it's a hard in the sense that we have been through so much, but it's a necessary read. disinformation is sabotaging america. thank you. and before i go, a reminder that you can catch me and former senator claire mccaskill tonight at 8:00 p.m. at the y here in new york city for a discussion about the upcoming election. obviously, there's a lot to talk about, especially right now. there's still a few tickets left. you can also watch online it you're not here in new york city. that's going to do it for me today. "deadline: white house" starts right now. hi, everyone. 4:00 in new york. americans woke up today in a nation for the highest court in the land is not out of the closet.

not an elected president. that one man in our nation of laws might, just might lawfully sit is above the law. that applies to every other single citizen. the supreme court, which has some of the lowest approval ratings among the american public in its history, in counts three trump appointees yesterday decided to dignify a legal series contrary to the american experiment that it rhymes with trump's "access hollywood" moment of infamy. basically arguing when you're president, they let you do it. agreeing to hear this case at all is the hinged moment. no matter what happens next. it alone opens the door to turning america into a country where one person can commit crimes in this effort to overturn an election he loses, enlist others in that criminal conspiracy and then instead of

facing any criminal accountability, just run for office again. and every last vestige the of criminal liability, criminal exposure and accountability. has to be crystal clear today about the logistical the implications just of yesterday's news about the cannot be unwrong. as we ointed out on this program, over and over and over again, the trump staj is always the same one and it's abundantly clear. it's always to delay, delay, delay, to run out the clock, slow down the spire legal process, exploit a defendant's due process rights so that a trial in any of these cases is still delayed and pushed back that it happens after the election. most likely. at that point, donald trump made clear if he wins, he will use his power to free himself, to liberate himself from what he publicly on the stump day after

day smears of an unlawful and politically motivated prosecution. that tactic whether wittingly or unwittingly received a pop in yesterday's decision from the supreme court. it comes despite the high stakes of actually having a trial in this election interference case. an enormous and quite obvious civic and public interest in it. a poll released earlier this month shows that 64% of all americans wanted to see trump go on trial before november 2024. that number includes 38% of republicans. now even after oral arguments in april, the court will take as long as it decides to take to make any decision on whether any american president, in this case that includes donald trump, is above the law for anything they to while in office. even if it includes crimes kmieted while trying to overturn

the will of the american voter using any means possible. so legal accountability for donald trump is now delayed or maybe even denied, there is over is and over again a matter of political the accountability. and on that front, no matter how much or how often donald trump lies to his base about the results of the 2020 election, the cold hard facts is 81 million americans voted against him and for joe biden in 2020. i tonight know if you're ready to hear this, it looks like it's going to the fall on the american people to do what our institutions constantly over and over again fail to do. to determine what conduct is outside the bounds of a nation of laws, outside the bounds and norms in a democracy. we will once again as citizens have to use the power of our vote to answer that question.

accountability for deadly attack on the united states capitol and our democracy now most likely in the hands of the american people. that's where we start today. former police officer who protected the nation is a mob of trump supporters carried out an insurrection and an attack on the toll, harry dunn is here. he's now running for congress. you were the best person to talk to and the only person i wanted to talk to after this news broke on our show and i had 24 hours to process it. i know you write in your book of all of the alleged crimes committed, he should be accountable for all of them, but this one is different. talk about that. >> first of all, welcome back. i'm so happy to have you back on the air. didn't get an opportunity to talk with you as early as some of the other people did, but you hit the ground running.

>> no choice. >> we are a time in this country where like you said the people are going to have to do the work for the institution. there's so many parallels that are at play here right now. the government right now is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. so we come -- let me back up for a second is. the blame for this solely outside of donald trump, put square ri on mitch mcconnell and the senate republicans who voted to acquit him when they had the opportunity to supervent this from happening. first of all, i have to acknowledge that. but to go become to your point about the people, we need to get involved. this is the government is the government of us, the american people. and we don't want the majority of people in the polls that you have shown, a majority of people don't want a criminal, a felon

to be running for president. nobody is above the law. >> what you remind me of, and i made a quick list, of course, he's acquitted by the senate after mcconnell refers him for prosecution. but after referred by the republican lead orer of the senate, there's no evidence that doj turns to do what mcconnell suggested they do on that day or the day after. it's not until the public work of the congressional committee led by chairman thompson. i was thinking about this on my way in today that we talk about institutions like they are absent human beings, but law enforcement as an institution, it was you, it was offer sic nick, congress wasn't just a blob. it was bennie thompson, liz cheney, witnesses weren't just institutional innocents.

it was we separate institutions from people, but institutions are only as good as the people that are themselves. i wonder how that changes now your campaign and your conversation as you're out there. >> yeah, same thing with the presidency. the presidency is just a human being. so that goes back to the point that nobody is above the law. and i'm glad you named those individuals that you named. especially the elected officials. that's where it comes become. that's the parallel. all the people that those individuals that you listed, they are elected by us, the american people. and i think that needs to be clear in the messaging that candidates running such as myself need to have election time. we are fighting because these institutions have failed us. not every single person, but these institutions have failed because of some of the choices that voters have made. we need to continue to improve

the institutions. that's a whole different thing. these unelected people that are making decisions that are affecting people's lives. that's a whole different discussion we're having with the supreme court. but that's the messaging that we need to have. the american people and honestly, if january 6th didn't ha, you and i aren't talking. we're probably not having this conversation. i'm not running for congress. but we are at this moment right now where we don't have the the luxury to sit back and see how things play out. we did that in 2016. we took our eyes off the ball. donald trump first got elected. we can't do that. because there's too much at risk. there's too much at stake. we all have to stay engaged and stay motivated. democracy is worth protecting. it's fra industrial jill. we are at a breaking point.

>> i was thinking yesterday and i think i said this on the air. it's hard to say this and it's hard to give this to trump, but what he does works for him. >> the strategy the of delay, delay, delay, rile up your base, yesterday's evidence that he should keep doing it because it's probably going to work out for him. it's probably going toft the effect of making it extremely difficult, not impossible, but extremely difficult for a trial to happen before anyone votes. and i was reading through the stories today. the a ap, as straight as it comes, the supreme court decision yesterday a legal victory for trump making it all but impossible that a juror will be to the evidence against trump before voting happened. and i was thinking back to how the country got to know you, this congressional probe. i already find what that probe did one of the most historic and important things to happen in my

life. but if that's the only body that investigates and seeks to hold accountable donald trump for ab insurrection that mike pence and husband family wept running for their lives. they don't walk if you're not scared for your life. you run. what does it make you sort of reflect back on when you think about the importance of the congressional probe? >> the congressional probe, the thing that goes back to mind, i can't talk about how disgusted i am with mitch mcconnell and husband actings that day because right after the the january 6th attack at the capitol, michael fanone, a couple other people lobbied members of the senate to form that bipartisan committee. this was before the january 6th committee was formed.

and mitch mcconnell, as for a personal favor to his senate colleagues, to vote to block that investigation from happening. so it's just extremely frustrating. we have so many days, had so many off ramps. i get so frustrated. here we are again. and donald trump is about to possibly skate on a technicality. ask that just brings about the bigger picture of the criminal justice system that we need to be reformed. do these trials need to take this long. do we have the ability -- that's one of the things i would love to look at when i get in congress. we need to reform the criminal justice system. it should not take -- the january 6th was 3 years ago. some of the individuals who committed the crimes pled guilty are already out from serving their sentences from the actions they committed that day. and now we're still debating

whether the president is immune from his actions of that day? that's a problem. >> what's so interesting having covered trump for so many years is the defense always moved. it goes from i didn't do it to what the supreme court is going to hear isn't trump arguing he didn't do it. it's trump argue whg you're president they let you. he's literally arguing when you're famous they let you do it about grabbing women between the legs. he's going to argue you're immune from criminal accountability from anything you do while president. there's a word for that. it's a king. it's a dictator. it's all out in the open. and the very signal we send around the world that we're going to hear it. we're going to have our clerks write up briefs and have a decision. to me it sends a signal that we have already changed. do you think we have changed?

>> we already have. the question before the supreme court where the courts right now is can a president send the seal team 6 to assassinate his political opponent. that's something you'd expect to hear on an extreme talk show. but that's a legit question before the supreme court. so yes, we definitely changed. those are the things that you hear about an underdeveloped democracy or countries like we shouldn't be having that discussion with here. people like to say we're the greatest nation on earth. we need to act like it. this should not be an issue right now. but it is. and it's putting a strain and a definite test on our institutions of the courts, the legislative branch and we need to stand up for it. can't stress this enough. people have got to be involved. like you said at the top of the

segment, us americans are the ones who are going to decide this. it's up to us right now. we need to hammer that home. >> we have a the lot of public spacing evidence that the conservative justices in particular consume copious amounts of media including cable news coverage, newspaper coverage because they give a lot of speeches in which they complain about the way they are covered justice alito, if you're watching. what would you say to the justices who decided to hear trump's case that he has immunity from criminal prosecution? >> thus about how they are going to be judged. think about what the country is actually wants. listen to the american people. i get it. there's a lot of nuances with laws and everything like that. but history is not going to be

favorable to them. and you are at an impasse right now where you have an opportunity to do what's right morally. i get there's a lot of nuances in laws and so many technicalities, but when it comes down to it, morally, you have to do what is right. the republicans who voted to acquit him failed to do, they have an opportunity to do it now, to set a precedent because history will remember this decision forever. >> there's so much that i always want to get to with you. i have all these other pieces of your book that i wanted to dive back through. i want to ask about your campaign. but we have to make a turn today. please promise you'll come back and sit a at this set with us and chomp on the day's events. thank you very much for being here on a day like today. >> thank you for having me. >> thank you. it's great to see you. still to come for us, officials in three states have

ruled that donald trump did engage in an insurrection. and that donald trump should be kept off the presidential ballot in those states. as we wait for the supreme court to weigh in on that. and this is what at the southern border. president biden is in texas expected to blast republicans for blocking a security bill while donald trump was on the border today too. an issue he single handedly sabotaged when there was a solution in reach. and later in the broadcast, how alan bragg is planning to use trump's own words against him in the one criminal trial that isn't in jeopardy. the one, the ex-president is staring down at and expected to start in a few weeks. there's new reporting to tell you about and much more, when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break don't go anywhere. after a quick don't go anywhere.

you can make money the hard way as a bullfighter or a human cannonball... or save money the easy way, with xfinity mobile. existing customers can get a free line of our most popular unlimited plan for a year! not only will you save hundreds but you'll also be joining millions who have connected to america's most reliable 5g network. sure is a lot safer than becoming a stuntman for money. get a free line of unlimited intro for a year when you buy one unlimited line. visit xfinitymobile.com today to learn more.

used to be sleep walking into dictaorship in the united states. is that what we would have if we reelected donald trump? >> i think it's a very, very real threat and concern. and i don't say any of that lightly. >> it seems crazy to ask this and crazy to fathom it, but do you believe were donald trump were elected he would try to stay in office beyond a second term? >> we would never leave office? >> there's no question. >> would he try to stay in power forever? >> absolutely. he's already done it once. >> there's no question he's already done once. cold, hard facts. joining our conversation, former top prosecutor at the department

of justice andrew weisman is back with us. and columnist and contributor charlie sykess. i'm glad you just gave in and agreed to be here every day after yesterday. that was a close call. your thoughts about what we woke up to this morning and the prospects of legal accountability? >> in many ways we are living through bush v. gore, but it's not hitting us straight in the face because instead of a decision on black and white that says this is now who the president is, this decision gives this little glimmer of hope that maybe this trial will happen but as my colleague and our colleague joyce vance said, the stars and moon and sun have to all align. and everything has to come the into play for there to be a trial where the facts will actually matter and we don't

have donald trump just spinning the public. which is an extra oshd nar position. the supreme court has sided with donald trump on this case. it's obviously going to side with him in the colorado case. and to the point that liz cheney was asked about what could we expect, obviously, joe biden won the election and donald trump could stil win, but i really don't have hope as to who would endorse the constitutional mechanism that there are only two terms. is it going to be congress? they same to be fairly ineffect yule when it comes to impeachment. it was going to be the supreme court, the supreme court just issued a stay in this case, but that actually reaching any legal conclusions that you need to reach a stay. they basically kept the judge's

case on ice, but they didn't do any of the things that the law requires to find that a stay is appropriate. you're supposed to go through all sorts of factors, incluing that you have a likelihood of success and there would be taj. they didn't do any of that. they just issued it. the real issue is where are the checks and balances and the one thing we know from somebody like donald trump from the first time he was president is you definitely need checks and balances with any president because of the extraordinary power that the presidency has. but you particularly need it when you have a president like donald trump. >> andrew, where does the -- i don't even know if this is a question with an answer, but where does the ambivalence on those legal questions come from? is that the natural extension of a supreme court so the walled

off from public opinion and accountability and ethics that it does something outside its own legal norms, issue a stay without any of those preconditions. >> i can give one answer that is the best case and one answer that's the worst case. it maybe that for certain justices, these things could be in play. the best case scenario is that certain justices said, the date of the election and what goes on with the election and whether we're supposed to decide this quickly or not is not before us. we're going to sort of decide this it like any other case. if so happens that the trial is before the election or after the election, that's not something we are going to focus on at all. we see a potential legal issue here and we're going to just do this in due course in a plotting

way that we would. trying to keep blinders on as if the real world doesn't kpes in the world that you were just discussing with officer dunn. that's one potential answer. the other is that this is a world of politics where people know what will happen to the legacy of the supreme court in terms of having more nominees of a certain type and solidifying if not capitalizing on what is a 6-3 majority in most significant cases. and that that is animating some of the justices. i would just say be careful what you wish for because one of the powers that the other branches have is to restrict the power of the supreme court going forward in the way that we have seen happened to be extremely controversial in israel.

so i think those are two potential -- polar extremes as to what could be going on, what the supreme court is doing. just to be clear, there's a third group of people who thought on the supreme court before were in the minority they should not be taking this case at all. >> charlie sykes, we launched a series called american autocracy, it could happen here. we gut checked ourselves. too much? what do you think? we thought liz cheney and her brand new book and her interview with savannah certainly detailed enough examples of things trump has done that are straight up authoritarian tactics. now you have andrew weisman, a revered legal mind and lawyer saying one of the things that we have to contemplate now in

america is benjamin netanyahu-like power grab. here we are. and i guess my question for you is, here we are again. we are always here. mueller does a pretty restrained look at trump's conduct. he gets away with not being interviewed. he gives his stuff to barr. he lies about it, distorts it. so fooled once. that's on him. but impeached twice with the republicans going along, even though they thought this was clear power, we are always in the same play. we are not at issue. but the question of accountability for trump is always off the table. where are we really as a country? >> first of all, it's really good to have you back. and i don't think we're back here again. i don't think we have ever been where we are right now. if you listened to dhai chay, i don't think she's being

accessibly alarmist. we described america as the american experiment. it became cliche. the reality was it was an experiment. and experiments can fail. they are not guaranteed. we are in a very, very fragile moment here. and what you have is donald trump essentially leveraging a borderline legal argument that could grant him complete impunity. it is possible that donald trump will regain the presidency is, will pardon himself, make all these criminal cases go away. we'll pardon the rioters, the people who tried to overthrow the government on government 6th without any meaningful checks either from the criminal justice system or from congress. and then you have liz cheney saying, look, he might not go away. donald trump is not being subtle about what he intends to do in office. and i think that we need to

understand exactly the moment we're in right now. if there's one bedrock principle in our system, it was that no person was above the law. that there was no absolute um um minty to try to overthrow the government. look where we are right now. there's a very real possibility that we will have this election and not have had this trial. the court knows all of this. and i'm not as troubled by the fact that the court took the case as that they are slow walking it. this is not a hard decision, as andrew as pointed out over the last two days. it's been fully agreed. so what they are doing is they are creating a situation where we are in a crisis moment. yet by doing what they are doing, they are pushing this country right to the brink of a fund the the cisis of legitimacy and credibility. not just of the court but of the whole democratic experiment. because what happens if the

american public no longer have confidence in congress, no longer have confidence in the criminal justice system new york city longer have confidence in presidential elections or the supreme court. where did that lead us as a country? what does that mean for the american experiment. so this is an alarming moment. it's been coming and heading in this direction for a long time. but now we're faced with the prospect that nobody is coming to rescu us. this is on us now. >> now that we have nine individuals who have not just the substance, but the pace of this in their hands, i said yesterday let's give ginni thomas and clarence thomas, maybe they don't ever talk about politics. maybe they talk about their fruit trees, but this is what the wife of one of those nine human beings text mark meadows

at the center of what trumps to be immune from. help this great president stand firm. you are the leading with him who is standing for america's constitutional governance. the majority knows biden and the left is attempting the greatest heist of our history. all sorts of by sars kapt sags. it sounds like sidney powell and her team are getting inundated. save us from the left taking america down. january 10th, after the insurrection, we're living through the end of america. most of us are disgusted with the vice president. that would be mike pence at the time. and are in listening mode to see the word of fight. those who attacked the capital are not representative of the great teams of patriots. let's deep with the perception that the american people have of the supreme court. they are 20 points less less popular today in the wake of dobbs and they now stepped into this. >> what a nightmare for john

roberts who has been concerned about the standing of the institution. supreme courtss don't need to be popular. they don't need to follow the folds, but it's not irrelevant if the american people lose faith in their legit ma us is. it's not irrelevant if people think that the court has become a partisan weapon. or that it is not bound by call standards. there is that moment at which when we're not there yet, where the court may make a ruling and the president like a president trump might say they ruled. i'm going to ignore it. what happens then? to liz cheney's argument or warning, if trump tdss that he's going to ignore the two-term limit, who is going to enfoce it. how does it happen? so these are things that the court needs to be concerned about. i think that justice robertss

has been concerned about it. but if he was really paying attention, he would not be putting the court or the country through this slow walk delay that allowing donald trump to run out the clock that may lead to this ultimate constitutional crisis. >> andrew and charlie are not going anywhere. new ruling coming out of illinois that is clear to everyone who studied the case. donald trump engaged in insurrection on january 6th making illinois the third state to kick him off the ballot. we'll talk about that, next. kit we'll talk about that, next. it's basically tennis for babies, but for adults. it should be called wiffle tennis. pickle! yeah, aw! whoo! ♪♪ these guys are intense. we got nothing to worry about. with e*trade from morgan stanley, we're ready for whatever gets served up. dude, you gotta work on your trash talk. i'd rather work on saving for retirement. or college, since you like to get schooled. that's a pretty good burn, right? got him. good game.

thanks for coming to our clinic, first one's free.

( ♪ ♪ ) start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand.

an illinois judge ruled yesterday that donald trump barred from even appearing on that 2024 republican primary ballot. the judge writing, this court's final determination on this issue is that the respondent candidate failed to meet section 3 of the disqualification provision based on engaging in insurrection. his name should be removed from the ballot. the judge put a stay on the decision and the ex-president has already filed an appeal. the final outcome will likely be decided, wait for it, by the united states supreme court, which heard arguments relate ared to trump's ballot eligibility earlier in the month. joining our conversation, legal correspondent and editor for slaet and host of the podcast, she's with us.

andrew and charlie are still here. i'll open the up the floor to you on this or anything we have been talking about. your thoughts today? >> i want to welcome you back as with well. it's good to see you. i want to link up something that i think andrew was just saying that is so important. we have this expectation for good reason. we love lawyers. we lo law. the constitution feels lawish. we think that courts are going to save us all the time. we have become in some sense so hypnotized by the notion that a court was going to step in and do the right thing. and i think andrew makes the point is and it's really worth lifting up again, this was made a determination was made in that colorado court that illinois judge relied heavily on that determination. we have had the january 6th committee. we have had an impeachment in the house. we all saw with our own eyes

what happened. so the notion that this this is some spy thing where nobody can figure out what happened because it's just too secret and complicated is part of what's throwing us off. and so i'm very much of the view that, yes, we all wanted a kind of shaix peern landing when the supreme court in some grand bargain said no to immunity and yes, let him be spriped off the bargain. that's proving that they were centrist and originalist. but okay, we're not going to get that. but i think what it does is it forces us to confront the fact that we all saw what we saw. we know what we know. the issueses in front of the courts are not did donald trump do it so much as they are can he be held accountable the for that. the answer to that in some sense, i hate to say it lies as much with us as it does with the courts. >> and i mean i think that's the deja vu. here we go again.

there was misplaced hope that the mueller investigation would be the accountability device for, to put it generously, a shared mission with is vladimir putin in 2016. and then obstructing the national security questions and the ability to investigate whether an american adversary meddled in our election with the knowledge of or coordination with the trump campaign. and i think that the lesson after that is that the election in 2020 answered the question. but the problem maybe is that trump's legal arguments are not based in a simple legal strategy. they are based in exploiting the american experiment to get out of criminal poe sure they are not about proving innocence. they are proving that absolute power, that ascending to the presidency again is the only way to stay out of jail.

that's what he's saying to his supporters on the trump. stump. what happens to the rule of law in that circumstance? >> i think you have heard charlie and andrew say it better than i could, which is if the supreme court were to countenance for even a nanosecond, the immunity arguments that are being advance ed right now, they are so laughable. it would allow joe biden to get seal team 6 to murder somebody and it wouldn't matter because he hasn't been impeached for it yet. it's crazy. so i think that what we're seeing is this cascading effect of lawlessness. i think that if in any way, shape or form, almost regardless of what the court does on the merit with this immunity decision, it almost doesn't matter because forcing this to go to trial in the fall when the election has already started, having donald trump darting in and out of a courtroom while

he's running for office is an invitation to more lawlessness and more doubt. so in some sense, the harm is done to the rule of law. and the supreme court dresses it up as a chin stroking. this is a serious issue. and we can't just affirm to be correct in ever day the d.c. sir is kit panel opinion. that's fine. that's their prerogative. they want to look to think there are not meaningful political consequences for notions of rule of law had, i think it's naive to the point of insanity. >> what is jack smith directing his team to do today? >> isn't there a couple things he can think about. but i just want to make sure people understand that i think what you're hearing is all of us are saying this is a might make

right regime. and the reason i think that i'm speaking for myself, but i'm so upset with the supreme court is of course, ultimately, it's for the citizenry to make a decision about trump vs. biden and what that means. but it shouldn't have to be over being hampered by the supreme court, when you don't have the institution of accountability, where row don't have a trial. this is the executive branch through a grand jury that has had four indictments and you have the courts stepping in to say essentially, no way. not going to happen. with really such a slim read. there were so many ways, as charlie said, they could have tone this much, much faster. so this is just saying, we're not doing this. the chances of there being a trial and certainly a verdict by the time that people start voting are somewhere between slim and none.

because of a choice the supreme court made. so the reason it's now on us is because we will not have that opportunity to have legal accountability. that's not the way our system should work. what can jack smith do? jack smith in addition to having to argue this case and you don't get any better than michael to point out just how all of the ways that this should be decided quickly and even if the court thinks there should be some room for some sort of qualified immunity and some circumstances, it's not this case. and there's just no reason to have done it here. he can also when and if there's a green light for the judge, he can try to streamline his case. there's a phrase i used to use. which is slim to win. you picked your case.

you do what you need to have to get to a verdict and to win. but you don't put in a lot of embroidery. he's going to be trying to figure out how to cut it down and what's the best argument he can make to the judge that the 88 days, the amount of time she has remaining on the clock, for donald trump to prepare for trial, what legitimate arguments cans he make to her as to why that should be shorter because he's trying to narrow the case so he has less to prepare for. but that's what he would be thinking about when the case goes back to the judge, if it goes back to the judge at the supreme court. >> wow. thank you for spending time with us on all this today. andrew will be back. charlie sticks around. up next for us, president biden and donald trump in texas. the two very different messages. supposedly, the came stoppic and

the same universe that split screen moment on the southern border is next. screen moment on the southern border is next diabetes can serve up a lot of questions, like... what is your glucose, and can you have more carbs? before you decide... with the freestyle libre 3 system... know your glucose and where it's headed. no fingersticks needed. now the world's smallest and thinnest sensor... sends your glucose levels directly to your smartphone. manage your diabetes with more confidence, and lower your a1c. the number one cgm prescribed in the us. try it for free at freestylelibre.us. ♪♪ you know, when i take the bike out like this, all my stresses just melt away. i hear that. this bad boy can fix anything. yep, tough day at work, nice cruise will sort you right out. when i'm riding, i'm not even thinking about my painful cavity. well, you shouldn't ignore that. and every time i get stressed about having to pay my bills, i just hop on the bike, man. oh, come on, man, you got to pay your bills. you don't have to worry about anything when you're protected by america's number-one motorcycle insurer. well, you definitely do. those things aren't related, so... ah, yee!

oh, that is a vibrating pain. meet the traveling trio. the thrill seeker. the soul searcher. and - ahoy! it's the explorer! each helping to protect their money with chase. woah, a lost card isn't keeping this thrill seeker down. lost her card, not the vibe. the soul searcher, is finding his identity, and helping to protect it. hey! oh yeah, the explorer! she's looking to dive deeper... all while chase looks out for her. because these friends have chase. alerts that help check. tools that help protect. one bank that puts you in control. chase. make more of what's yours.

what was it like before viasat satellite internet? two words: not fun. log off. i've got homework! no way! it's still my turn! we couldn't share the internet. times up. (♪♪) sharing's caring! but now with viasat's new plans, we have plenty of internet. for everyone! except you babe. you're being rude. more data. faster speeds. available where you live. learn more about our plans at viasat.com.

president joe biden right now on a split-screen moment in texas today, visiting the u.s./mexico border, showing his commitment to border security, as the ex-president holds a border photo op about 300 miles west after his very public and unfortunately, effective, efforts to block that border

deal. see that biden can't take credit for doing something to solve the problem. today, president biden met with border patrol agents and first responders, as he prepares to call out republicans in congress for torpedoing at the explicit request of donald trump that bipartisan bill that president biden helped negotiate for the toughest border reform in decades. and while president biden weighs executive action on border security, because his team says doing nothing is not an option they're contemplating. joining me at the table, former assistant u.s. attorney, maya wiley is here. charlie stock is here as well. i missed this, charlie, correct me if i'm wrong, but it goes something like that. president joe biden gives more than any democratic elected official in a very long time has been willing to give to do something about the -- it's a tragedy, it's not a crises, it's a huge tragedy at the border and

donald trump calls the republicans who he was working with and says, don't do it, we can't have him fix this? >> the rank cynicism was there for everybody to see here. look, this is going to be a big issue in the campaign. what was really extraordinary was the degree to which you had a bipartisan consensus around this legislation. you had people like james langford from oklahoma, who negotiated it. and republicans got almost everything they claimed they wanted. remember, they were actually holding up the aid to ukraine because the crisis at the border, they said, was so serious that they couldn't do anything until this border crisis was addressed. well, the biden administration worked with republicans and they came up with a solution to what republicans, saying is this existential crisis. and donald trump torpedoed it, and he torpedoed with it this sort of this explanation that we can't do anything that will make it look like biden is succeeding. we want the issue, we don't want a solution. and so that's where we are,

that's brought us to this moment right now, where the republicans in congress basically backed away from solving the problem that they had identified, because they -- because they wanted to prioritize donald trump's ability to use this as an issue in the presidential campaign. >> i guess it's something that's still hard to get used to, that donald trump apparently at a rally says, the senators are trying to say they're blaming it on me, i say, that's fine, blame it on me. what charlie is saying isn't a theory. these are the facts as all sides acknowledge them. president biden just a couple of minutes ago is laying this all at the feet of the republican speaker. is that enough? >> you know, when we're looking at the humanitarian crisis we're seeing at the border, the strain it creates within this country, you know, i think it's really important to talk about what it means to have political leaders who call for solutions, you

know, who are problem sofrls rather than seeking power and using a problem to get it. and i do think that's a stark contrast, but it's not enough, because i do think that we have to hear about solutions, but again, if we don't have true bipartisanship, if when there is an ability to come up with some kind of negotiated compromise, and it can't be seen through, because of naked, rank grab at power, and the use of division and fear to create it, which is a pattern we have seen with donald trump, then we don't get solutions. and i have to say, as someone who comes from a civil rights community that really actually didn't like the compromise, and was really concerned about a border patrol that, for example, remember, under donald trump, had that horrific video, that kind of painted someone of latina background as a criminal, showed them in an ally, victimizing someone, and it looked like a fantasy film about

killing someone, because they crossed a border, and that notion of criminalization. it's just the kind of thing that keeps us away from the right discussions around how we create meaningful solution. and that's just something we can't afford as a country, and it's not something we can afford as a globe. >> let's listen to a little bit of the president. >> here's what i would say to mr. trump. instead of telling members of congress to block this legislation, join me, or i'll join you. in telling the congress to pass this bipartisan security bill. we can do it together. you know and i know it's the toughest, most efficient, most effective border security bill this country has ever seen. so instead of playing politics with the issue, they don't we just get together and get it done? let's remember who the heck we work for. we work for the american people, not the democratic party, the republican party, we work for the american people. and let's remember who we are. we're the united states of

america! i mean this. think about this. there's nothing, nothing beyond our capacity, nothing when we work together. and of all things we should be working together on is this, and we have the formula to get it done. god bless you and may god protect our border patrol and may god protect our troops. >> so, charlie, at some point, making sure that people know that the bipartisan deal, the one that republicans, as you say, got everything they wanted, the one that as maya just put, went farther than she would have liked to have seen it go, was scuttled by republicans in service of donald trump. i mean, there are no new stories in the trump story, right? solving this thing, fox news bangs the drum about 24/7 along with life in american cities, which actually the two stories are tied together, even on fox news, what do they program if republicans are part of an actual solution on this thing

they pretend to care about most? >> well, and that's why donald trump demanded that they kill it, because he knows what the playbook is. he's used it, you know, in every campaign. we're going to hear a lot about caravans. you see fox news and republicans trying to exploit a tragic murder of a young woman by an illegal immigrant. that's what they're claiming. this is the way he's the framing it. he goes back to that moment he came down the golden escalator and talked about, you know, the people coming across the mexican border, they are rapists. this is really the message they want to pound through. if, in fact, they solve the problem, if, in fact, you had this major surge, this new legislation, that takes away their talking point. and they want that talking point. they want to play upon the fear, they want to play on the division. they know that the system is broken. the biden administration is acknowledging it's broken, but what they're saying is, we don't actually want to fix, we want to use it. we want to make people afraid,

because that's their -- that is the road back to power for them, they believe. >> straight out of bob rumson's lines? thank you for spending the hour with us. maya sticks around. much more news ahead. the one criminal case against the ex-president that has nothing to do with the united states supreme court. new reporting on the manhattan hush money trial when we come back. don't go anywhere. trial when w back don't go anywhere. that's why they choose t-mobile for business. pga of america and t-mobile are partnering on 5g-powered analytics to help improve player performance. t-mobile's network helps aaa stay connected nationwide... to get their members back on the road. and las vegas grand prix chose t-mobile to help fuel operations for one of the world's largest racing events. now is the time to see what america's largest 5g network can do for your business. when my doctor gave me breztri for my copd, things changed for me. breztri gave me better breathing, symptom improvement, and reduced flare—ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler

for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ask your doctor about breztri.

i went to the wharton school of finance, i was a great student, i built a fortune. >> because i do like a deal a second. i do many, many deals. most of them work. i'm a world-class business guy. i've built an unbelievable company, very, very little debt. tremendous -- some of the greatest assets in the world. >> hi, again, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. donald trump sold himself to his base of supporters on his so-called business genius, rallying support by selling

people on his financial successes. he spoke all the time is about the size of his wealth. he hosted a reality show that showed people vying to work with him and for him. he even wrote books about the subject. but now, those words are going to be used against him in court. new reporting reveals that prosecutors in the criminal hush money case out of new york plan to quote from those books in those arguments, from that new reporting, quote, the manhattan district attorney's office provided trump's defense team with a list of past statements made by the former president, including four dozen quotes from books published between 1987 and 2015, which they plan to introduce as evidence during the trial. according to the defense, some of trump's quotes that prosecutors intend to highlight involve his approach to business, including his frugality, and, quote, hands-on approach, while others focus on trump's interactions with women, which is expected to be a central issue in the trial.

following yesterday's news out of the supreme court that it will consider trump's immunity claim, the hush money case brought by alvin bragg holds even more significance. it is increasingly likely it will be the only criminal case of the ex-president to go trial before the election in november. back in april of last year, alvin bragg charged donald trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal damaging information ahead of the 2016 election. the charges hold penalties of up to four years in prison. trump has pleaded not guilty to all 34. bragg's case will be the first-ever criminal trial of an ex-president, set to begin just under one month from today on march 25th. the wrongdoing by the ex-president, bragg alleges, is much more than paying money to an adult film star there stay quiet about an alleged affair. >> it is often shorthanded to

hush money as we've laid out in public court filings. the case is not -- the core of it's not, you know, 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. and so that's the heart of the case, as we've laid out in court filings. >> that's where we start the hour with some of our favorite legal experts and friends. msnbc legal correspondent, lisa ruben is back with us, plus back with us, former assistant u.s. attorney, maya wiley, and msnbc legal analyst, former top prosecutor at the department of justice, andrew weismann is back with us. i was writing in my notes, what did sdny do? >> remind me what they did with this case? they looked at the same evidence and facts? >> so, with respect to michael cohen, they actually brought the case and he pleaded guilty. i actually know a lot about

that, because that was referred to them by the mueller investigation, because it was -- you know, we had this narrow remit. and when this came up, we split off this part of the michael cohen case, and they successfully brought it, but then they stopped. so, that is where the manhattan district attorney's office, to their credit, both to the d.a. vance and now to d.a. bragg, they both have been tenaciously pursuing this. i just wanted to say, you know, some of your viewers might be saying, what do those quotes, what are those packages that nicole read, what is it, frugality and, sort of being hands-on, what does that have to do with this case? why are they going to seek to read those passages? this is why. and they're really good lawyers on both sides in this case. what the prosecution is going to say is, this isn't some executive. donald trump was not some senior

executive who didn't know what was going on and the details. this wasn't some tiny bit of money that, how do you expect a billionaire to keep track of this paltry sum of money that low-level people might be dealing with. he's not in the weeds. what they want to show is, he is a hands-on boss, he is frugal, he watches every dime. that's going to be the theory of their case. that's why these statements are going to be relevant to them. you know, obviously, that's part -- those are bricks that you use to build a wall, as both leah and milo know from trying cases, that's how you sort of go about it, and the defense will have to figure out how they're going to that can. but that's the reason for why those statements are going to be something that the prosecution wants to introduce to help build their case. >> i feel like this case has always suffered from the words "porn star,," "sex," and "hush money" as being part of the

searches, but alvin bragg is making clear in his comments that this is about election interference. and no doubt, i worked on campaigns, when you are keeping information quiet ahead of a date that happens to coincide with an election, that is election interference. what do you make of the larger themes in this trial? >> i think that is right. it is important to remember, i think, two things. one the information that d.a. says they were trying to keep quiet was particularly sensitive because of the "access hollywood" tape had just come out. and so this was coming out around that same time. it would have really cemented people's view of donald trump, it would have made it much harder for him to say, remember, if you remember, he said, that's not even my voice -- that was one of his first claims, that wasn't even me on that. so we've come pretty far. now he says, it's me, who cares?

because i'm a misogynist, essentially. so that's one. and something that's notable to me, you have this effort to catch and kill that involves the complicity of a media organization. it's safe to say when you think about a media organization, you think about giving information to the public, you don't think about deliberately keeping information from the public, on behalf of not just keeping it, but on behalf of a political candidate. and so, that is what is charged here, and according to the indictment, the head of that media organization, the "national enquirer," is going to be one of the government's witnesses, is going to be called by the manhattan district attorney's office to talk about

that agreement, that complicity between donald trump and keeping that information from the electorate. just to be clear, everything i'm saying is what i will anticipate we will hear. it's obviously the state's burden to prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt. >> when i went on maternity leave, there was this dmairt looming. good thing you'll be back before the trial starts. and now that i'm back, it looks like this could be the only trial that happens before election day in november. alvin bragg seems wider for that possibility. >> he is wired for that possibility. and i think he's been telling all of us for a long time, don't discount this case. i'm not telling you that it is as grave as the federal case, with willful retention of

classified materials and instead of referring this to as a hush money case, i think it's time as the state election interference trial, as contrasted with the federal election interference trial, before judge chutkan, i think ready to go. i think that they have been preparing, including with pre-interviews of witnesses for weeks. and based on the performance, i saw of the prosecutor's handling this case and the pre-trial hearing on february 15th, i think we will be treated to some very good lawyering in this case. i share andrew's opinion of the two lead defense attorneys representing president trump. one is a former prosecutor, the other is a very well-regarded federal defense attorney. they are todd blanche, who used to be a southern district of new york prosecutor, maya and i both know, and susan necklace, a very well-regarded criminal defense lawyer in town. i think you're going to see both sides really make an effort here

and be prepared for trial. but we can't ignore the fact that this trial and the supreme court review of the immunity case are going to coexist. and then we've also got these civil cases where judgment and post-judgment issues are going to collide with that calendar, too. this case opens on march 25th. you know what else march 25th? it's donald trump's deadline to post a bond in the new york attorney general's civil fraud trial. and unless he gets some intervention from that appeals court, he's going to owe $454 million plus interest in the form of some kind of undertaking on the same day that jury selection begins in this state election interference case. >> having watched him in judge engoron's courtroom, what are you prepared for in a hush money with a porn star trial? >> i'm prepared for anything and everything. that's honestly the truth.

and i think one of the reasons i'm prepared for anything and everything is because state courthouses are fundamentally different animals than federal courthouses, in almost every sense of the word. but in this one critical way, cameras cannot even enter the southern district of new york. they are not only welcome at 100 center street, where this case will be tried, but donald trump will be given the opportunity to address the press multiple times a day, there will be pool photographers who come in at the beginning of a trial day. when he leaves to take a break, they will be waiting for his every word. he will transform the hallways of 100 center street into a briefing room, in effect, a very poorly setup briefing room, but a briefing room, nonetheless. i think i've mentioned to you before that every moment that he is there in the courtroom is just a little bit more tense, you know, i think about, i'm a huge taylor swift song, and i think about the song "bejeweled" when she says, i can still place shimmer, for donald trump it's like, i can still make the whole

place tenser. his is very presence brings an aura of danger and unpredictability to the proceedings. >> you know, trump has benefited by years now of railing against elites and a lot of it we've tlaernd from mary trump comes from feeling excluded by them, disrespected by them. but elites thought that this was too sordid. and i think in some case, this case hasn't been given both the import in terms of its impact on the 2016 election, the absolute sort of base corruption, as andrew was talking about, as co-opting a media outlet and conspiring with them to keep information from the general public ahead of a presidential election, but this, too, to lisa's point, this is about what was before the voters before they made a choice about in a presidential election. >> yes. and i think lisa said it really well. and going back to the point about the importance of the case, one of the things that has been so devastating about these

past several years is that the normalization of criminal activity, even the claim of criminal activity against someone who is seeking to hold to reins of the most powerful position in the country, which under any other circumstances, at other points in our history, this case would have been a big deal. it is only because we have gotten to a place in this country where we saw what happened on january 6th that we're hearing a discussion of this case that denigrates its importance. >> totally. >> and that is something we should worry a lot about. >> this is a personal obsession. and it's actually brain science, right? the laws of adoption -- you know, we have to adapt. and so we have triage and take the most frightening thing and then the laws of relativity force us to sort of prioritize. and so when we're talking about a coup, when we're talking about classified stuff, and talking about these other things, we put sex with a porn star and alleged

hush money payments at the bottom of that list. but they're essential to the corruption of an election, as anything else. and they're -- someone you'd this term earlier, they're the original sin, they're about 2016. >> remember the "access hollywood" tape, right? the "access hollywood" tape, we actually see a lot of republican politicians backing away from donald trump, because they think that this is going to be the political kiss of death. and then it's not. but yet, this case goes back to why we have to be concerned about why and how a person behaves in a certain way, and what might indicate. june, voters care a lot about understanding who they're voting into office. people who run for office spend a lot of trying to project to voters who they are. the question is always, are you actually who you're telling me you are, or are you not? and part of what this case is bringing to the fore is something the civil cases have

already brought. whether it's the settlement of his trump university civil fraud case. whether it was the settlement of the trump charities, where he was writing checks, that personally benefited from himself -- to himself out of the charity, or, now the trump organization's a felon. his business is a felon. his cfo is a felon. so we've already got all of these data points that have built over time, that even include some of this information we heard before 2016 and saw before 2016, but now it's -- it's such a pattern that we should be looking at this now for first criminal trial in the full light of day, of all of the data points we have seen that relate to a long pattern of fraud and the relationship portraying himself in a certain way and working hard to, with regard to maybe what the truth

is. >> andrew, explain to a non-lawyer why tish james and alvin bragg were able to do what no federal prosecutor has been able to do. >> that is such a great question. you know, i think there's a complicated answer to that. you know, i think you started by asking me about and ai gave you this explanation about the southern district of new york making headway on michael cohen's case and then stopping, and as we know, bill barr had a hand in that. that the case would not go any further. as you were in the michael cohen plea documents, it was clearly referring to the role of donald trump, at least what we see in the state documents. at least initially, you had a problem because of bill barr. the second part is, you know, a

less-flattering answer with respect to the current department of justice' administration, because there was nothing that prevented the current doj from picking that case back up, in the same way that you and i and others have talked about merrick garland being slow to take up the january 6th case until really stepping on the gas, only after the january 6th congressional hearings. so a lot of what we're dealing with now, it doesn't excuse what the supreme court is doing. there are lots of others players to share in that blame, but the sort of having the moxie and the, you know, the sort of sang-hwa to basically say, you know what, i'm going to follow the facts where they lead and i'm going to do it quickly and

i'm going to do it regardless of the political hit that i'm surely going to take in a town like washington is unfortunately, i think, part of the story as to why we are where we are. and i don't think you saw that either with d.a. vance, to be fair to him, as well, and d.a. bragg, and with tish james. i think they basically did their jobs, as good public servants. and there's a real contrast in looking at what they did compared to other people. >> and in some instances, they face, not just equal threats, but more brutal and crude ones, with a lot less security infrastructure. we hope that's been beefed up. but always worth pointing out that some folks found a way. lisa ruben, thank you again for yesterday and for coming back today. you're on the andrew weismann schedule now. andrew, you're finally allowed to leave, but don't go far.

i think we're 4 for 4 this week. thank you, my friend. maya sticks around for a little bit longer. when we come back, american autocracy and the bright red warning sign from the prime minister of australia, who has seen donald trump up close and maybe too personal with vladimir putin. he calls the reverence trump has for russia's dictator creepy, likens it to that of a 12-year-old boy who looks up to the captain of a high school football team. he will be our next guest with an urgent warning about the safety of global democracy if trump wins a second term. and later in the hour, so much for protect, ivf. republicans now for purely political purposes trying to talk the talk on ivf, but not even remotely walking the walk. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. continues aft. don't go anywhere. at new chapter vitamin's we have been busy too innovating, sourcing organic ingredients testing them and...fermenting. fermenting? yeah, like kombucha or yogurt

and we formulate everything so, your body can really truly absorb the natural goodness that's what we do so you can do you new chapter. wellness well done when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding,

or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. meet the jennifers. jen x. jen y. and jen z. each planning their future through the chase mobile app. jen x is planning a summer in portugal with some help from j.p. morgan wealth plan. let's go whiskers. jen y is working with a banker to budget for her birthday. you only turn 30 once. and jen z? her credit's golden. hello new apartment. three jens getting ahead with chase. solutions that grow with you. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours.

when i was your age, we never had anything like this. chase. what? wifi? wifi that works all over the house, even the basement. the basement. so i can finally throw that party... and invite shannon barnes. dream do come true. xfinity gives you reliable wifi with wall-to-wall coverage on all your devices, even when everyone is online. maybe we'll even get married one day. i wonder what i will be doing? probably still living here with mom and dad. fast reliable speeds right where you need them. that's wall-to-wall wifi on the xfinity 10g network. i am every opponent you've ever faced. let's dance lizard. i can take any form i desire. awesome! i mean it's disturbing, but it's awesome.

trump is in awe of putin. when you see trump with putin, as i have on a few occasions, he's like the 12-year-old boy that goes to high school and meets the captain of the football team. my hero! it is really creepy. it's really creepy. the scary thing is that for countries like australia and many european countries, we may find ourselves -- are we going to find ourselves not dealing just with two autocracies in russia and china, but is what is trump's america going to look like? this is a guy leading a party

that is no longer committed to democracy as we understand it. >> a chilling statement at this point heard around the world, but perfectly put. those are the stakes of a decision now left solely and squarely in the hands of the american voter. the fate of the world order as we know it. former australian prime minister malcolm turnbull giving voice to an acute anxiety shared by many nor government officials all around the world, that the united states is very, very alarmingly, but very realistically at the brink of a possible dark new era, one where it veers into autocracy. an american autocracy. donald trump isn't even pretending otherwise, right? he's not saying one thing behind closed doors and another on the podium. the self-described day one dictator, perhaps inspired by his the catalog obsession with strongmen on the world stage,

people like vladimir putin, has been open and public about his desire to use american government institutions to target his political enemies. as he heard, he idolizes, in a, quote, creepy way, vladimir putin. putin for his part, today, suggested in a speech that the west faces the prospect of nuclear war now, should it continue to support or intervene more directly in ukraine. and "the new york times" today reporting that donald trump plans to meet privately with hundred gainer prime minister, another man he has a creepy affection for, victor orban, a right-wing nationalist, at his club, mar-a-lago next week. these developments taken together bring into even shaper focus this afternoon that with u.s. institutions passing the buck now to the american voter, it is on us to choose the path forward for america, democracy or autocracy. joining our conversation, it is a privilege to get to speak to the aforementioned former prime

minister turnbull. thank you so much for being with us. your comments were heard around the world. i woke up to them on "morning joe" and i've seen them everywhere. >> well, look, i think it's a very important point to make. the trump fascination with putin is a very creepy one, and it was palpable. i mean, people who have been with trump and putin, and indeed people who saw him with putin at that helsinki conference will say the same thing. he has a fascination with putin, he's in awe of putin, probably admires him, probably wishes he could be his omnipotent in america as putin is in russia, but it's a very, it's very disconcerting when you see the leader of the free world being so interested in tyrants. and of course, it's not just

putin. look at his bromance with kim jong-un. how improbable was that? you know, effectively exchanging what i think he described as love letters. i think it is alleged to be the among the classified things he took with him to mar-a-lago to hang on to them and i understand he has framed pictures of himself with kim jong-un, which it's so bizarre, it sometimes falls off the radar of the things we talk about, but it should be top of mind. i want to ask you what the conversation was among world leaders when you saw trump fawn over putin and kim jong-un? >> this was particular the case at the hamburg g-20 inform 2017. it was very disconcerting. you saw on the one hand trump's very, very apparent distaste for angela merkle, the chancellor, you know, effectively the prime

minister of germany. on the other hand, his fascination with putin. and it was an extraordinary contrast. so the, you know, his -- i mean, his instincts are not democratic. i mean, again, he says the quiet part out loud, as you've said in your introduction. you know, we don't have to speculate or psychoanalyze donald trump. he says all of this stuff. he is not a conservative. people often talk about conservatism and so forth. trump's not a conservative. conservatives believe in the rule of law. they defend established institutions. you know, they are not -- conservatives do not embrace radical change. they want change to be incremental and gradual. trump is determined to use every lever he can get and he says he will do that to maximize his

power, and of course, you know, take action against his enemies. i mean, didn't he say at a bit of a public speech, i will be your retribution? well, you know, that's hardly the -- that's hardly the language of someone who wants to bring everybody together. you see, i've always believed the role of a national leader is to unite their nation, their country, their community. to bring people together. now, what trump does and what, of course, victor orban, who is also he's fascinated with does the same thing in hungary, what his goal is is to divide, take advantage of those divisions, and then use that to, you know, rile up his supporters, you know, so that he can get enough support to win. and it's this -- this is supported by the right-wing media in america, particularly fox news, what i call

angercontainment and it's doing unbelievable damage to your country. i mean, you live there, you know what it's like. >> yes. >> and for the rest of us, we all have a stake in your election, but we don't have a say in it. >> let me ask you this, i mean, america benefits from intelligence-sharing agreements with countries like yours, five eyes all share threat information and so the intelligence product that an american president sees may be a compilation of things that myriad of nations have risked their lives to present to an american president for policy making and to protect the country. what happens if the american president becomes someone who is not a democratic leader, who's someone that is on their way to being an autocrat. could you imagine countries being reluctant to share their

intelligence with our country? >> well, you could. i think it's, you know, puts enormous stress on relationships. you know, a very good friend of mine, david petraeus, has often observed the only thing worse than fighting a war with allies is fighting a war without allies. so, you know, the reality is the united states, unlike china and russia, has a broad range of alliances, nato being, i guess, the largest and most important one. when trump was president in his first term, he sought to unsettle all of those. he pulled out of some very important global agreements. the climate agreement, for example. he wouldn't participate in the transpacific partnership. happily, shinzo abe and i were able to keep that going without the u.s. but with nato, which is the single most important in a military strategic alliance, the

america is part of, he has threatened to pull out of that, and his fascination with putin, who, of course, is the adversary, really puts in question the viable of nato. now, this is, you know, the problem with that, with these arrangements is that once you undermine the trust in them, the language -- and you don't have to amendment article v of nato agreement, but once people feel that the united states cannot be counted on, is not consistent, and trump actively seeks to undermine that confidence, then all sorts of terrible consequences can ensue, dictators are encouraged. countries that have been allies and friends of the united states, moving to the pacific, may start to decide, the only way we could secure our future

is to acquire our own nuclear capability. so you run the risk of nuclear proliferation. i mean, it is this disrupt chaotic approach that trump takes to establish alliances is a real threat to the security of the free world, the security of the united states, and of course, particularly, the security of america's close friends, like australia, america has no better friend than australia. but you know, we have to look at it from our point of view, is trump's america, mach 2, going to be one that we can rely on? and the truth is, we can't be sure. you know, we really can't be sure. we can cross our fingers and hope that all will go well. but you can't be sure, because this is a guy who seeks -- he's not a conservative, he doesn't believe in continuity or

consistency. he's in sense a revolutionary in that respect, but it's a chaotic populist way of disrupting the world, and i don't see that there is any satisfactory outcome of that, except advantaging our autocratic rivals. >> are you aware of conversation s among world leaders to figure out what to do should trump win a second term? >> well, everybody is hedging. i mean trump was elected if 2016, you know, i was prime minister of australia. i discussed the likely -- you know, the trump presidency with many leaders. you know, from xi jinping to at least a dozen world leaders. and the view at that point was, oh, well, he's said all of these wild things on the campaign trail, but once he gets into

office, he'll be institutionalized. he'll become more conventional. people used to quote that line of mario cuomo, we campaign in poetry, but we governor in prose, as michelle beschloss said, there wasn't a lot of poetry in the 2016 campaign but what trump in office proved was is that he was as wild in office as he was on the campaign trail. so now we're faced with a really unpredictable prospect, and a guy who is hellbent, so he says out of his own lips, on his opponents and critics. and you know, it is, it's a the -- it's going to be -- look, there isn't a is foreign policy commentator in the rule who isn't writing up the prospect of a trump protest as a major risk

to global security. so what i'm saying to you is effectively a penetrating glimpse of the obvious. i mean, trump is a threat to global security, because he essentially presents himself as being a threat to the established order. >> former prime minister of australia, it is an honor to have this conversation with you. i hope it is a conversation we can continue in the coming months. malcolm turnbull, thank you very much for spending sometime with us. thank you. >> quick break for us. we'll be right back you. >> quick break for us. we'll be right bac n your skills, you can stay on top of the market from wherever you are. e*trade from morgan stanley power e*trade's easy-to-use tools make complex trading less complicated. custom scans help you find new trading opportunities, while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. e*trade from morgan stanley

my mental health was much better. but i struggled with uncontrollable movements called td, tardive dyskinesia. td can be caused by some mental health meds. and it's unlikely to improve without treatment. i felt like my movements were in the spotlight. #1-prescribed ingrezza is the only td treatment for adults that's always one pill, once daily. ingrezza 80 mg is proven to reduce td movements in 7 out of 10 people. people taking ingrezza can stay on most mental health meds. ingrezza can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease. pay close attention to and call your doctor

if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, behaviors, feelings, or have thoughts of suicide. don't take ingrezza if you're allergic to its ingredients. ingrezza may cause serious side effects, including angioedema, potential heart rhythm problems, and abnormal movements. report fevers, stiff muscles, or problems thinking as these may be life threatening. sleepiness is the most common side effect. it's nice. people focus more on me. ask your doctor about #1 prescribed, once-daily ingrezza. ♪ ingrezza ♪

. we don't do that all that often, but let's take that in for a moment. there was a plainspokenness and a candor that comes from being out of office. he was actually pretty outspoken and candid in office, but this is just flat-out the whole world order is on the line in november. >> you know, nicole, he said something that was so chilling and depressing, which was, post-november, the whole world might have to reckon with the idea that there are autocracies in the world. >> china, russia, and america. >> i wrote that down, too. >> and it's like, talk about being unvarnished. he also said that the thing that -- he didn't quite say what i'm about to say, but he was hinting at it, is that donald trump is himself the greatest

threat to security in the world and the security of the united states. and it's not just because of hiding classified documents. it's because he doesn't recognize the world order, while turnbull was speaking, i kept thinking, you know, i don't think trump really understands what happened in world war ii and who won and what the consequences of it -- i mean, that's part of the problem of why he has never understood what nato is all about. and we've never had a world -- >> see, i think he does and doesn't care, which is scarier. >> i -- i don't know which is worse. >> he even told john kelly that he wanted his generals to be just like the germans. and kelly was like, which ones? >> and he kept a copy of hitler's speeches by his bed. he's an anarchist. it's not that he's a radicalist, it's just that he doesn't understand the world order. how the world order works on predictable. that's why trump is such a great

risk. >> if we go back to trump's very own words, his words, i am going to have an article ii that lets me do anything i want. he's referring to article ii of the constitution that created the office of the presidency and it does not say you can do whatever you want. this is exactly why we have a case before the supreme court that shouldn't be before the supreme court. but he said things like, i am going to make sure we stop all theft, because if you go into a store to rob it, you'll be shot and killed in the store. he said, we are going to make sure that we are rounding up all of the people he doesn't like, essentially, the radical left vermin, he called them, and take care of them. this is the language not just of an authoritarian, but someone who beyond not caring, actually cares a great deal, but the thing i think he cares a great deal is about his ability to do whatever he wants. and that is exactly why he's a danger to the world order as well as to all of us inside the

country, because he does it wherever, whenever and whyever. and imagine if we had actually had an impeachment, when he had gone and tried to get zelenskyy and ukraine to do his bidding against a political opponent, imagine what we would have stemmed if, in fact, we had had a politics that said that we are going to take seriously our constitutional power, including the power of congress to make sure that we're curbing this kind of behavior. >> rick stangl, maya williams, i'm sorry we didn't have more time. thank you for reacting with us. when we come back, despite talking, call it a good game, they thought it was a good game, republicans are working hard to block protections for iv f treatments. the dire impact they're having on women and families is our next story. don't go anywhere. s is our next story don't go anywhere. up to 4,000 s with a machine that weighs less than half that. cutting grass, clearing the way,

and perfecting every inch of your land. ♪♪ we could keep trying to put it into words. ♪♪ but nothing compares to experiencing it for yourself. ♪♪ you just have to get in the seat. learn more at johndeere.com/getintheseat

well, i'm for ivf. i'm pro-ivf and it's protected in law in missouri in my state and i think should be everywhere. >> i believe in the sanctity of every human life, i always have. and because of that, i support ivf and its availability. >> we should celebrate the miracle of every one of those births. i'm personally glad that this issue is now at the state level where it should be. >> so, falls apart in a lot of places, but especially that last part, where they start to reveal themselves. republican elected officials talking about how they love the ivf. how important ivf access is to

them. after near universal outcry over the alabama supreme court's recent decision imperiling access to ivf. republican state legislators in alabama scrambling to respond, passing legislation today that claims to protect doctors from civil and criminal liability after a wave of outrage from patients, providers, and people watching all around the country, horrified by the court's decision and its instant and immediate unpopularity. at the national republican level, republican senators seemed open to supporting a bill backed by democrats to create a federal right to ivf access. but here's where their true colors are revealed, as they always are. because if you listen closely to what they're saying, republicans aren't actually interested in protecting ivf. their legislative actions show it. the bills that passed are unlikely to give the patients and providers the full peace of mind that they need, and last night, republican senator cindy hyde-smith blocked the

republicans' bill by claiming that ivf actually isn't banned in alabama at all. there is something about enraging 81% of americans when you overturn a right we've had for 50 years, that it were harder to fool. and i wonder what you make of how this conversation and debate is playing out over ivf. >> i think in the post-dobbs world, people now understand that they have a big old end game. that this was never about just going for much more. they're going to go for a national abortion ban. they're going to go for contraception, and they're going to go for fertility treatment, and i think what you saw in alabama, but around the country the giant reaction is because it is such an extreme idea that frozen embryos should have the same rights as children, and if

they keep that idea in alabama law and if other states follow, there's no end to the types of controls this will happen on our families, on our freedoms and on our ability to decide for ourselves what we do with our bodies. >> the gaslighting is also just at epic levels. let me show you tommy duckworth yesterday on the floor of the senate. >> you're not missing something, it's the nightmarish blend of hypocrisy and misogyny that you think it is. the very people who claim to be defending family values the ones trying to enact dystopian policies that would revent americans from starting their own families. this no longer a hypothetical worst-case scenario. >> i can't tell you how often in

my regular life people talk about the dystopian nature of the republican policy nature today. she's putting it all out there for us, isn't she? >> you know, she really is, and i think she's echoing what people are saying every day. they don't understand how something that is popular and is common and is used from people in every corner of this country that suddenly and very -- when you think about people accessing ivf it's a process already that is physically and emotionally taxing and very financially taxing, and so the idea that you will add the chaos of a legal landscape that is so uncertain on top of that, i'm worried about not perhaps in alabama and worried about around the country. >> fatima, thank you so much for

spending some time with us so we can get on the record and on the story. we'll stay on it. there is news on the e. jean carroll case and donald trump. we'll tell you about it after the break. d trump. we'll tell you about it after the break. for my condition called stress incontinence it really works, and the relief can last for years. take the next step at findrealrelief.com to arrange an appointment with an expert physician to determine if bulkamid is right for you. results and experiences may vary. move beyond the leaks. everywhere but the seat. the seat is leather. results and experiences may vary. alan, we get it. you love your bike. we do, too. that's why we're america's number-one motorcycle insurer. but do you have to wedge it into everything? what? i don't do that. this reminds me of my bike. the wolf was about the size of my new motorcycle. have you seen it, by the way? happy birthday, grandma! really? look how the brushstrokes follow the line of the gas tank.

-hey! -hey! brought my plus-one. jamie?

i found a cheaper price on my meds with singlecare. did you say singlecare? i use singlecare. whenever my customers ask me if there's a cheaper price on their meds. i always tell them about singlecare. i found a cheaper price with singlecare! i know. download the singlecare app free today. [crowd noises] [dramaticlly beat] introducing, ned's plaque psoriasis. he thinks his flaky red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. ned? otezla can help you get clearer skin, and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required.

doctors have been prescribing otezla for nearly a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. with clearer skin, movie night, is a groovy night. ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. . lawyers for e. jean carroll are hitting back against donald trump's request to reduce his bond in the defamation case where he was ordered to pay more than $80 million in the filing, attorney roberta kaplan telling the court this, quote, the reasoning trump offers in seeking this extraordinary

relief boils down to nothing more than trust me. he doesn't offer any information about his finances or the nature and location of his assets. he doesn't specify what percentage of his assets are liquid or explain how carroll might go about collecting. it's an offer that is, quote, the court filing equivalent of a paper napkin signed by the least trustworthy of borrowers. trump has until march 9 to either pay e. jean carroll or appeal the judgment. we'll stay on the story. another break for us. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. plan from unitedhealthcare. with this type of plan, you'll know upfront about how much your care costs. which makes planning your financial future easier. so call unitedhealthcare today to learn more about the only plans of their kind with the aarp name. and set yourself and your future self up with an aarp medicare supplement plan from unitedhealthcare.

i was stuck. unresolved depression symptoms were in my way. i needed more from my antidepressant. vraylar helped give it a lift. adding vraylar to an antidepressant is clinically proven to help relieve overall depression symptoms better than an antidepressant alone. and in vraylar clinical studies, most saw no substantial impact on weight. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts.

antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, as these may be life-threatening, or uncontrolled muscle movements, which may be permanent. high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, weight gain, and high cholesterol may occur. movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. stomach and sleep issues, dizziness, increased appetite, and fatigue are also common. side effects may not appear for several weeks. i didn't have to change my treatment. i just gave it a lift. ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save.

is it possible to count on my internet and learn how abbvie like my customers count on me? it is with comcast business. keeping you up and running with our 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. with comcast business, reliability isn't just possible. it's happening. get started for $49 a month. plus, ask how to get up to a $800 prepaid card with a qualifying internet package. don't wait, call and switch today! >> thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these truly extraordinary times. we're so grateful. "the beat" with ari melber. >> i was watching you and your esteemed lawyers, and i had this feeling as we were looking at the supreme court weighing in where you don't need a law school book or let