be treated even without surgery. say goodbye to searching online. find a specialized urologist who can diagnose pd and build a treatment plan with you. visit makeapdplan.com today. you're probably not easily persuaded to switch and build a treatment 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.

>> i can tell you that his insinuations or the suggestions in the report about the presidents interview just simply don't correspond with my recollection of how that interview went. i frankly don't understand why they are in the report. >> president biden's personal lawyer publicly criticize to report from special counsel robert or after its release last week. but tonight we are learning that biden's legal team made their displeasure known to attorney general merrick garland garland before that report was released. a newly released letter biden's lawyers say we object to the denigrating statements about biden's memory which violate the long-standing doj practice and policy. the associate deputy attorney general responded today later, writing, the identified language is neither gratuitous nor unduly prejudicial. it is offered to explain special counsel hur's conclusions about the president state of mind and possessing and retaining classified information. special counsel hur will get a chance to stay tell his side of the story, testifying publicly

before the house judiciary committee on march 12th. joining me now, jennifer palmeri, co-host of msnbc how to win in 2024 podcast, in jim psaki, host of inside with jim psaki. a double threat of john tonight. ladies, thank you for being here. i'm gonna have to refer you as missaukee as miss palmeri. >> everyone in the obama white house called us psaki and palmy ari. >> they had a reason. sake, are you surprised, i mean, being a white house expert as you are, about the level of combativeness that is on display between the white house in the doj and the fact that the doj essentially it seems to not heed any of the white houses complaints? >> i'm not that surprised. it spilled out a bit. obviously, in the last, week but it has been reported, frustrations at moments, that had been reported about the present frustration about the pace of movement on voting rights and other priorities for him. i won't say for this the view it seems from not just the white house but a number of legal experts i've talked to, you've talked to, that merrick garland, the attorney general, was never going to not appoint a special counsel.

he decided to do that though they are frustrated with that initial step, or scrap the reporter not released the whole report. there were steps in the process, including getting updates to see what the scope of what they were doing wise. and also there was language in there that in the view clearly of people in the white house but also shots by other legal experts outside kind of went way past what his scope was in what he should've done. there are things, is we all know, when we get the report, all of us were trying to read to it and scan through it. it was unclear if he was saying or concluding that he winningly kept the classified documents. you don't know until after page 200 plus that he didn't keep them. obviously this language is what has been taken out and used by republicans as a political dagger. i am not surprised that it has been a bit of vitriol. i am a little surprised it's

build out into public, but sometimes that happens with situations like this that are of such great public interest. >> the question of whether the president willingly retain the documents is litigated. the conclusion is clear, but the summary makes it sound more nefarious than quite obviously even hur determined. but to the question of talking out of school about president biden, the white house compares what is in this report to what james calmly did to hillary clinton. it is a searing comparison. it's something that it feels like merrick garland when he was sworn into office was going to go out of his way to prevent from happening again. are you surprised that this kind of report came out of this kind of justice department? >> i'm surprised at the attorney general's response. we all have, because we work at msnbc, we have a lot of legal expert threads. the characterization that hur made about the presidents state

of mind, whose acuity, and all that, which is like even worse than what cool me did in terms of he criticized secretary clinton's actions. he didn't go to her state of mind. and this is like a whole other level. so it is, i think, merrick garland has not, has generally sided, come down on the side of protecting what he sees is the independence of the department of justice, even if, in this case, a lot of legal experts think, hur is going in the wrong direction. he's not, garland is not going to step in to stop that. but what the assistant attorney general is arguing is surprising. >> i do wondering, jen, hur is going to the hill, republicans have their knives out, they want the transcript if not the audio of the interview released. it seems to me like a foregone conclusion that this is going to come out. do you think that we are going to be combing through five hours of interview transcript in the near future? if so, how does the white house

handle that? jen psaki. >> it sure feels like. it will see what happens. you know what we say about relationships? it's complicated. on one hand if everybody in the country who is paying attention to this was as nerdy and had as much time and has the job to do this like all of us and we're actually gonna come through, it like we all will. then it might serve the white house well. but the problem is that that's probably not what's going to happen. people don't have enough time. so small pieces of this could be pulled out. it's hard to make an assessment about whether this is good or not because none of us have seen it. but that is the challenge. the way people consume information today, the likelihood is, these two lines, this additional line, the audio of different pieces that would validate what hur we're saying, even though the context may be a longer line of questioning, maybe they just came back from a call about the attack on israel. so that's the challenge for the white house. i do think, though, that republicans who are out there

spouting that they want hur to come testify, they have to be careful for what they are asking for. most of this report is not good for trump. it clears joe biden. there are parts of this that politically, as we all know, our over the top and are not terrible for the biden team. there is a clear comparison from robert hur, somebody who was a trump appointee that is making clear how trump handled this in such a poor uncooperative way. and he would have to speak to that on the hill as well. i think this is also him going to the hill is not a clear win for republicans. they may not think it is isaar either. >> they might think it's a double-edged soil. but there is some utility in getting out first is they're not? the bill barr years we know that and from this report. does the white house need to lean on? this >> time and place of your choosing. so we will respond a time in a

place of our choosing. >> on a friday evening. at five pm. >> this is just really generals letter is getting out, the report itself is getting. out that's going to happen. particularly if the hill gets it. and so i think that first of all that hur hearing it's hard to say. it's not going to be a good day, i predict, four hur or for the republicans. the actual facts are on biden's side. the house democrats are very

effective in its committee settings and sort of deconstructing. the same thing happened when jim camille went up to testify on capitol hill about his report. he got crucified. it was a good day for the clinton campaign. the same thing will happen here. the white house could figure out, do they put it out the day of the hearing, near the hearing, coordinate that with house democrats gratton prevented the way, with integrity this time, but the way bob barr did when he brought in the mueller report. these are the things you need to know and package it the way that is putting the facts in the right context. >> jen palmieri and jen psaki, thank you for your time tonight. now it's time