republican side is going to boost republican turnout and come at the expense of democrats in this race. one thing i want to say is stay tuned, because we could take up to 30 days if it's a close race to count the votes in california. we may not have an answer for weeks to come. that's how we do it in california, slow and deliberate. >> i understand why she came out to move you along, you are very loud. >> that's what my wife says to me. >> always good to see you. thanks, buddy. that's going to do it for me today. deadline white house starts right now. hi, there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york, on the very same day that the disgraced ex-president was supposed to go on trial in a federal courthouse for hits efforts to end democracy as we know it, that

little january 6th insurrection. the highest court in the land today kept him on the ballot in a ruling a dodges the facts of january 6th and trump's role in it. instead, the supreme court handed trump a second gift on a constitutional technicality. the justices say that states do not have the power to bar candidates from running for federal office. they say, quote, because the constitution makes congress rather than the states responsible for enforcing section 3 against federal office holders and candidates, we reverse. they're referring to the decision by the colorado state supreme court. now, that court found that trump did engage in insurrection by trying to overturn the will of the voters by any means possible, including violence, and that section 3 of the 14th amendment does, in fact, apply to the presidency. now, the supreme court's decision today does not touch on either the question of whether trump is or is not an insurrectionist, or whether the text of section 3 applies to

him. instead, it says that only congress has the power to do anything or to enforce the 14th amendment. colorado secretary jenna griswell, point out, if we had a functioning congress, we would not t be in this situation today. the liberal justices blasted the majority for closing the door on the possibility of federal courts disqualifying trump or any other candidate who would engage in an insurrection, writing, quote, section 3 serves an important, though rarely needed role in our democracy. the american people have the power to vote for and elect candidates for national office. and that is a great and a glorious thing. the man who drafted and ratified the 14th amendment had witnessed an insurrection and rebellion to defend slavery and they wanted to ensure that those who had participated in the insurrection and in possible future insurrections could not return

to prominent roles. today the majority goes beyond the necessities of this case to limit how section 3 can bar an oath-breaking insurrectionist from becoming the president. although we agree that colorado cannot enforce section 3, we protest the majority's effort to use this case to define the limits of federal enforcement of that provision. that's where we start today with some of our most favorite experts and friends. former lead investigator is back with us, he testified in the colorado case when it was in front of the state's court. senior editor for "slate" is back with us. with me at the table, once again, former top official at the department of justice and msnbc legal analyst andrew weissmann is here and princeton university professor and distinguished political scholar at the table. so nice to see you, my friends. let me start with andrew

weissmann. what did the supreme court say and do today? >> so they did a lot more than we thought they would do. everyone after the oral argument thought that trump would be allowed to be on the ballot in colorado, and frankly, any of the other states. >> and just explain why we knew that. >> because the argument -- a lot of times people say you really can't tell from an argument. there was just no friendly question and you had no friendly question, you had a legitimate argument, and you had sort of the atmospherics of the court being we don't want to be the ones deciding this. the reason they went further and the reason this is a 5-4 decision is where it sort of went. everyone agreed he can be on the ballot in colorado and that the states cannot decide this. the reason it's 5-4, and notably the men versus the women, which was just a remarkable split,

was that they said this applies not just to the presidency, but all federal office holders. the big sort of 5-4 split was that the majority said only -- it's not that the states can't do it, it's that only congress can do it. so you're picking the one institution that is completely dysfunctional and isn't going to do it. so if you want the big picture, you want to read this provision out of the constitution, the only way to do it is to stay congress has to enact legislation to implement section 3. no room for the courts, the federal courts to step in. that's the part where amy coney barrett said, why do we need to reach that? you are needlessly inflaming in a political year the issue, when

our job in the court should be to try to just decide this issue and lower the volume. >> lowering the volume by not weighing in on whether he is or is not an insurrectionist? >> yeah, it doesn't touch the core facts. the supreme court decides questions of law, not questions of fact. they found that section 3 of the 14th amendment could not be invoked by a state government, it has to be invoked by congress, some of the justices went further and said it will take enabling legislation. what america should take away is that's a question of law, not a question of fact. the supreme court didn't find that colorado was wrong in its finding that a former president engaged in insurrection. they actually found that he did, several states have similarly found, much as our committee recommended. and those are the allegations,

the factual allegations that are going to come before federal juries barring a supreme court ruling on an immunity question down the road. it's a victory for the president because it keeps them on the ballot. it just doesn't touch really the core issue, whether or not what he did on and whether january 6th was criminal. we found that it was, special counsel has alleged that it is, and ideally a jury will get to decide that question in some months. >> ideally. let me show you what a judge said on this show, we're down in the weeds but i think our viewers alongside me, we've all earned our honorary law degrees. so it's a little technical. consider yourself warned. here is the judge offering a different legal analysis. >> it is not necessary in order for the former president to be disqualified, or for any other

person who comes within the ambit of section 3 to be disqualified that he or she have been convicted of an insurrection or rebellion, nor is it necessary that the congress of the united states have found that the former president or any other person have engaged in nurkz or rebellion against the constitution of the united states. that's what we call in constitutional law, the self-executing character, if you will. of section 3. it does not require a congressional finding, and it does not require a criminal conviction. >> i guess what's so amazing, i've been back in the chair six days and this is the second day where another body is -- i guess it's the same body that stunt

-- doesn't want to deal with the insurrection thing. trump carried out an insurrection, by november it will be part of his convention video. it's who he is, he's running as an insurrectionist, he's running on pardoning his fellow insurrectionists, the accomplices in congress are into it and those who weren't are retiring or resigning. the supreme court is, maybe that didn't happen, maybe not, the voters will get to see the facts in the case against him. >> it's such an interesting problem, because on the one hand, you have the court performing what looks like some version of institutional humility, who are we to decide whether an insurrection happened, who are we to decide these complicated questions. congress has to decide. that looks like it's a kind of democracy -- expanding democracy

affirming move and it's very much, i think, in line with the we're umpires, balls and strikes people, we do as little as possible. i guess i would just note two things in response to that. one is, and this comes up in the concurrence that the three liberals offer, which is they literally main check dobbs and say all you needed to do was do what chief justice roberts said we do in dobbs, which is decide as little as possible. the court clearly did not do that today. they foreclosed a whole bunch of different avenues. but, also, this is where it's really sneaky, the court doesn't actually tell us what that enabling legislation would look like. so even if congress could shake it off, get it together, write some kind of meaningful legislation that could, in fact, knock an insurrectionist off the ballot, the court reserves to itself the power to tell us whether or not that's okay. so it is both the most bragging

humility and humble bragging in the history. it's strange for them to want to stay out of it, yet putting a sum on the scale for donald trump. >> i'm not a lawyer by any stretch of the imagination -- >> you say that every day. >> -- but i keep thinking about the historical parallels. i'm thinking about the civil war amendments and radical reconstruction between 1863 and 1877 and the context of the 14th amendment in response to andrew johnson's refusal to hold the south accountable. i mean, we have literally traitors who are running for office, who are taking hold of the reins of power in the south, after leaving over 600,000 people on the battlefield dead. and people are, like, no, we have to hold these folks accountable.

so the civil war amendments emerged in the context of section 3, it emerges to hold folk accountable. here we have in this context hence tans to hold him accountable, and it's a historical echo that screams with irony. >> i don't want to make it relative, but the thing that is so egregious is that -- at least there there was some sense of the south will rise again, defending a cultural rival. here it's all a lie, and they know it because they went back to congress on the same ballots. >> yeah, again, we're at this inflection point, and what's so striking about the moment in the context of the collapse of radical reconstruction is that we went into a dark period that

didn't open up until the mid-20th century. here we are at that moment, and the courts played a central role in ushering that dark period. here we are in this moment again, and it seems to me -- i'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the court is playing another central role in ushering the shadows. >> it's not the only echo, right? what jack smith has charged also draws on some of the legal toolkit that emerged from this stain on our country's history. >> so i wanted to somewhat complicate the picture, which is you do have the three liberal justices joining in the idea that the states should not be able to do this. they wouldn't go far as to say it should only be congress, but there's no way to just dismiss the case unless you think the

three liberal justices got the law wrong. they go along with the actual principle here. but it is 5-4 -- >> explain that. it's about chaos. >> exactly. the idea is that everyone, all nine say we just don't -- even though it's been the system so far, nobody has paid attention to it because it hasn't involved a major candidate, and now that it's sort of come to the fore and there's a major candidate, they said we can't have each state deciding for themselves when it's a federal office. when it's a federal office, there needs to be a federal decision. that's something that all nine justices agree on. so it's hard to just say, oh, this is just a politicized supreme court. where i think there is a correct view, and that's where i think the 5-4 part of this is

relevant, the context we're in is a pending case now where the former president is saying that he is immune, and you can't look at this decision without knowing what they're doing in that case. they have given him not one win and we're going to split the baby and give him a loss. the stay that is in effect now, which they are slow walking and -- we're not even hearing the arguments for two months on a case that is ready to be argued. everyone knows this. there is a stay that is delaying the case that was going to start today. so these are two wins that are being given by this court. there's no way that the three justices in the -- sort of essentially the dissent today, think that the timing is appropriate. there's no reason to have delayed it. so you really end up with a supreme court, even if you want to think there's some merit to this case, it's hard to

disaggregate it and not see the court in its two cases saying, what can we do to help donald trump? we are going to make sure that this will only be decided not in a court of law, but in the court of spin and disinformation where donald trump lives, and there will actually not be sort of legal accountability. the court is removing that. either in this decision or in its immunity decision, because they basically are saying we're not hearing that and we're sitting on that. so the chances of it going in court could be zero. >> and i would say there's a possibility they're oblivious to that, but we know they're not, they're some of the most voracious consumers of their own press than any other american institution. >> it's one of the great mysteries, for those of us who thought -- and i know we've been talking about this for two years now, that the court was sensitive to plummeting approval

ratings, to a complete lack of confidence from the public. we all thought, this is a court that knows how to pump the brakes, this is a court that knows how to do a little razzle dazzle to confuse us about the fact that it certainly is carrying water, i think now we can say, for one person and doesn't carry water for multiple criminal defendants ever, some of whom are wrongfully accused. and i think part of the answer is what andrew just said, which is there's an amazing split in this decision. i also think it's not an accident that it's the women who are taking the position that this is really a question of institutional integrity, confidence in the institution, justice barrett writes for herself alone essentially saying some version of, don't worry, we're not mad at each other, we're all cool here, let's take the temperature down.

so i think there is a really interesting split between those who are deeply worried about how this impacts the institution and the sort of public integrity and reputation of the institution, and the folks in that kind of majority, the folks who signed and say nothing else, who don't seem to be bothered at all about the fact that the election is coming, they're not making proclamation bsby the insurrection. and, by the way, we've got major gun cases, major deregulatory cases, hurtling at us. they're all going to get decided in june at the same time. >> i want to stay on this theme of what the public is left to sift through and i want to spend a lot of time on the evidence developed in the most transparent manner by the probe. i'll send some time with tim on the other side of a quick break. no one is going anywhere. still to come, the long-time lieutenant of the trump

organization, the business side, allen weisselberg, is likely headed back to rikers island all in service of protecting his long-time x-boss, donald j. trump. another person close to the ex-president pleading guilty for lying under oath. what it might mean for donald trump's first criminal trial in new york that gets under way in three weeks. plus, president joe biden preparing for an ugly political fight come november. in an interview out today, president joe biden saying we should all be prepared for donald trump not to concede should he lose again, adding that losers who are losers are never graceful. more from that interview just ahead. later in the broadcast, our autocracy in america series continues with someone who personally had the job of briefing then president donald trump on the most sensitive national security secrets in the land inside the oval office. the principal deputy director

with decades of experience in the intelligence committee, with warning how a second trump administration will compromise the nation's computer. we continue after a quick break. don't go anywhere. where. 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.

her uncle's unhappy. ah, yee! i'm sensing an underlying issue. it's t-mobile. it started when we got him under a new plan. but then they unexpectedly unraveled their "price lock" guarantee. which has made him, a bit... unruly. you called yourself the "un-carrier". you sing about "price lock" on those commercials. "the price lock, the price lock..." so, if you could change the price, change the name! it's not a lock, i know a lock.

so how can we undo the damage? we could all unsubscribe and switch to xfinity. their connection is unreal. and we could all un-experience this whole session. okay, that's uncalled for. we'll see what happens in the courts. if you look at the select committee's work, we made a criminal referral with respect to the part of the 14th amendment that talks about providing aid and comfort to an insurrection. i certainly believe that donald trump's behavior rose to that level. i believe that he ought to be disqualified from holding office in the future. it's working its way through the

courts, and in the meantime, we have to be prepared to ensure that we can defeat him at the ballot box, which ultimately i believe we'll be able to do. >> so, tim, this was part of what the committee referred. explain that. >> yeah, we found very specifically and included in our report a referral of incitement of insurrection. again, there's a factual narrative here that has been evident for a long, long time that the president's actions leading up to january 6th and then on that day itself were intended, specifically intended to disrupt the joint session and prevent the transfer of power. that's the core factual allegation that was evident to the select committee. and i believe it's only gotten more evident when the special counsel has had access to information that was beyond the reach of the select committee. that's why this immunity decision is so much more

ultimately important for the rule of law than today's decision on the 14th amendment. i don't want to minimize today's decision. i agree with miss cheney there's a basis to disqualify him under section 3 of the 14th amendment. putting that aside, very important that those same facts are adjudicate in a criminal proceeding later this year. look, i am heartened to disagree with andrew a little bit that the supreme court issued its decision today just ahead of the colorado primary. it does suggest that they're mindful of the need for their opinions to provide clarity to people before they vote. and if you extend that logic, maybe that means that they will hasten to decide the immunity case very soon after the arguments in april in order for that clarification to be provided early enough for people to factor it into their vote in november. i certainly hope so. because, again, the ball game is

in the criminal courtroom in washington, d.c. where the same facts that have been obvious for a long time will finally, tested by cross-examination, finally reach that crucible. if he's convicted, i think that has the potential to be transformative in terms of public opinion. >> i think that's where these are accurately described from every news organization as a big political and legal win for trump. here is some of the evidence you've stopped that would ostensibly be part of any criminal proceeding. >> trump repeated his big lie and claimed it was, quote, statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 election, before calling for a big protest in d.c. on january 6th. be there, will be wild. many of trump's followers took

to social media to declare that they were ready to answer trump's call. one user asked, is the 6th d-day? >> i remember mr. ornato had talked about intelligence reports and i remember him coming in and saying that we had intel reports that there could potentially be violence on the 6th. >> i overheard the president say something to the effect of i don't effing care that they have weapons, they're not here to hurt me, let the people in. they can march the capitol from here. >> if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. mike pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he doesn't, that will be a sad day for our count. [ crowd chanting ] >> vice president pence's staff and d.c. government officials, none of them, not one, heard from president trump that day. he did not call to issue orders, he did not call to offer

assistance. so if president trump wasn't calling law enforcement or military leaders, what did president trump spend his time doing that afternoon? he first settled into the dining room. he was calling senators to encourage them to delay or object to the certification. >> we don't know what else jack smith has developed, but we know from tim's work that they established the attack was premeditated. he started declaring it was impossible to lose. we know from the evidence that was developed from his closest advisers that the violence was something he was enthusiastic about because he knew they were not here to hurt me, end quote. we knew that risking mike pence's life was part of the plan all along. he was the target of the violence. trump was fine with it. and we know that the people who carried out the acts are people that trump plans to pardon so that they're at the ready should he need them again.

what part of this is there any suss sfens about in this country? >> i have no idea, to be honest with you. and what i've been trying to understand and figure out, with your help, what's the motivation behind it all? what are the fears that block us from holding this man accountable? is it the millions of americans that seem to support him? is it the fear that somehow the very fabric of the country will be ripped apart? what does it mean for us to willingly risk the very foundation of the rule of law for this guy, for what they've done? so the evidence has been before us, and we can go through it over and over again. i don't know why jack smith didn't charge him, andrew. you might know. i don't know. it's baffling. and from my vantage point, it just shows that some people are

above the law. >> value the institutional anxiety, the institutional reluctance, and this isn't just the court, this is merrick garland's justice department. they turned to trump after tim's brilliant work. there's no evidence that the supreme court wants to do anything. i hope what tim just laid out is what happens. i hope that they do see in the same way they did with the 14th amendment case that there is a public interest. i think upwards of 83% of all americans would like to see this adjudicated by a jury of trump's peers. i hope they see that. we know they're very cognizant of the conversations on cable news. they usually responded in the "wall street journal" editorial page. but i don't -- that would be a deviation, i guess, from the pattern of institutional anxiety and reluctance to treat trump like any other american would be

treated. >> i'm going to say something that sounds cynical, but i think is hopeful, and i think this is echoing what everyone else is saying. for those of us who imported all of our hopes and dreams into the supreme court intervening in some heroic way, it's a disappointment, just as the kicking the can down the road on the immunity case is a disappointment. but i think tim just said and you just said, and it's important, there's nothing that is going to happen in another case -- i don't want to say nothing, there's a lot that's going to happen, but it's not dispositive, because what the select committee found was dispositive, maine, illinois, colorado, all determined he committed the acts he committed. so instead of having magical thinking about the court giving us some reason to believe, i think it's time to say, good, the court utterly disappointed us. now we've got to make this

happen at the polls. >> that is liz's sort of final point, and she says, i'm confident we can do that. we'll let you and liz cheney be the optimists for the day. thank you so much for starting us off today. andrew and eddie, stick around a little longer. still ahead, allen weisselberg turned himself in, again, this morning to the manhattan d.a.'s office. why the former trump org ceo could find himself behind bars again. ♪ you were always so dedicated...

♪ we worked hard to build up the shop, save for college and our retirement. but we got there, thanks to our advisor and vanguard. now i see who all that hard work was for... it was always for you. seeing you carry on our legacy— i'm so proud. at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner. setting up the future for the ones you love. that's the value of ownership. (vo) in the next 30 seconds, setting up the future for the ones you love. 250 couples will need to make room for a nursery. (man) ah ha! (vo) 26 people will go all-in. (woman) yes! (vo) this family will get two bathrooms. and finally, one vacationer will say... (man) yeah, woo, i'm going to live here... (vo) but as the euphoria subsides, the realization hits... (man) i've got to sell the house. (all) [screams] (vo) don't worry, just sell and buy in one move when you start with opendoor. (woman) oh wow. (vo) oh yes. start with an all-cash offer at opendoor.com y'all wayfair is the talk of the neighborhood, c'mon!

we wanted a recliner. but it had to be chic. so we wayfair'd it. wayfair for the win. hey neighbor looking fancy. fancy? nah. we wayfair'd it and saved a ton. wayfair does it again. it's beautiful i didn't know you wayfair'd. oh girl we wayfair, tile, faucet... the works. guess the wayfair word is out! ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ you're probably not easily persuaded to switch mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible

that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? you can get 2 unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. all on the most reliable 5g mobile network, nationwide. wireless that works for you. get the new samsung galaxy s24 on comcast business mobile. save big with up to $500 off an eligible samsung device with a qualifying trade-in. don't wait! call, click or visit an xfinity store.

officer of donald trump's company, allen weisselberg, did it again, pleaded guilty to felony perjury charges in a manhattan courtroom earlier today. he admitted that he lied during sworn testimony when asked about allegations that trump lied about his wealth during the ex-president's civil fraud trial. this is now weisselberg's second guilty plea. he pleaded guilty to multiple tax charge prices and served three months at rikers. today's plea will put him behind bars again for up to five months. the new charges come weeks before the ex-president is set to face trial on separate allegations that he falsified business records. manhattan d.a. alvin bragg's criminal case, "the new york times" lays out the developments for that case, writing, quote, monday's guilty plea could strengthen mr. bragg's hand heading into trial, deferring other witnesses from lying on

the stand. the perjury charges could discredit mr. weisselberg, who has disputed details of the prosecution's evidence in the case. joining our conversation, "new york times" investigative reporter, sue craig. andrew and eddie are with us. sue, weisselberg is going back to rikers for donald trump? >> he must know the bus route. >> and the weekly bunch plan. why? >> because he said during the civil trial -- he was testifying during the civil trial and he said at one point that he wasn't really familiar with the valuations of the now infamous tri-plex that donald trump lived in in trump tower. and almost immediately don alexander at "forbes" puts out a story that has just a litany of back and forth between allen

weisselberg and his magazine about how involved he was and the headline in the story even said that weisselberg was lying on the stand. and this almost immediately triggered an investigation that led to this morning's proceedings, where he looks like he's going to end up back in rikers for another five-month tour of duty. >> sue, there are lies that could be fuzzed up with a complicated fuzzy borderline, and then there were lies that were so obvious that i could understand them. and lying about trump, the size of trump's tacky condos is like a lie that a child could understand. anything you can measure with a tape measure. >> that's above my pay grade. maybe you're saying these things

so often that you forget the difference between the truth and the lie. i don't know. it was puzzling to me why he would -- it was such an obvious misstatement, and it was seized upon immediately, and i think prosecutors saw it as a way in come back with charges against allen weisselberg. they had been looking at other charges to potentially bring about other misrepresentations they had found, and this one was almost just immediate. people's heads were spinning when it happened. so here we are. >> explain "the times" reporting today about how this strengthens alvin bragg's hands ahead of a criminal trial. >> i think there's two components to that. one is allen weisselberg moving forward with his perjury charge really does send a message, a very loud one, of actions, not words, to other witnesses that you better not do this. and so i think that's one thing.

and i think going in, allen weisselberg knows a lot about the hush money payment. we know that he had discussions with michael cohen, who is another key witness in the case, about how to structure this payment so that it didn't look like what it was. and he's been -- allen weisselberg has been an uncooperative witness. so i think if they couldn't get him to cooperate, they want to discredit him. >> allen weisselberg is going to rikers twice over the hush money alleged crimes, and allen weisselberg's crimes are crimes that aren't just alleged, crimes for which he's been convicted. it's such a remarkable contrast to the way trump world looks at this one. oh, not that big of a deal. >> let's just pull the lens back. who was allen weisselberg? he is the long-time chief financial officer of the trump organization. he has pleaded guilty -- before today he pleaded guilty to a

decades-long tax conspiracy, and it's not just him. the trump organization was convicted of just that. so that's the backdrop to -- to what we're talking about with respect to donald trump. we have the chief financial officer engaging in, by his own words and admission, this crime, and a jury has already found that the trump organization did this. he gets out of jail. normally there's some kind of chastening from rikers. i don't care if it's a day. that's not a great place to be. and he hops on the stand and lies again. >> why? >> so one reason, for one, he's worked for donald trump for years, he's engaged in this tax scheme and crimes at that organization for years. and from the evidence at the trial, he was not alone. it's not like he alone was doing this crime.

it was benefiting all sorts of people, including the trump organization and thus trump. if he told the truth about this, he was going to implicate himself in yet another crime, and as it was brought out at the trial, he was given -- we talked about the hush money case with respect to stormy daniels. the evidence at this trial was that allen weisselberg had a $2 million hush money payment to him as part of his severance. he was told -- even though he had pled got to this tax offense, he was given $2 million to say, you know what, you have to cooperate with us, don't meet with the government. and there was still $1 million left on that payment. so he had made a choice about which side he was on. >> after taxes, a million dollars -- to go to rikers twice, i know it's a ton of money. he's not a young guy. i feel like there's more in there. >> of course. >> it's a ton of time of your life at a point in your life where going to rikers two times

for trump, who hasn't been accountable by anybody, just seems like a remarkable act. >> it's hard not to look at that and think that what he has pled to is -- >> is the tip of the iceberg? >> exactly. it's so nice to see you. we'll continue to call on you. there's much more ahead. president joe biden anticipating his likely 2024 presidential rival, donald j. trump, will, without a doubt, do anything to try to win. a new profile of president biden on why he remains defiant in his urgency to defeat donald trump one more time. the story is next.

hey, dad. i got an a on my book report. that's cool. and i went for a walk in the woods and i didn't get a single flea or tick on me. you are just the best. -right? i'm great. -you are great. oh, brother. this flea and tick season, get 20% off your first pharmacy order at chewy. to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war, forced to flee their homes. a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger.

exhausted and shell shocked from what they've been through. every dollar you give can help bring a meal, a blanket, or simply hope to a child living in conflict. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today with your gift of $10 a month, that's just $0.33 a day. we cannot forget the children in places like syria, born in refugee camps, playing in refugee camps, thinking of the camps as home. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today with your gift of $10 a month. your gift can help children like ara in afghanistan, where nearly 20 years of conflict have forced the people into extreme poverty. weakened and unable to hold herself up, ara was brought to a save the children's center, where she was diagnosed and treated for severe malnutrition.

every dollar helps. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today with your gift of $10 a month. just $0.33 a day. and thanks to special government grants that are available now, every dollar you give can multiply up to ten times the impact. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special save the children tote bag to show you won't forget the children who are living their lives in conflict. every war is a war against children. please give now. ♪ you need t-mobile... ♪ ♪ home internet with 5g. ♪ wait! t-mobile has home internet? ♪ what a feeling! ♪

♪ to have t-mobile now! ♪ america, as we begin this election year, we must be clear, democracy is on the ballot. your freedom is on the ballot. this is the first national election since january 6th, insurrection has placed a dagger at the throat of democracy since that moment. we all know who donald trump is. the question we have to answer is, who are we? that's what's at stake. >> president joe biden earlier this year in his speech at valley forge, marking the anniversary of the deadly january 6th insurrection. the president talking about the stakes of this upcoming election in determining whether we remain a democracy at all. a brand new interview in "the new yorker," president joe biden

warns us that trump could, yet again, try anything to regain the presidency, win or lose. the president argues if he loses the election in november, he won't call it quits because that's how losers like trump operate, the president says. quote, losers who are losers are never graceful, biden said. i just think that he'll do anything to try to win. if and when i win, i think he'll contest it, no matter what the result is. in the interview, president biden makes a case for why he has to be the candidate to take on the disgraced ex-president. he says, i'm the only one who has ever beat him and i'll beat him again. i'll ask a rhetorical question, if you thought you were best positioned to beat someone who if they won would change the nature of america, what would dow? joining us, host of the politics fast forecast, molly john fast is here. what do you think of this? this is fiery of biden. >> i like fiery biden. and i also think that -- you

know, this is a guy we've counted out again and again and again. i wrote a piece for the "washington post" saying he should drop out, the guy is not the nominee, and what he did is he came roaring back in south carolina. like, he happens to have, again and again, and even with the midterms, really defined expectations. and i remember before the famous red wave midterms that he was out there giving speeches about democracy and a lot of pundits were making fun of him and saying that it was too broad and all people cared about inflation, and actually voters really liked it. so i do think he connects with voters. and if you read that piece, the sub text of it, and it's a very long piece, but brilliant, he talks about how these people have been doing this for a very long time. and they have real instincts about politics, which i think have turned out to be quite useful. >> democracy becoming a top tier issue is the plot twist that i

didn't see coming. biden didn't just come roaring back. black voters in south carolina and jim clyburn chose biden over all the other choices. it was a very crowded and talented democratic field, and they chose biden. and some of this posture that he's taking feels like sort of reminding people why he prevailed the first time. and, listen, you have to be this aggressive and you have to go big. on a small ticky tack kind of whack-a-mole fight with trump not only do you not win, nobody comes out alive because he's so dirty. but this big argument, if he can win this argument isn't even running as somebody who wants to lead a democratic state. trump is running as a dictator. >> right. so we are in this country historically at least, we've been more comfortable with populism from the right than from the left. we're more comfortable with fascists than we are with, quote

unquote, communists. and so there's a sense -- remember when he was in that field there was this feeling that the left wing of the democratic party, the progressive wing, the bernie sanders vote, pulling the party too far to the left, and biden comes in and splits the difference. he's the guy who can get those independents. he's the guy that can get those suburban white women to vote, and only he could do it, not these other folks. definitely not bernie sanders, right? so he's the guy who could convince those folk who may just simply pull the lever for donald trump because they're afraid of this left-wing cabal. and so here we are still, right? worried about the left wing, the progressive bugaboo. >> the right wing planned an insurrection. >> exactly. >> crazy. >> but the question has to be asked in the midst of that is the question president biden asked. who are we? >> it's so scary, but it is absolutely the right thing. and then trust the answer. we have to sneak in a quick break. no one's going anywhere. we'll all be right back. ere. we'll all be right back.

(vo) if you have graves' disease... ...and blurry vision, you need clear answers.

people with graves' could also get thyroid eye disease, or t-e-d, which may need a different doctor. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com. ohhh crap. now we gotta get france something. wait! we can use etsy's new gift mode! alright. done. ♪♪ plateau de fromage! oh la la! don't panic. gift easy with gift mode, new on etsy. 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. oof. you are busy working parenting, problem solving at new chapter vitamin's we have been busy too innovating, sourcing organic ingredients testing them and...fermenting. fermenting? yeah, like kombucha or yogurt and we formulate everything so, your body can really truly absorb the natural goodness that's what we do so you can do you new chapter. wellness well done y'all wayfair makes it so easy to create a home you'll love. it's the talk of the neighborhood. kelly! i just wayfair'd. -that's wayfair... saving time saving money. you wayfair'd your whole bathroom?! even the vanity - when i wayfair, i wayfair ya know? oh i know. this is nice. another wayfair day!

you know it. new couch in just two days the wayfair word is out. ♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪ l've always wanted to do that. are you keeping as much of your investment gains as possible? high taxes can erode returns quickly. at creative planning, your portfolio is managed in a tax-efficient manner. it's what you keep that really matters. book your free meeting today at creativeplanning.com. we're back with molly and eddie, and we're heavy -- it's gotten heavy in the breaks. but this is about big stuff. and when you -- you realize -- we try to go big here. but this is about everyone who saw how bad trump was for our democracy, for the world order, to come out and if you see something say something.

this is time for jim mat sxis mark milley and everyone at the state department. because the opposite is also true. if anyone at the cia thought it went well we would have heard from them. trump would be talking about them as a running mate. or the pentagon. or the state department. nobody thought it went well. and here we are precariously closer to the possibility of a second trump term. >> if you love this place, if you are -- i was about to drop an f bomb. right? if you are an american to the core. it's time to step up. period. we have to discover who we are. and the only way you're going to discover it is you've got to make the damn choice. period. >> yeah. and that's what biden's calling on americans to do. >> yeah. and i also think, look, it's the do you want to have more elections election. >> i love that. >> trump is saying he's going to be a dictator on day one. and maybe he walks it back and says it's a joke. but obviously we know the point. right? he could have just told -- >> and he's never joking. he's always saying what he's going to do for two reasons. one, so that the press is just freaking out, i said i was going

to do that. and two, so his base is conditioned. insurrection? i don't mind an insurrection. putin taking ukraine? what's the big deal? and vaughn hillyard is out of the room. literally saying those things. trump does what he does because it works. >> and even san hannity when he said that all sean hannity wanted for him to say was you're right, of course i'm kidding. and instead he was like no. and the whole idea it was about natural gas, it's ridiculous. >> in another two months he'll be like dictators aren't all bad. >> can i say real quickly? >> sure. >> i'm so glad you're back. >> i'm so glad to see you. eddie, thank you for spending the hour with us and for being at the table. molly will be back in the next hour because nobody ever gets to leave. up next for us a veteran of the united states intelligence community, somebody we love to talk to. sue gordon will be our guest as part of our american autocracy, it could happen here, series. don't go anywhere. we'll be right back. here, series don't go anywhere. we'll be right back. for colon cancer.♪ ♪it's time to use my voice,♪ ♪i've got a choice, more than one answer.♪

♪i sat down with my doc.♪ we had a talk. ♪knew just what to say.♪ ♪i asked for cologuard and did it my way.♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪i did it my way!♪ i told myself i was ok with my moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. with my psoriatic arthritis symptoms. but just ok isn't ok. and i was done settling. if you still have symptoms after a tnf blocker like humira or enbrel, rinvoq is different and may help. rinvoq is a once-daily pill that can rapidly relieve joint pain, stiffness, and swelling in ra and psa. relieve fatigue for some... and stop joint damage. and in psa, can leave skin clear or almost clear. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal;

cancers, including lymphoma and skin; heart attack, stroke, and gi tears occurred. people 50 and older with a heart disease risk factor have an increased risk of death. serious allergic reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. done settling? ask your rheumatologist for rinvoq. and take back what's yours. abbvie could help you save. ♪ and take back what's yours. ♪ ♪ liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪

once people feel that the united states cannot be counted on, is not consistent, and trump -- if trump actively seeks to undermine that confidence, then all sorts of terrible consequences could ensue. dictators are encouraged. countries that had been allies and friends of the united states like japan, for example, moving to the pacific, may decide, well, the only way we can secure our future is to acquire our own nuclear capability. you run the risk of nuclear proliferation. >> hi again, everyone.

it's now 5:00 in new york. an extremely troubling outcome of trump's increasingly autocratic missives and ways voiced by the former leader, one of america's strongest allies, getting to the point that as much as american democracy is on the line with the upcoming election so is the entire world order as we know it as well. it's all on the line. that was australia's former prime minister, malcolm turnbull. he made that comment on this broadcast last week based on what he's seen in public from the ex-president over the last several months and years. donald trump seems intent on ripping apart america's global alliances. he instead wants to align himself with the world's most brutal dictators and wants to shape u.s. government institutions into tools for his own whims. politico recently spoke with a dozen and a half former intelligence officials from the trump administration about how on edge the idea of a second trump term makes all of them.

quote, trump, who already tried to revamp intelligence agencies during his first term, is likely to re-up those plans and push even harder to replace people perceived as hostile to his political agenda with inexperienced loyalists. that could empower the former president's top subordinates to shield him from information that doesn't conform with his politics and even change the wording of assessments with which he disagrees, many of them said. the piece goes on to explain why this is such a concern. quote, an overhaul of the type trump is expected to attempt could undermine the credibility of american intelligence at a time when the u.s. and allies are relying on it to navigate crises in ukraine and the mideast. it could also effectively strip the intelligence community of the ability to dissuade the president from decisions that could put the country at risk. it's terrifying. it is a terrifying reality. we could soon face as americans. especially as trump has

repeatedly shown his affinity for the world's autocrats as well as his utter disregard for the safety and protection of classified material. former officials paint a bleak picture of what could be. former trump national security adviser john bolton said this, quote, the chief requirements for duty will be how quickly can you say yes, sir. the former director of national intelligence dan coats warned that by being cavalier with classified intelligence, quote, people's lives could be lost. and top nsc russian adviser fiona hill said this, quote, trump can't just cherry-pick what he wants to hear when there are so many u.s. adversaries and countries that do not wish the u.s. well. you heard it from those up close and personal to the trump show the first time. second one? would be an unmitigated national security disaster. it's where we start the hour with former principal deputy director of national intelligence sue gordon. so sue gordon, when i think of

what's good about being back at work and covering this moment i think about the opportunity to talk to you because i'm guessing that if you didn't feel that there was some need to be out there you might not be? >> yeah, i love america. and i think this is a consequential moment. i think the world is fraught and disrupted. and i think in times of uncertainty it is really tough for democracies and authoritarianism looks really attractive. so to me that's what's at stake. and so i'm so delighted to come back and talk to you. i love talking about intelligence because i think it's kind of arcane but it is so foundational to national security and who we are that i think understanding what the former president thought of it and what he might do with it is important for us to talk about. >> tell us what he thought of it and what he might do with it in your assessment. >> i think, to begin with, i don't think he fundamentally understood that intelligence is

one of the great advantages and tools of statecraft that anyone has. it is, my parlance, knowing the truth allowing you to see beyond the horizon and let leaders act before events dictate. it has nothing to do with opinion. it has only to do with the ruthless quest to see what is rather than what you prefer. that's all it is. so giving that to a president -- >> but it's so opposite of everything we see him do in public. >> exactly. >> did you ever see a private version of trump that's better than what we see publicly? >> sure, there were plenty of times that he listened intently to what we had to say. but it requires understanding what it allows you to do. right? it allows you to know with certainty. it allows you to talk behind closed doors with the most both friendly and unfriendly of adversaries to say here is what is, we need to act together

below the surface. it is such a tremendous tool of stability when used to effect, and when misused it does quite the opposite. it can be a tool of instability. of creating distrust. of creating mayhem. of not understanding second and third effects. so i think he just doesn't understand it. he saw it as something that was disadvantageous to him because it was inconvenient. >> because it was the truth. >> it was the truth. and it was inconvenient to what he wanted to achieve. now, that's not different than other presidents have thought. president obama once said you all do understand that you steal my decision space. >> that's right. because it is an inconvenient truth. but what it allows is good decision-making. and that's what national security is. and that's what we count on the president to do. and if you don't use it, you're

undermining national security of the american people. worse, if you misuse it and you use it for a small purpose or to mischaracterize it, you can destroy the friendships that turnbull was just saying. the advantage of america is we have friends. but friends trust each other. what happens when we can't be trusted? when what we say is not foundational or the information that has been shared is not protected. >> what's the answer to that? what happens when we can't be trusted? >> we won't have impact. and then you break into a world where each gets his own. >> what does that look like? >> putin deciding that he wants ukraine. >> and we do nothing. >> i mean, look at how hard the intelligence community has worked to try to shed light on that circumstance. look how hard the intelligence community has worked to

declassify information so that we could counter a narrative that putin would put forward. but it did so because it had a process by which it understood the value of the information, the community it was trying to align, and how it could be used to put light on evil. but that is not a simplistic i want it or i want to do it. that is a thoughtful execution of national security. >> what if you -- i mean, if you reverse-engineer it to trump has said -- and we'll just deal with what's in the public sphere. i won't press you for anything you saw in your official capacity. but in the public sphere he said he would end the war in two days. >> that's nonsensical. >> it's nonsensical. but in the public sphere he's also said nothing but glowing things about putin and russia. what do you -- what is happening? what's being gamed out in

closed -- behind closed doors in kyiv and washington as possible? >> i think -- i think the strength of our system, and i think this is what's in peril. so i'll give you the strength and what's being gamed out and then i'll tell you what's in peril. the strength of our system is that we have installed bureaucracies. i know it's really fun to call them the deep state, they have malfeasance. that is not my experience. this is a bunch of people who have spent their lifetime doing the backbreaking physical labor of national security and they understand how it works. they understand the constitution. they understand their partners and colleagues. they understand geopolitics. and when presented with a situation they give their best -- >> they give their lives sometimes. >> they do. and that's what's going on right now globally with our coalition to try to counter what's going on between russia and ukraine. right? and we do that because of all the work of that great apparatus. i think what's in peril is if

you put the wrong leader in charge of this thing called national security or intelligence they don't understand what they're sitting on top of. they don't understand the responsibility of their mission. they don't understand the commitment of their women and men. they don't understand the cost of the collection of that information. so it becomes not the strength but something that can be casually thrown away as a party favor or a sound bite or to be able to say i got something small. so that's one. you can put the wrong leader in charge. you can misuse the information so that you put either billions of dollars or more importantly lives at risk. if you misuse that information, people will start sharing with you, and make no mistake, we get most of what we know from somebody else's participation with us. and finally, you'll break the institution. why would anyone want to come and do this if every single day the american people are being

told that they're not worthy, that they are other than what they know themselves to be, which is trying to keep america and their interests safe for democracy. so the -- >> is it fair to ask if that's the end goal, to break the institutions on trump's part? >> the institutions are inconvenient because they were designed to be inconvenient. you don't want government to be so fast that it is just the whim of the person. it's designed to be transparent and fair and repeatable and work against the system. now, i've spent my whole career thinking it wasn't good enough. i'm a revolutionary within the systems. but i will tell you, if you think we don't need government you're not thinking. yes, let's -- >> but do you think that trump thinks that -- >> i don't think -- i think it's inconvenient. i think it's massively inconvenient. i think he is confused what are

legitimate concerns about his behavior, what are legitimate warnings about the intention of our adversaries and competitors. i've said this to him. i will say it again. anyone who thinks that you have to be complicit to be used does not understand the interests of our adversaries and competitors. >> do you think putin was using him or would like to use him in the future? >> the doctrine of the former soviet union, now russia, is to undermine democracy, particularly that practiced by the united states. yes. that is doctrinally one of his intentions and one of the ways you do that most effectively and they have since the second world war is to undermine our belief in ourselves. and what better way to do that than to convince somebody that what they're doing is what they want when it's feel what you

want to achieve. >> i think it's generous he understands. i worry he does and does it anyway. but let's go with he doesn't understand. what role does tucker carlson being in russia interviewing putin amplifying putin's propaganda to the point it comes out of the mouths of american citizens at trump rallies, how does that fit into the autocratic playbook? >> well, it's a dream. right? you have a venerable u.s. institution, our media, going there and saying hey, i think this is better than we are. what more do they have to do? how hard do they have to work? we have just achieved one of their objectives simply by participating in that sort of thing. you know, one of the things, nicolle, you and i talked about this last time, what i think is so interesting about the world in which we live right now is national security decision makers are disproportionately not in the government. they're the ceos of companies that take money from the wrong

person or tucker carlson, who doesn't understand what he's participating in when he thinks he's getting a rating or seeming to support somebody else. we need to understand that there are adversaries and competitors who do wish us harm, in part because we have the winning system. look at what we have. >> yeah. well, what do you -- again, what is the view from moscow if the american system, our rule of law can't hold trump accountable for his mishandling of classified documents at mar-a-lago or his attempts to overthrow the american elections on january 6th? >> well, it becomes a lot easier to figure out how to influence us because you're not trying to break down a whole nation that has an ethos, institutions that have standards, a constitution that has standing. and now in order to achieve your outcome we have a much easier

gig. >> because there hasn't been adjudication in the courts -- >> right. >> so again, wittingly or unwittingly, the inability of the rule of law to hold trump to account by any of the rest of us aids them. >> it just makes it easier. right? their job of influence is easier. because our institutions are weakened. >> it's incredible. >> right. and it's a lot of us. and i'll start with the american people. one of the great things about being an american is this thing called consent of the governed. >> explain that. >> we have the power. every single person that holds any office we put there. so we need to wake up a bit and see what's at stake. there are these incredible gifts we have as a nation. it would be lovely if we were all participating in keeping -- the congress has an incredibly important role. they're one of three branches of the government. the whole design of our system is to have these counterbalances. if they decide that whatever

party is in power is the one they're going to just blindly accept and you're going to have party line votes, oh, my god. scoop jackson and sam nunn must be losing their minds at the idea. >> can it come back, though? >> sure. >> i hear you and -- i worked for mccain, who was on the phone all day on the back of the bus with his best friends from the senate and they were all democrats. i mean, that era seems to be out of reach. not just gone but -- i mean, do you think -- because the consent of the governed means that the governed value being a democracy. and you listen to the sound of some of the trump voters and they seem ambivalent about it. >> yeah, i don't think the conversation we're having in america is worthy of the americans. >> oh, wow. >> i don't. i don't think that we are talking about the right things. i don't think we are dealing with the reality that we have two factions that see the world so differently. and it used to be that we had different views of how we would get there but not a different view of what --

>> what the problem was. >> right? >> right. >> so how do you get that back? >> you have to start talking about it and start talking about the things that are common. stop vil nooizing people. stop villainizing industry. yes, industry ought to be much more responsible. but they are one of the great engines of not only our national success but our ability to influence the world. the government. but do we not want america's best and brightest to participate in the systems that protect the organizations and our ideals that we have? i just think you have to -- we have to talk more about what is really at stake. it is fun to talk about individuals, about who they are. but the strength of america is who we are. and we haven't talked enough about that. which is why i love coming on and talking to you because that's what you and i are talking about. >> i want to -- i need to -- >> you put me on the spot. go ahead. >> does that mean a conversation

with national security experts who've been behind the curtain like yourself who say there's only one person, don't look at his age, don't look at anything but look at the one that's running to lead a democratic state? is that the conversation we should be having? >> i think you have to look at what the person is saying they would do. >> so one is saying he would lead -- continue to lead america as a democracy. the other is saying, quote, i will be a dictator on day one. >> that's antithetical to who we are. >> disqualifying? >> it's antithetical to who we are. >> disqualifying? >> i believe in the american people. >> you believe they should -- will find it disqualifying? >> i believe if they understand who we are the moment we have, the power they possess and what's at stake, i think they can. >> do you think they should? >> i think they always should make the choice for america. >> thank you for letting me drill down on that one. can we continue to have this conversation? >> i'd love to, if you'll have me.

>> do you believe that if there were anyone in your position of authority with the access to america's secrets that thought differently of trump they would have appeared by now? >> i think -- you know, the questions you asked me and that you're asking of me, who has spent my life, i believe in the constitution, the constitution prescribes a president -- i think one of the hard things that national security professionals have is separating that which the constitution allows -- and the constitution doesn't say the president has to be good. the constitution doesn't say the president has to make good decisions. and where you draw that line. and so i guess what i'm offering you is that the more we have conversations about what the consequence of some of these candidates -- and i think we absolutely should believe former president trump and what he says he should do. he would break the systems that

i think are the power of america. i think he would undermine intelligence such that we would lose the great strength that it represents. but what i want america to hear is it isn't about trump. it's about -- >> it's what he's running as. >> it's about what he will do to what they count on. they count on us being good. great. we've had 40 years of peace and abundant. i'm telling you, that is not a guarantee. make a decision not about who can tell you that they alone -- because i'm here to say no one alone can do it. it is who we are that has allowed the strength that we possess. and you ought to make that decision about who can best preserve that, and make it better. >> can i ask you to stick around through a quick break? >> you got it. >> all right. sue gordon isn't going anywhere. our conversation about the possible damage that could be done if someone like trump were to lead the united states of america, specifically to the intelligence community, we'll continue that conversation in just a moment.

and later in the broadcast, the disgraced ex-president once again slipping up, mistaking one joe biden, his likely opponent in november, for one former president barack obama. we'll show you what he said in his own words and the stunned silence from his very devoted supporters that followed. we'll also talk about the question of age that is now everywhere. "snl," maureen dowd. you name it. it's everywhere. we'll talk about the one thing he could do right now to get himself on the offense and promise the american people he hears them and he sees them. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. s after. don't go anywhere today. e's easy-to-use tools, like dynamic charting and risk-reward analysis, help make trading feel effortless. and its customizable scans with social sentiment help you find and unlock opportunities in the market. e*trade from morgan stanley. with powerful, easy-to-use tools, power e*trade makes complex trading easier. react to fast-moving markets with dynamic charting and a futures ladder that lets you place, flatten, or reverse orders so you won't miss an opportunity.

e*trade from morgan stanley. anthony: this making you uncomfortable? or reverse orders so you won't missgood.pportunity. when you've got type 2 diabetes like me, you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack or worse death. even when meeting your a1c goal. discomfort can help you act. i'm not trying to scare you. i'm empowering you... to get real with your health care provider. talk to them about lowering your risk of stroke, heart attack or death.

i brought in ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein! those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. -ugh. -here, i'll take that. woo hoo! ensure max protein, 30 grams protein, 1 gram sugar, 25 vitamins and minerals. and a new fiber blend with a prebiotic. (♪♪) is it possible to count on my internet and a new fiber blend 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!

as i expressed to the president on my third visit to the oval office as his new principal adviser, i said mr. president, there will be times when i have to bring news to you that you don't want to hear. i just want you to know that the news i bring to you, the information i bring to you will be to the best extent that we can, be unvarnished, non-politicized, the best that our incredible intelligence agencies can produce, so you will have the information you need to make the policy decisions that you're going to be faced with. >> joining our conversation, former assistant director for counterintelligence at the fbi frank figliuzzi's here. and former fbi counterintelligence agent and author of "compromised: counter intelligence and the threat of donald j. trump," written before he was on the hook for all of these civil legal defeats, pete strzok is here. sue gordon is still with us.

pete and frank, we've talked so much about the things sue says when she's here and we talk about them when she's gone. so i wanted to have you here while she's still here and broaden this conversation a little bit. to the fact that what she's laying out and her perspective, there's enough information that's now public. everybody has all the information they need. and i wonder if we just shift that kaleidoscope a little bit and sort of turn this over to the country, what in your view, frank, does that conversation start to look like? >> you're right that the evidence is there if we want to see it. we don't need to have a crystal ball to predict what the intelligence community could look like under another trump administration. if we look at what he did previously, his disdain for the intelligence community, his deciding to side with putin on who speaks the truth and who doesn't, his absolute disdain for intelligence community inspectors general who actually keep everybody on the straight

and narrow, who he's placed in dni positions, without any expertise or professionalism, then we know what's going to happen. and then look at the reports that there are teams together working right now on what to do with the intelligence community and the dismantling of it. the bottom line is that intelligence work without integrity undermines national security. so this isn't a political conversation. this is not a conversation about oh, well, i prefer a politically conservative approach to national security, i don't like spending so many resources defending democracy around the world. that's not this discussion. this is a far higher-level discussion, which is you're either understanding the threat to national security when you dismantle the intelligence process or you're not getting it. for example, if you put into the upper echelons of every one of the major u.s. intelligence agencies people who are loyal to the autocrat in the oval office

versus the constitution, you've got a big problem on your hands because the intelligence process consists of collection, dissemination and consumption. and if you control all three of those, you literally can weaponize it to your own agenda, your own personal agenda. you don't want collection on russia and how bad it is? you tell the community i don't want to see it or hear it. you don't want to hear how bad north korea is and how they've developed their nuclear weaponry because it makes you look bad because you're so friendly with north korea? that it never gets collected or disseminated and therefore not consumed. that's part of the huge problem we're looking at. >> you know, pete, mar-a-lago and the depiction of classified materials stacked one on top of each other more rec v recklessly than i stack my son's

kindergarten artwork at trump's golf club is something we fixate on because we can see it. but behind that is a human being, often an american, sometimes someone from one of our allies, sometimes someone who doesn't neatly fit into the box of an ally but they trust us to share their secrets. there are human beings running around the world's diciest spots sharing things with us. and we look at the paper and we talk about the paper, we talk about the trial. we don't give enough air time to the people. what would it be like to be an agent in a second trump presidency? >> well, nicolle, first welcome back. it's greet to see you back. >> thank you. >> i would say it is a terrible place to be as an agent. i agree with everything that sue and frank said. i would point to there is an interesting perspective when you start talking about being an agent, and there are laws to protect those agents. and it goes to -- the fbi's in an interesting place because on the one hand there's a member of

the intelligence community. they collect foreign intelligence. they lead counterintelligence efforts here within the united states. but they're also in charge of enforcing national security laws. and that comes into play in particularly two specific areas with regard to trump. the first is when it comes to politicizing intelligence if you happen to be someone like michael sussman, if you happen to be someone like igor danchenko, you can suddenly find yourself with the fbi at your door with a search warrant, with an arrest warrant, trying to bring charges against you. the other thing that it can lead to is if you are donald trump and you've been re-elected and you are facing charges for which in my opinion is one of the most obstructive, grossly negligent handling of classified information that i've seen in my career, that you can let yourself off the hook, that you can let others off the hook who also might have committed crimes. so at the end of the day those crimes are designed to protect those things that keep us safe. whether that's the life of a human source. whether that's some

extraordinarily sensitive technical technique. we have those laws in place to protect those things and protect those people. and if you have no respect for those laws, if you're willing to wield them to attack your enemies and protect yourself, it's a horrible place to be as a human source. >> and we've been exactly there before. people who tried to protect our national security laws, the -- look into trump's campaign was a criminal one. the national security questions were national security questions. and the people that ran the agency all had their reputations maligned and largely lost their jobs. comey, mccabe -- i mean, what if trump were handed a second term? what happens to the people in charge of enforcing the laws that protect our national security? >> they won't have their position. >> and then what? >> well, then the system breaks. then what makes us special, what makes us different from various apparatus, they're used as

instruments of the states against something with no constraints, we become that. so that's the risk. i think we saw it so clearly in the first administration because you saw this tension, between a system that was trying to be responsive to a president but unwilling to do what it couldn't do. right? and it got exposed. and the former president was angered because there were things he wanted to do but couldn't be done within the confines of the system we had. and he with were perhaps not as effective on either side, but certainly that lesson has been learned and the listen that will be learned is if i want to do what i want to do i have to get rid of those people and institutions that would resist it. but again, what i say is the consequence is less about the individual who's doing it than about who we back. >> who we back.

do we stay -- >> no, we don't. listen, this is a very hubrisy statement but i think free societies globally rely on the united states to be a reliable trustworthy partner that behaves within not only a set of rules but within the international order. if we dop stog that, then it all kind of breaks down. >> will we know? >> things happen slowly but -- >> are they happening right now? >> yeah, we have less trust. i think the biden administration has actually done a pretty surprisingly good job of rebuilding coalitions that i thought even with some of its own actions could have been disrepaired. i think what's happened with ukraine and the coalition that has stayed together and even as we faltered has stayed together is a pretty remarkable testament to how important our investment

in these things are. if we start becoming untrustworthy. >> can we continue to have these conversations? >> sure. >> thank you very much for being here, sue gordon. it's a privilege to get to talk to you. frank figliuzzi and pete strzok thank you as well for spending time with us. when he with come back the one thing joe bide kenn do today at 6:00 if he wanted to to take control of the conversation that's happening in every corner of his own winning coalition about his age. that's next. 's next. ona. i'm a flight nurse on a helicopter that specializes in trauma. i've been doing flight nursing for 24 years. as you get older, your brain slows down and i had a fear that i wouldn't be able to keep up. i heard about prevagen from a friend. i read the clinical study on it and it had good reviews. i've been taking prevagen now for five years and it's really helped me stay sharp and present. it's really worked for me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. if you have chronic kidney disease you can reduce the risk of kidney failure with farxiga.

because there are places you'd rather be. farxiga can cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract, or genital yeast infections, and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. ♪ far-xi-ga ♪ sometimes, the lows of bipolar depression feel darkest before dawn. with caplyta, there's a chance to let in the lyte™. caplyta is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, caplyta treats both bipolar i and ii depression. and in clinical trials, movement disorders and weight gain were not common. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements which may be life threatening or permanent.

these aren't all the serious side effects. caplyta can help you let in the lyte™. ask your doctor about caplyta. find savings and support at caplyta.com businesses go further with 5g solutions. 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. hi, i'm michael, i've lost 62 pounds on golo and i have kept it off. now is the time to see what america's largest most of the weight that i gained was strictly in my belly which is a sign of insulin resistance. but since golo, that weight has completely gone away, as you can tell. thanks to golo and release, i've got my life and my health back. what do i see in peter dixon? i see my husband... the father of our girls.

i see a public servant. a man who served under secretary clinton in the state department... where he took on the epidemic of violence against women in the congo. i see a fighter, a tenacious problem-solver... who will go to congress and protect abortion rights and our democracy. because he sees a better future for all of us. i'm peter dixon and i

in the spirit of sue gordon just the facts here. president joe biden has carried out an agenda with broad and deep public support at a policy level. the biden economy is in a much stronger position than a lot of economists expected it to be. president joe biden's support for our democracy and our democratic institutions is never, ever, ever questioned, even by members of the republican party. and yet, and yet, and yet the age thing hangs over him like a looming political storm cloud. from "snl" to maureen dowd to the latest "new york times" public opinion polls, it's everywhere. fair? absolutely not. ageism is real. as a woman on tv i can attest to that. but there is no time for joe biden between now and november to do that much about it. but you know what he can do, he can get on the offense. he can control the conversation. he can control how he deals with this issue, this question. he can wake up tomorrow and say okay, voters, i hear you and i

see you and i love you, give me a chance to prove you right. president joe biden should run on a constitutional amendment capping the maximum age that a man or woman could be inaugurated at 75. if it passed, future voters wouldn't have to contemplate president joe biden or his opponent. the constitution isn't mum on age. it has a minimum age. and if president biden is successful in a second term, it would also have a maximum age. and just in case anyone at the white house or the campaign is worried it would somehow make biden look defensive or self-conscious about his own age, biden's response to that writes itself. day after day after day. have you seen the other guy? this was from this weekend alone. >> putin, you know, has to little respect for obama that he's starting to throw around the nuclear word. you heard that. nuclear. >> did you just see maduro, venezwer -- -- it's unbelievable. >> oil exploration and

production in the united states. >> the biden border will -- well, you know this, right? >> even argentina, they went maga. you know argentina. great guy. >> we will expel the warmongers. we are a nation that just recently heard that saudi arabia and russia will be re -- but -- ah. >> we didn't doctor that. it really happened. joining us msnbc contributor and columnist charlie sykes plus u.s. special correspondent for bbc studios, msnbc contributor katti kay is here. and lucky for us molly jong fast special correspondent for "vanity fair" and msnbc contributor back at the table. molly, you have thoughts. >> you know, look, there's been so much talk about the age. and some of the age writing is a mobius strip. we saw the "times," there was one sunday when almost all the opinion columnists wrote about biden's age. and it became this issue that was sort of propped up to make a

kind of false equivalence. like one guy has 91 criminal counts and the other guy's gold. but the truth is trump is 2 1/2 years younger than biden. these are not a lot of years. >> and sounds like that. >> and sounds like that. and i think the best thing bide kenn do is get out there. when he gets out there he's really good. i was at a party and everyone was like we're going to vote for him but we're not sure. and i played some stuff from c-span of him talking and they were like he sounds really good. and i was like, yeah, that's from yesterday. >> the thing about running on a constitutional amendment, one, charlie sykes, it's been done before. it can read as cynical. the other thing that it does is it says let me prove you right, voters. you feel strongly about this, i hear you, i see you. and i think there is nothing to be gained by having nothing to bring to the conversation. it at least gets biden in the room and lets him sit at the side of the table of people who think our constitution and our elections should speak to age. >> but he has a lot to bring to the table. he has a lot to talk about.

and you've put your finger on it. he has the other guy to talk about. look, i don't think he can run away from this issue. it is a legitimate issue. it's a real issue in the minds of voters. so he needs to lean into it and say look, i am old. i am so old that, you know, make a routine out of it. but then he needs to say, but the other guy is also old. and he's crazy and he's dangerous. and he poses these threats. this is the moment that i think people need to come to grips with. if donald trump does pose an existential threat, then we ought to act like it. maybe a year ago we could have had a serious conversation about replacing joe biden, you but joe biden is not going anywhere. he is going to be the candidate. so at some point the bedwetting has to morph into focusing on the task ahead. and every one of your programs, nicolle, underlines what a trump presidency would be. and i do think that it's

incumbent on everybody to say okay, what is this election about? what is important? yes, we can be concerned about joe biden's age. but how does joe biden's age stack up with everything we know about donald trump? his dishonesty, his authoritarianism, his intention to have a presidency of revenge and retribution. every single day donald trump gives joe biden something more to talk about. and that's -- that's what 2024 has to be. does america want an old guy as president or do they want an old crazy dangerous deranged authoritarian as president? >> yeah. i mean, and katty, that's where sue gordon i think oriented the conversation. if she could be here every day i would have her. but this is an election, and we say it all the time, it isn't always true, believe me, about big things. p not big policy things. not big foreign policy decisions. about whether we remain -- whether we continue to have an election.

i mean, whether we continue to be a country every four years lets the voters weigh in. >> so the challenge for the white house seems to be pretty clear. keep making that argument, this is an election about big things. keep bringing up donald trump's record. and keep bringing up the achievements joe biden has had in terms of policy decision that's have made americans' lives better. point to the fact consumers are feeling more confident. i filled up my car this weekend it was like $3.40 a gallon. and at the same time talk about the age things that in a way acknowledges he's old but also acknowledges that he's competent. this is not somebody from all the reports that we have who is incompetent when it comes to policy, from thefrom what the record suggests. along with your constitutional amendment idea another thing people who want to shrink -- the trump coalition seem to be saying time and again, and this is republican pollsters who charlie knows along with democratic voters, where are the surrogates? it's another practical thing, get surrogates out on

television. every day the democratic party is filled with a rich bench of talent. and have them out all talking about the same hymn book, talking about all the achievements and the criticisms of donald trump. it is something that is frustrating campaign advisers on the democratic side certainly. but it seems to be something that's fairly easy to fix. >> i think that's right. but i think you also in this day and age, you have to trust that you have to lean in to where the voters are. and i think the idea of muddling through and setting out "snl" to take issue with some of the surrogates being out there, i've sat across from joe biden. i think he sees the country the way we see the country. he sees the choice in terms of -- donald trump isn't running as someone who wants to lead a democratic state. i think to the degree it becomes a distraction finding a way to get on offense, charlie -- what is the under armor? the only way out is through.

it can't be dodged. we're at the point now where trump is doing the contrasting for him. >> well, right. he has to lean into it. he can't pretend it's not there. i think there's been a certain amount of denialism on the part of some of the president's defenders, that if we just didn't talk about it would go away. the reality is you can't have a conversation with any voter in america where it doesn't come up. so you do lean into it. but again, you need to put joe biden's age up against what donald trump represents. where is the republican freak-out about decompensation going on with donald trump? where is the republican freak-out about the fact he faces 91 criminal charges that he has been found liable for raping a woman? here you have joe biden's age and then here you have all of the issues of donald trump. and that's what they have to lean into. don't complicate it. don't make it more difficult. own the fact that you're old.

but donald trump is also old but he's so much more than that. that i think has to be the strategy. >> no one's going anywhere. i've got a million more questions for all of them. we'll be right back. lion more questions for all of them. we'll be right back.

eggs make all our family moments better. especially when they're eggland's best. taste so fresh and amazing. deliciously superior nutrition, too. for us, it's eggs any style. as long as they're the best. eggland's best. love you. have a good day, behave yourself. like she goes to work at three in the afternoon and sometimes gets off at midnight. she works a lot, a whole lot. we don't get to eat in the early morning. we just wait till we get to the school. so, yeah.

right now here in america, millions of kids like victoria and andre live with hunger, and the need to help them has never been greater. when you join your friends, neighbors and me to support no kid hungry, you'll help hungry kids get the food they need. if we want to take care of our children, then we have to feed them. your gift of just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month at helpnokidhungry.org right now will help provide healthy meals and hope. we want our children to grow and thrive and to just not have to worry and face themselves with the struggles that we endure. nobody wants that for their children. like if these programs didn't exist me and aj, we wouldn't probably get lunch at all. please call or go online right now with your gift of just $19 a month. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this limited edition t-shirt to show you're part of the team that's helping feed kids and change lives.

if you're coming in hungry, there's no way you can listen to me teach, do this activity, work with this group. so starting their day with breakfast and ending their day with this big, beautiful snack is pretty incredible. whether kids are learning at school or at home, your support will ensure they get the healthy meals they need to thrive. because when you help feed kids, you feed their hopes, their dreams, and futures. kids need you now more than ever. so please call this number right now to join me in helping hungry kids or go online to helpnokidhungry.org and help feed hungry kids today. >> dana, look at the schedule. seven a.m. seoul cycle class. i am not talking about taking one. he leads it. 8:30 am, play speed chess and

the park. 8:32 am, wins game. points at a point and says, next time young blood. 9:30 a.m., meets with -- four military strategy meeting and push up contest. 10:02 i am, winds contest and points of the head of the joint chief and says next time, young blood. ten or 3:11, train time. that is all before a lunch where he eats five hole chickens interoperated. >> it is one of the things that we don't cover a lot around here, because his age is his age. i'm not as tells our shower, but i can't be taller. it's one of the things that just is. i do sometimes wonder, i think it is incumbent for them to be on the offense. he saying the voters he sure that they're not in that situation again. everywhere you, go your

engrossed or you're at the dentist just a conversation to be had. on the other hand it's the most known thing about joe biden. >> and look he's old but if you look at the primary votes come in it's not like dean phillips is cleaning up. >> nobody. is >> nobody's and biden is really definitively away ahead and even when there was an uncommitted campaign which i think was a very good use of democracy there was even more turnout. if you look at trump who did everything he could to consolidate those primary schedules, he is still -- i mean nikki haley is getting 30 or 40% of the vote. those voters are saying that they are never dropped which means as you and i both know. >> nikki haley has turned this into a really against trump and biden. but mostly against trump.

and the voters do you act more like you would think a chris christie voter. what they are more than you would ever hear from a desantis voter, there were more than a few. what do you make of how the nikki haley voters our sounding. we sort of waltz into tomorrow. >> chris christie launched his campaign as the never trump candidate right from the start. i suppose it's not surprising that his voters were all never trump. nikki haley launched her campaign trying to be more church than that. but it is clear that a portion of her voters feel, as she is now saying, they reflect what she now says out of the campaign trail. the question in november is, what portion? how big is that slice?

is it 10% of republican voters who would not vote for donald trump? is it 60%? where others voters? are they in the states that matter? and then the suburbs of those states that matter? all that is the kind of information that is very useful to democrats as they try to run joe biden's campaign. but i think you are right, it is pretty clear from the way the nikki haley is talking now that there are a group of people who support her who will never vote for donald trump. the only question for democrats is, how big is that group? >> i want to push back, respectfully and narrowly. i think that the biden strategy of -- is a loser. i think it is i'm old and most of the stuff i did is so popular, they are trying to destroy me through any means possible. by coming after my vice president. it's offensive to every aspect of the center. it's not true on the merits.

i think my worry is that the democrats are on their heels and they are not going on offense with the support of the popularity. he tried and failed to do biden's finger on the pulse is so intimidating. they are trying to destroy him below the belt. >> well, he needs to lead into it and i think the democrats had them back on their heels. i don't think that joe biden needs to play the victim card. we are seeing donald trump do that. but i don't think that that is necessary for him to do. what he needs to do is reach out to some of those nikki haley voters. the killer was the republican parties off-ramp for donald trump. in the last few, days she is run a stronger campaign than i expected. look we need to move away from the unhinged chaos from donald

trump and move back to normalcy. after tomorrow, joe biden can appeal and say am the candidate that moves past the chaos. and the return to normalcy. the constituency in swing states will listen to. that >> we will keep our eyes out on. that thank you so much for spending time with us today another break for us, we will be right back. di nausea or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection

and headache may occur. live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. i love your dress. oh thanks! i splurged a little because liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, right? i've been telling everyone. baby: liberty. did you hear that? ty just said her first word. can you say “mama”? baby: liberty. can you say “auntie”? baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ [♪♪] did you know, many moisturizers only hydrate your skin? for advanced science that visibly repairs signs of aging... try olay regenerist micro-sculpting cream. it delivers 10 benefits in every jar for younger-looking skin, visibly firming, lifting, and smoothing wrinkles. olay regenerist penetrates the skin's surface, to boost regeneration at the surface cellular level for continuous improvement.

to visibly repair signs of aging, try olay regenerist. this has been medifacts for olay. ♪♪ we're building a better postal service. all parts working in sync to move your business forward. for more value. more reliability. and more on-time deliveries. the united states postal service built for how you business. whoa, how did you defeat them? the united states with a little kung fu strength and by connecting my devices to the most powerful force of all. skadoosh. hah, huh?

cool right? amazing. harness the power of xfinity internet and stay connected to the things you love. ah, they'll be like this for hours. hello dad, hello dad, hello da. uh-oh. good bunnies. ahh! >> thank you so much for spending part of your monday with, us we are so grateful. the beat starts right. now high. >> hi nicole, thank you very much. welcome to the. beat today the supreme court unanimously ruled