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. put uc and crohn's in check... and keep them there with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq and learn how abbvie can help you save. business. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq it's not a nine-to-five proposition. it's all day and into the night. it's all the things that keep this world turning. the go-tos that keep us going. the places we cheer. and check in. they all choose the advanced network solutions and round the clock partnership from comcast business. see why comcast business powers more small businesses than anyone else. get started for $49.99 a month plus ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card. don't wait- call today.

that is tonight's last word, the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle starts now. tonight, donald trump hit with double setbacks in his push to get the charges against him dismissed. we will break down the latest in the classified documents case and the georgia election interference case. then, no labels is no more, what it means for both campaigns ahead of november. plus, the tense call between president biden and

prime minister netanyahu, the wording from the president about u.s. policy toward israel. the 11th hour gets underway on this thursday night. good evening, once again, i'm stephanie ruhle. we are now 215 days away from the election. and tonight, there are double denials for donald trump as he tries to get his criminal case is dismissed. judges in the classified documents case and the georgia election interference case both said no way to trump's the bid to end the prosecutions. judge aileen cannon did not buy trump's argument that those classified records were considered personal under the presidential records act. the ruling came after special counsel jack smith blasted her handling of the case thus far. he also objected to her request for proposed jury instructions, taking into account trump's claims about the presidential

records act. cannon fired back, calling smith's response to a request unprecedented and unjust. earlier today, former prosecutor andrew wiseman weighed in on her ruling with some pretty choice words. >> she says this is a complex case of first impression. only for her is it a complex case of first impression. there is nothing complex and there's nothing first impression about this other than a former president. but that is not really posing any legal or functional barriers that make this so unusual. >> asked for trump's other legal setback, judge scott mcafee denied it and by trump and his co-defendants to get the georgia election interference case tossed out on first amendment grounds. in his ruling, judge mcafee said, quote, free speech, including political speech, is not without restriction. meanwhile, new york attorney general test james has a few questions about the california company that backed

the $175 million bond trump's posted in his civil fraud case. the company or mr. trump's lawyers must file additional paperwork for information about that bond in the next 10 days. we have a lot to cover. so let's get smarter with the help of our lead off panel. some of my favorites, special correspondent from vanity fair, and msnbc contributor, peter baker. you know him as chief white house correspondent for the new york times. but what you don't know is that he just won the white house correspondent associations 2024 award for excellence in presidential news coverage under deadline pressure. and former u.s. attorney joyce vance who spent 25 years as a federal prosecutor joyce, heavy legal day, so you are going first. judge cannon, heard trump's bid to dismiss the case three weeks ago, she finally filed a ruling today after jack smith's filing insisted she do something or he was going to go to a higher court.

what is your take on this? >> yes, so this ruling has some good, some bad, and some ugly stuff. it is good insofar as it goes, she reached the only result she really could reach here, denying trump's motion to dismiss, at least for now. but the bad is that it is not a final ruling. and as we saw her do previously with trump's motion to dismiss on vagueness grounds, she leaves the possibility open that she could have a different ruling during trial. and as we have been discussing, that is dangerous for the prosecution. if they get a ruling from her now before trial and they don't like it, they can appeal it. if she doesn't rule until after the jury has been sworn in and double jeopardy has been attached, they can't take an appeal. the case is essentially over if she rules against them or if a jury acquits. so the ugly part of this is for jack smith to figure out what does he do next? will he file, as some have

suggested, a motion, asking the 11th circuit to order her to clarify the ruling, or mikey, file a motion and eliminate the source of pretrial motions prosecutors file, asking for a ruling on the jury instructions before trial. i think that both of those are problematic. he might not be able to win because of the way she has postured this case. his best shot might be a straight up motion asking her to recuse at this point on the basis of multiple bad rulings. but at least in so far as this goes, this is the start of goodness and perhaps some suggestion that judge cannon, when her feet are held to the fire, which is what jack smith did with his response to her request for jury instructions, that she at least understands what she is being told. clichi definitely reacts when her feet are held to the fire because she doesn't want this to go to the higher court. however, she also responded by

smacking him down. what could that mean for a potential trial that jack smith may have made an enemy? >> well, so i don't think it is a surprise to anyone that judge cannon isn't on the government side in this case, simply because her rulings have been so out of the ordinary, so inconsistent with accepted legal doctrine. i mean, lawyers have disagreements with judges all the time. no one likes to lose a motion. that is not what this is. her rulings have been contrary to well-established law. and it is no exception here. because the fact of the matter is, she is saying, well, maybe trump could offer some facts at trial that would reinvigorate this presidential records act defense. and that is simply not the case. the presidential records act is in some sort of magic wand that excuses criminal possession of classified documents by a

former president. the fact that she will even entertain that speculation suggests that this is a case where jack smith will have to find a way to get this in front of the 11th circuit in hopes of having her move before the trial takes place. >> peter, what do you think about what andrew wiseman said, judge cannon pointed out how complex this case is. he said, no way, it is cut and dry. what do you think? >> i think in fact a lot of lawyers think it is pretty cut and dry. of the former cases that have been lodged against president trump, this one seems the most open and shut, at least from a legal expert, you are not entitled to take classified documents with you. he tried to prevent the government from getting them back when they asked for them, he supplied a subpoena. according to evidence, submitted by the prosecution, he conspired with other members of his team of staff at mar-a- lago to prevent the government from finding these documents, bringing them back. it wasn't a case that, oh, he brought some of the boxes and he didn't realize he had, he

actively made an effort, hard evidence that has been submitted to try to prevent the government from having it. this is not, people get in trouble for a whole lot less in the handling of classified documents. we have seen it time and time again. especially about january 6th, the question about the hush money case. they argue raise some interesting legal questions we haven't seen before. it i think wiseman is correct to say that it was really novel about this, for the president of the united states, not the issue of healing classified documents. >> i would like our party is to know that molly is such a superb nerd that when other guests are answering questions, she is feverishly taking notes to prepare to answer hers. so get ready for a good one. there you are, what is she writing down? these two judges today rejected trump's efforts to dismiss these cases. peter just said it, you got the alvin bragg case coming up in 11 days, are his efforts to delay, delay, delay, are they becoming less effective?

please the road is coming to an end. >> this is a big question and it is funny because the new york times did this story about how trump had spent $100 million on legal fees. >> someone spent $100 million on behalf of donald trump. >> right, but that is a staggering sum of money. and it has worked in a lot of ways because he is only facing one trial at this moment, which is kind of incredible considering that he has 91 counts he is facing and he has managed to punt these three other trials. i would say what you see with these lawyers as they are throwing everything they can against the wall, anything they can. the first amendment protects them from maligning the judges daughter. just any ridiculous excuse. and so i think he has gotten to be able to really delay the accountability the way that it should have, and honestly that is really, in itself, a sign that the guardrails have not

held. >> all right, joyce, new topic. i want to talk about donald trump's social media company, now publicly trading, truth social. until today, he was relatively quiet, he wasn't talking about it much, but then he went on a big rant on his platform today, talking up the stock, saying all these positive things about the company, isn't that dangerous? because if he is saying anything that is materially incorrect, won't you attract a lot of attention from federal regulators, the s.e.c., that could bring shareholder lawsuits his way. >> so, you know, he started this morning, before the opening bell, right? talking up this stock in ways that are possibly misleading and i say possibly, advisedly. because this is the story of a situation that certainly folks at the s.e.c. , maybe for prosecutors, possibly for shareholders, this is the sort of setting where

you start to wonder if what is going on is completely kosher. and so it requires some investigation to look into precisely what he is saying and precisely what the position of the stock is and to contemplate whether there is some fraudulent effort here to pump up value or to encourage investors to take steps on the basis of fraudulent intervention . and that can lead, although it is not a fast process by any means, to some sort of investigation. there is even the possibility of parallel proceedings with the justice department and the s.e.c. who are working in tandem on these cases. so look, i think it is far too early to say with any definitive sort of a conclusion that that is what is going on here and certainly will create some interest. >> but of course, and noteworthy, while donald trump owns 60% of the company, oddly, he is not on the board, he is not a director. and that might end up protecting him or he can say, i

am just a guy who owns a whole lot of shares, i can't be held accountable, like an actual ceo or an officer of the company. that might be by design, only time will tell peter, i want to talk about some reporting from your colleagues at the times reporting on trump businesses and how they will become less about the hotels and more about the golf resort and how the saudi is were playing a huge role in this. of course, donald trump is a presidential candidate. how is it that more people are not raising alarms about huge conflicts of interest? please welcome it was remarkable, course, you hear congressional politics talk a lot about foreign business entanglements of incumbent presidents son, that he was paid money by businesses in ukraine and china and therefore, ergo, there must be ran by foreign interests in order to influence the current president. they have no evidence that president biden the ever took any actions as a result of his sons is in his efforts, even if

his son was profiting off of the biden name, but you hear a lot of talk about how concerning this is. you don't hear a lot of talk about how concerning it is that trump himself continues to do business overseas. he and his family have long had assets and projects and other interests in foreign countries. and that was a big issue while he was president. he continued to get some cash in from foreign interests. at the same time, foreign policy, no country or very few countries are more in the of our full and policy right now in saudi arabia, which is looking at the united states in terms of the middle east, these of these israel and the middle east vis-@-vis iran. the trump administration which protected the consequences after the killing of jamaal khashoggi, the journalist who was dismembered by saudi agents. according to the cia, by the saudi crown prince. of course there is obvious

senate questions that will be raised here. they know who is running for president, they know what the polls are, they are paying attention to what is happening here. have a great interest for who is sitting in the white house next year. >> let's talk about trump's other money issue, his bond in the civil fraud case. explain to us what new york ag tish james may be looking for and asking for more information . you know, it is not just a regular old bank or lender that is backing him, this guy in l.a. and the business that he has always been in. subprime auto lending, this is like the former president of the united states going to a payday lender, basically. the riskiest low end lender. >> it is an awfully odd place for someone like donald trump to go to post a bond. so tish james is concerned that this bond does not secure the full amount of the judgment that she is entitled to.

and you will recall that that is after the court of appeals in new york, actually reduce the bond for 450 million+ dollars to 175 million. now she seems to have concerns that there is not sufficient cash and the entity that offered the security bond to fulfill that obligation, if trump defaults. so the judge will, i think, permit her to engage in a hearing where they will push on the integrity of this offering because if, in fact, this is not sufficient surety to secure trump's debt in the event he loses on appeal, that there will have to be some sort of a substitute or additional bond placed in order to avoid tish james immediately going about the business of collecting on the judgment by going after trump's properties. >> molly, the l.a. times is reporting that some members of the house january 6th committee are talking about

preparing for retribution that they might face from trump if he is re-elected. what is your reaction to that? >> i mean, they are right to be worried trump tells you what he is going to do and we have heard cash patel, in case we are not words, we have heard cash patel say he is going to lock up members of the media. this is the sort of hungary autocrat kind of thing that trump world is sort of has been chomping, as a possible, the revenge for. if he gets back in office. and i think they are right to worry about that. that is a real concern. but it really does bring back into stark relief that this is not a normal election. this is not a normal presidential candidate. we live in a democracy, we have never faced a president who was once president running again saying that he plans to lock up his political enemies this is

really wild stuff. >> it is, the most important point to make every day, this is not a normal election. these are not two candidates running against one another about run-of-the-mill policies, our democracy is on the line. molly, thank you so much. one day i hope you guys get to see her secret notes. joyce, peter, peter congratulations again. we'll actually check back in with you later. when we come back, failure to launch. the label drops his third-party bid for president. what they did with all that money they raised. we are going to get into what went wrong. later, protect civilians or else, biden's sharp words for netanyahu after the death of seven aid workers in gaza. 11th hour just getting underway on a thursday night.

not all caitlin clark's are the same. caitlin clark, city planner. just like not all internet providers are the same, don't settle. get real deal speed, reliability and power with xfinity.

she shoots from here? that's kinda my thing. get the real deal with xfinity internet today, and get fast speeds and a reliable connection to all your devices in the home —even when everyone is online. not all caitlin clarks are the same. caitlin clark. city planner. just like not all internet providers are the same. don't settle. you want fast. get fast. you want reliable. get reliable. you want powerful. get powerful. get real deal speed, reliability and power with xfinity. she shoots from here? that's kinda my thing. and no labels is officially

no more. in a statement today, ceo nancy jacobson announced that the group would end its lefferts to want to third-party ticket after no candidates emerged. that leaves only one third- party candidate left, rfk jr., and his campaign has some democrats, quote, freaked out and ready to mobilize back with us tonight, jennifer palma, four white house communication are and tim miller, host of the bulwark podcast, and the former communications director for jeb bush. jennifer, the threat of a no labels ticket is gone, they couldn't find a candidate. what is your take? >> right, i am one of those democrats who is freaked out about rfk jr. and i am ready to mobilize, stephanie. i think that, i hope what happens with no labels will repeat itself here, although i think that this is, rfk jr. is a little more complicated. i think democrats, i guess, anti-trump courses are really aligned and the fact that all

of these candidates look at the possibility for serious, who are serious leaders, the possibility of possibly doing, joining the no labels ticket and deciding that all to do is to help trump and no one would do it, right? that is an early indicator of concern in the populace writ large about the possibility of trump winning and i think it reflects a larger concern that democrats can sort of, not to be complacent about, can count on to be there to fight to bite trump and now you got to turn that to rfk jr. who, even if he gets just a small portion of the vote, and he is a little more complicated because i think his appeal could be that he appears to be independent, starting to see a lot of questions arise about his funding and being backed by trump supporters, there is some questions today about the probe pardoning jan six, that they made. he seems to be somewhat who is aligned with trump, and not who

he claims to be, not as independent as he claims to be. i think that really hurt him but this notion of somebody who is sort of independent, not of either party is a real threat, even if it is just two, three percentage points. that could be a margin of victory. plea temperatures before we get to rfk, what is your take on what happened in no labels? for months, nancy and her squad were out there fundraising, fundraising, full steam ahead. >> yeah, i felt from the start that nancy jacobson had a big no labels donors were mostly delusional about, a, the possibility that they couldn't find a candidate, the possibility that candidate could win, about what the impact of such a candidate would be. some people out there who thought that, who argue that this was a nefarious effort, that this is trump's talking horse. i do think it is worth the saying, i never felt that way it is clear today, the decision

that that was not the case and with respect to the late joe lieberman, i think that what this really was was just a lot of naoveti from people in the group and a lot of rich people in new york who thought that there was a broader interest in a center-right center candidate than there is. i think those people who are in that thinking our for joe biden and like joe biden. joe biden at the center of this race, maybe he is a little on the left than various people to want to be on one issue or another, and broadly speaking he is acceptable, donald trump is unacceptable and so it is hard to recruit somebody in that environment and i think that is why they came up ended. >> jennifer, you were mentioning some of the things that certainly make rfk jr. sound and the more right than people realize. but the voters he could potentially pull, are they actually paying attention to the ins and outs of what he says ? or are they drawn to this new face, different guy, young vp

candidate coming from silicon valley and they don't actually know what they are getting into. but he could attract young voters that president biden is banking on. >> i think right now there is polls that show him getting about 14% of the vote or at least i've seen those in the last couple of months. i think you're right, that is what it is, right? people are exhausted by the current political stalemate, it sounds like somebody, the name of the candidates, but, like his first added that he did was very well done and it was sort of like are you tired of both sides, here's something different, here is an independent, relief. it has only been a couple of months where people started to look at him seriously. there is a couple of groups that have formed to take him on , the dnc, i know, is doing that, as well. and already starting, people

will be educated about who this guy is and what he is really for. and i think that will turn off a large swath of voter, the chunk of voters that you will lose. then there is the messaging that needs to happen about you help him, you are helping elect trump. i think there's one way to stop donald trump and that is to elect biden president, period, end of discussion. that will also take place for voters for him i think at the end. the other is a question, who hangs on? because biden had been appealing for whatever reason. those people might be turned off they learned is who is funding him, he doesn't appear to be an independent as he is. i think those are sort of the three lanes that democrats are trying to stop him he is not who he says he is, there's a lot of crazy stuff that he is four and if you vote for him you are going to help trump. i feel pretty good about our ability to make this argument. but still, one, two percentage points could be the difference. it is really scary.

>>, tim, what do you think rex >> i'm aligned with a lot of what jennifer has said. i think there is one area to add to this, i think the democrats don't want to bank on this, probably. i think the very core of rfk supporters is pretty trump he. antiestablishment and anti- vaccine, that engaged type of voter, not that engaged in anything broadly, hasn't voted a lot in primaries. that i think rfk is down two or 3%. i think it is a big question of who he actually hurts. he might hurt trump if he is really that low of a number. once you get beyond that and then we have the categories that jennifer was talking about. i think that is the big concern for joe biden if rfk get up to eight, nine, 10, 11%. a lot of those voters are going to be basically part of the democratic coalition traditionally, black voters, younger voters, people that aren't happy with joe biden,

maybe about gaza, maybe about inflation, that are looking at rfk as an offramp. those are the people the biden campaign really needs to communicate to and educate about the far right views of rfk today going around rfk's support, at least openness to pardoning the january 6th rioters, for example. educating those voters about the democratic traditional democrat base voters about rfk's radicalism i think it's going to be the key for joe biden. >> pardoning the january 6th insurrectionist is a lane i will never -- what voter is going right on, that's a great idea? thank you both. >> maga voters. >> it is just ridiculous. thank you both for being here. i appreciate it. it leaves me speechless. when we come back, president biden's serious warning for israel. we are going to break down his tense

call with prime minister netanyahu when the 11th hour continues.

(psst! psst!) ahhh! with flonase, allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily gives you long lasting non-drowsy relief. flonase all good. also, try our allergy headache and nighttime pills.

it's time to get away and cache in, at cache creek casino resort, to rock and to roll. to go all out or... go all in. with four stars and rising stars, northern california's premier casino resort is the perfect place... ...to do as much -or as little- as you want. make your get away now and cache in at cache creek casino resort.

today, president biden spoke with minister, netanyahu after the israeli airstrike that killed seven aid workers in gaza. nbc news gabe gutierrez has the details. >> tonight, president biden is warning israel that without immediate action to protect civilians in its war against hamas, u.s. policy towards its staunch ally will change the direct message coming during a phone call between the president and israeli prime minister, benjamin netanyahu. >> the president emphasized that the strikes on humanitarian workers and the overall humanitarian situation are unacceptable. >> the 30 minute call was the first between the two leaders in nearly three weeks, marks a much tougher tone toward israel. the white house says the president made clear the need

for israel to announce and implement a series of specific, concrete, and measurable steps to address civilian harm, humanitarian suffering, and the safety of aid workers. the white house has repeatedly said israel faces a genocidal threat from hamas, just as we were saying there will be no change in policy. the two u.s. officials tell nbc news the president today strongly implied he may condition american military aid to israel on whether netanyahu aches immediate changes to humanitarian concerns in gaza. getting to a cease-fire, the white house say changes must happen in days, even hours. >> do you think the prime minister? >> i think it was evident in the phone call today, it was a good discussion, direct, no question. but a good discussion. >> today's call was arranged in direct response to the israeli strike that killed seven world central kitchen workers, including 33-year-old jacob, a duo american-canadian citizen. rath sanchez spoke with his parents. >> people who suffer because --

we lost our only son. we are only two, there are thousands and thousands there. >> israel say the strike was a grave mistake and was not intentional. click here to discuss, jim shooter, chief national security and a author of the new book, the return of great power, russia, china, and the next world order, it is out now, and peter baker is back with us. peter, the biden administration is trying to walk a really difficult, thin line between supporting israel's fight against hamas and strongly encouraging them to protect civilians. how hard is that? >> very hard, beasley has been very successful up until now. pushing the president along that line, he is going further than he had before in saying he is going to leverage american support, maybe arms,

specifically american support for israeli response to his concerns over humanitarian issues and civilian casualties in gaza. he saw the beginning of the response. israel says it is going to open up the crossing in the north, gaza has been closed up until now. more humanitarian goods. the admin tells us that they expect more commitments by netanyahu's government in the hours and days to come, the demands made by the president will see how far they are willing to go and whether it is enough to satisfy the president. for now he is ready to take a stronger position that he had been urged to by other democrats for quite some time without completely cutting off support from israel. he doesn't really want to do, he wants netanyahu to respond to this. the push on his part in order to keep the support going. please let's talk about what respondent means, jim. in the last few hours, israel has agreed to increase

humanitarian aid delivery. is that going to be enough to repair the damage of the relationship with the u.s., we had to save the children on two nights ago, she describes the current situation in gaza as on earth . >> yeah, listen, gaza is facing the prospect of imminent famine , so the two pieces that the administration is demanding here, one is get more aid in, and you are seeing that immediate response, opening the erez crossing, opening the port, et cetera, but the other piece is to take substantive changes that detect civilians better and protect aid workers better. the fact is, the last 24 hours, we have seen other civilians killed by israeli airstrikes, so those changes have not taken place yet and israel has not yet articulated what those changes, what those new standards are going to be. we are still awaiting the results of israel's investigation of just how this deadly strike on world central

kitchen took place. that is the second piece. the administration is doing. we haven't seen israel's answer yet. >> jim, your book explores specifically the uncertain global world order and what the next world war could be. now is the tension between the u.s. and israel grows, so does the threat of a wider war with israel's bombing of an iranian embassy put complex this week, it is more and more complicated. i know you think a lot about the ongoing conflicts, how does this one fit in? >> no question, you see, when you think of the great powers, russia and china, their relationship with the u.s., you see russia and china to some degree watching america's troubles in the middle east here, drawn into a conflict there, drawn into a dispute, a very public dispute now with one of its closest allies as serving russia's interests in the region to occupy the u.s., distracted from the war in ukraine, create dissension in

the ranks, as it were, among the allies. and also present the possibility of a broader war this is straight out of the russian playbook, stir the pot, throw more fuel on the fire, so all of these events we are seeing their serving russia's interests in this broader great power conflict. by the way, russia is not just watching, it is contributing. it is meeting with hamas officials, sending missiles to hezbollah. this suits russia's interests, as well, in a broader great power conflict. >> peter, president biden just signed off on more arms for israel, congress is considering a plan to send jets there in the future. they say that these plans have been in the works for months, but do these plans undercut the message that the president just delivered to netanyahu today? >> well there is timing, right?

first you get the arms, then you get the pressure. so at the moment, the pressure on israel is to some extent alleviated because they don't have an immediate need for weapons since they had just gotten a shipment. but having said that, there is a risk on the part of the israelis, losing president biden because he is the one person in washington who is the most important to them and prosecuting this war because they have lost a lot of the democrats in congress, they have lost a lot of the american public. they have lost people inside the biden administration, it is the president who has been insisted that israel had the right to defend itself, it has a right to go after hamas, he just wants them to do a more cautious and careful way. so you don't see incidents like you did this week with the kitchen workers. >> gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. peter, jim, good to see you. when we come back it is time for our keynote conversation. we have said it many many times of the show, 2024 election is unprecedented. and our next guest wants to make sure the media treats it like one. you do not want to miss this important discussion when the

11th hour continues. i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's?

the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. options start at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate-lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information, and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling,

so call now for free information.

“look at all those snacks, you must be a king!” “i did just pay 60% less for my ticket with the gametime app.” “it's the best place to get last-minute deals on tickets.” “i guess i'm just a better fan than you.“ "(crowd cheering) i've got to get the gametime app.” “download the gametime app to get great deals on last-minute tickets.” there's so much noise surrounding the 2024 presidential race, it is only going to get louder before the next seven months. we all have to remember words matter in how we talk about these things matter. so with my next guest, an expert on american history said the media is talking about from versus biden all wrong, i knew

it was a conversation we needed to have on this program for tonight's keynote, i am proud to welcome rochon willits, offer and professor at princeton, also part of a group of historians and scholars that have met with president biden from time to time. all right, let's get started. thank you, what is the media getting wrong, how should we be approaching this? >> the treating this as a normal election. that is really the problem. just normalizing the process normalizing what is a situation. that is really the problem. let me just say i am saying this as a historian because you put into larger prospective on how you might want this. what is a normal election? in normal election with the political parties nominating a candidate, prospective candidates for an entire process, lots of bedding is changed over the decades but nevertheless, they name the candidates in the candidates will debate the issues and

different ideas to the american people, where they stand. and with a certain amount, nonetheless, that is what it is. that is not happening now. that is just not happening. >> okay, people might say okay, that is not happening. it is not that big of a deal. you are far more alarmed than that, you are historian, how would you compare what we are experiencing now to another point in history? >> let's start, there is nothing, nothing in american history that is anywhere close to what we are going through now. that is part of the problem. that is why it is so not normal. examples, okay? parties, political parties, we had a democratic party and a republican party the republican party doesn't exist in a group, as we knew it. >> yes, but one could argue the republican party has morphed to represent what republican voters want and that is donald trump i'm not disagreeing. that argument. you are saying we should be alarmed and scared

not telling you something is scary yet. >> okay, because donald trump, period. has not just moved and it turned in popularity, they have changed from a conservative party to a populist party, and a populist party is outside the norms of american history. we don't have that we have them at the local level, they come and go but not at this level and a populist candidate is someone who says that the people, the people, the people that they have, trump everything, as it were. more important than the constitution, more important than the rule of law. by the way, who did the people respond to? there is always a maximum leader, always a man who says i am the only person who can do this. >> and how should we be covering the selection? if it is this donald trump is a problem, you can't just say, we don't like this candidate so let's cover him. how should we be framing him?

>> it is an entire process, it is not just the candidate himself, it is what the candidate has to offer so he is talking about it. he is not talking in a normal way about leadership. yeah, he will maybe mention once in a while, that is not what is going on here. what is going on here that he is promising, listen to what he is talking about, they believe what he is talking about. he is going to be a dictator on day one or round up new guns, believe him. >> we do cover that everyday. >> because you have, why cover the primaries? there's nothing going on there. it is silliness. it is all the trappings, the trappings normalized trump. trump becomes something other than what he is because he looks like a normal candidate. he is not a normal candidate. >> this takes me to project 25, which many many people don't even know what it is, right? it was founded by the american heritage group, a right-wing group, filled with trump allies, that is not officially connected to the campaign. however, they have laid out a 900 page plan >> you got it. >> for what trump should do day one in office, and one of the

central tenants is to remove the guardrails that actually kept trump from going off the rails and getting a lot of really scary things done >> that the problem, they plan to get the executive branch. got everything and the allegiances to trump, not the country, not the constitution, but to trump. at every level. the federal reserve, pretty important institution, they're going to got it, they're going to put it. >> do you think people realize that? >> no, but i think that is what has to be covered. there's a lot of things, not so much how they cover things, it's what's not covered. and it's crazy. >> these are profound, profound differences because they're not just taking away the guardrails, it is promoting a system of government, a form of government that might call

itself democratic is essentially a liberal, anti- democrat, that is the problem. >> what do we do with all the people who are exhausted from being outraged? i'm guessing you would say, you can't be exhausted, there is too much at stake. >> i would say that. and i would address it to particularly people who may not be so exhausted, really, younger voters. younger voters think it is two old men running, i don't really care. >> they don't understand democracy being at stake. we donald trump is going to be able to appoint hundreds of federal judges throughout the system that are going to affect those kids lives, long after i'm dead. long after all of us are dead, that is going to affect their lives profoundly. dobbs is just the beginning. you're going to have a supreme court, you think it is rough now, right? 63, 72, you have to address younger voters who may not have more energy, for the last time. but point out the fact that this , that the stakes are that important for them or the rest of their lives.

and i think you'd be doing a good job. >> crucially important warning, thank you so much for being here. >> when we come back, a rare solar eclipse is getting ready to sweep the u.s. and it might be your last chance to see one for another 20 years. we are going to get into all of the eclipse excitement when the 11th hour continues.

“look at all those snacks!” “i did just pay 60% less for my ticket with the gametime app.” “it's the best place to get last-minute deals on tickets.” “i guess i'm just a better fan than you.” “(crowd cheering) i've got to get the gametime app.” “download the gametime app and use promo code viva to get $20 off your first purchase.” it's time to get away and cache in, at cache creek casino resort, to rock and to roll. to go all out or... go all in. with four stars and rising stars, northern california's premier casino resort is the perfect place... ...to do as much -or as little- as you want. make your get away now and cache in at cache creek casino resort.

the last thing before we go, tonight eclipse mania. we are just four days away from the total solar eclipse cities and towns along the path are along the path of totality are planning viewing events with festivals, art projects, even a mass wedding ceremony tomorrow. throughout the history of the clintons, they have left a lasting impression. savanna cellars has more. >> reporter: the live phenomenon of an eclipse.

>> whoa, that's crazy. >> reporter: has moved people throughout generations. >> never seen anything like this before. i would like to see it again. >> reporter: the eclipse has been a mainstay in american pop culture. >> we have to tell people. >> reporter: in society across civilizations, one of the earliest mentions found in epic of gilgamesh, from 2100 bce, written on ancient clay tablets. or more moderately, it has been used across media, taking on many forms, taking on different and contrast, hard to revoke suspense and reflection. to make us laugh. >> does anyone want to switch seats? >> seeing. dance. but experiencing a solar eclipse in the moment is nothing short of sensational.

please spectacular because not only to see it with the cloud cover, and a break, i think we had some good lighting. fully we really did, we were here for this. we were all here for this. >> we saw history! >> i was chanting, as well. i was lucky enough to join those guys in charleston back in august of 2017. we built our own pinhole project, but you don't need to do that, you do need to get eclipse glasses if you plan to look up in many places in the u.s. on monday, you will be able to see at least a partial eclipse, go to science.nasa.gov, plug in your z.i.p. code for the exact information. and on that out of this world note, i wish you a very good night. remember, you can catch the nightcap