it is good to be back with you on this second hour of "chris jansing reports." at this hour, a decision that dramatically reshapes the future of presidential power in this country. the supreme court ruling donald trump is partially shielded from prosecution in the january 6th case. the historic opinion by chief justice john roberts. plus, the scathing dissent from sonia sotomayor, calling the decision a loaded gun that basically makes the president a king. plus, what this all means for special counsel jack smith

and when now might this case finally go to trial. our legal experts are standing by. we're also getting new reaction from the trump and biden campaigns. how will today's decision impact an already tumultuous presidential race. our nbc news reporters are following all of the latest developments. let's get right to nbc news legal correspondent lisa rubin. give us the big picture, what this means for presidential power and equal responsibility under the law? >> chris, today the supreme court is taking off the table in large measure the possibility of prosecuting a president for what they do when they're in office, and the consequences for presidential authority are vast as some of the dissenters have noted. it means that rather than fearing prosecution after their conclusion of term in office, many presidents will be largely immune for what they do while they're in office. and that's because the court

took off the table anything that comes within a president's core constitutional authority. that's everything from the pardon power to vetoing legislation, to appointing and removing officers, and it even encompasses, for example, his direction of the department of justice as an executive agency. that's one bucket of allegations in this indictment that this court did give clear guidance on saying that the president is absolutely immune for the conversations he had with department of justice officials and his contemplation of removing the then acting attorney general at the time because that person didn't want to do what trump wanted him to do in terms of communicating to state legislatures that they could take back their certificates of electors. >> lisa rubin, thank you. today's decision included a powerful dissent from the three liberal justices. yamiche alcindor is outside the supreme court. the dissent is dramatic on paper, but apparently inside the court, it was even more so.

tell us about it. >> that's right. justice sonia sotomayor, you could feel the frustration. she read it aloud from the bench. she said the decision to give presidents absolute immunity on official acts makes a mockery of our founding principles and constitution. i want to read what she wrote, this new officials acts immunity lies about like a loaded weapon for any president who wants to put his political interests, and financial gain above the interests of the nation, even if these nightmare scenarios play out, and i pray they never do, the damage has been done. the relationship between the president and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. she went on to say the man in charge of enforcing laws can now just break them. ironic, isn't it. she said the president could order seal team 6 to kill a political opponent, take a

bribe, stage a military coup and she wrote, immune, immune, immune. justice sotomayor is very unhappy with the way the supreme court is ruling. we have a reporter inside, gary grumbach, while she was reading the dissent, amy coney barrett, one of the conservatives who voted to give immunity was staring about like a statue. we have justice clarence thomas, he seemed to have a hard time keeping his eyes open. at times he was leaning so far back in the chair, he was testing the limitations of the chair's flexibility. and roberts and alito were reading along with sotomayor while she was reading the biting dissent, and justices ketanji brown jackson looking into the gallery. this was a consequential moment where the supreme court expanded the powers of the presidency. chris. >> yamiche alcindor, thank you. well, former president donald trump is celebrating today's supreme court decision. nbc's vaughn hillyard is following this for us. what are we hearing from trump and his campaign? >> he has put out several social

media posts since this morning's decision, one in which he says in all caps, big win for our constitution and democracy. proud to be an american. of course, there are the short-term implications that has to do with the charges brought against him as part of the federal election interference indictment and part of the supreme court's decision was to state that he had absolute immunity from any conversations that he had with any department of justice officials. now, of course in that indictment, there were several instances in which they allege as part of an alleged conspiracy to defraud the u.s. that donald trump pressured doj officials to send letters to states claiming that there is election fraud in order to send alternate electors back to washington, d.c. to be counted. there is another allegation in this indictment that he made the statement very directly to the department of justice officials that they were to make the claim that there was corruption and that the rest should be left to

him and republican congressional figures to figure out, and so because of that absolute immunity, he will have cover. at the same time, he is facing evidentiary hearings as part of this trial, as it's sent back to the district court under judge chutkan. those evidentiary dates have not been set. they could come potentially before november's election. of course for donald trump, one of the parts of this, though, is the reality that trial on its face will not be taking place until after the 2024 election. and of course, there is major implications potentially on what a second term for the trump presidency could look like as well, chris. >> vaughn, you stick around. you'll be back later in the show. let's head to the white house now, and nbc's aaron gilchrist. what's the reaction from the biden campaign? >> they are essentially saying donald trump just became more dangerous. that has been a core tenant of the campaign, really from day one that donald trump presents a

great danger to america if he were to win a second term in office. the campaign has been focused on trying to communicate that medication. we know the campaign held a call a little while ago for the press really to talk about this supreme court decision and the deputy campaign manager said that they just handed donald trump the keys to a dictatorship. that's the messaging that the campaign is really focusing on now, and saying that the president will now go out and try to impress upon americans that there should be fear about donald trump becoming a dictator were he to win a second term in office, and i do want to share with you part of a statement that we did receive from the campaign earlier today in the minutes after that decision came down from the supreme court saying that today's ruling doesn't change the facts. so let's be clear about what happened on january 6th. donald trump snapped after he lost the 2020 election, and encouraged a mob to overthrow the results of a free and fair election. that statement went on to say that he thinks he's above the

law and is willing to do anything to gain and hold on to power for himself. i think that really, chris, describes the sort of message you're going to hear from campaign surrogates, from president biden himself as he continues to go about the country over the next four months, at least that's according to what the campaign said to us today on this call, and we know that they're working to fund raise all of this moment in history as well. there have been fundraising e-mails that have gone out from the campaign to his supporters saying that folks should donate more because if trump wins he'll be an even more dangerous and unhinged person. that's the position from the campaign, chris. i wouldn't anticipate a real robust statement of any sort from the white house on this as this is still a part of an active case and the white house has tended not to comment on cases that are in the courts. >> aaron gilchrist, thank you. in 90 seconds, justice neil gorsuch said this would be a ruling for the ages. what impact will today's

decision have on america's trust in the supreme court. in the supmere court (restaurant noise) allison! (restaurant noise) ♪♪ [announcer] introducing allison's plaque psoriasis. she thinks her flaky, gray patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. over here! otezla can help you get clearer skin and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing otezla for over a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting.

some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. ♪♪ [announcer] with clearer skin girls' day out is a good day out. live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. (aaron) i own a lot of businesses... so my tech and my network need to keep up. thank you, verizon business. (kevin) now our businesses get fast and reliable internet from the same network that powers our phones. (aaron) so whatever's next... we're cooking with fire. (vo) switch to the partner businesses rely on. at its core, today's immunity decision had to address a critical question for the future of democracy. what can be done when a person who took an oath to defend the rule of law in the united states instead breaks those laws. in her dissent, justice ketanji brown jackson wrote departing

from the traditional model of individual accountability, the majority has concocted something entirely different, a presidential accountability model that creates immunity and exemption from criminal law, applicable only to the most powerful official in our government. the ruling adds an obstacle for a trial jack smith planned to begin months ago. joining me now, professor of history at rice. jennifer palmieri, former communications director for hillary for america and cohost of msnbc's "how to win 2024" podcast. i want to look back for a moment, doug, about what donald trump said about presidential immunity while on the campaign trail earlier this year. >> you have to give a president immunity, otherwise take a look at harry truman, he wouldn't have done -- if you think hiroshima, not a nice act but

did end the second world war, probably, nagasaki, i don't want to do that because my opponents will indict me! >> i wonder what you think this ruling signals about how donald trump might approach a second term. >> well, it's deeply disheartening, and there's really nobody who could claim that our founders, the people who wrote our constitution wanted a president to have this kind of power, this sort of immunity. it's a big win for trump. and somebody like him who's a reckless operator, god only knows what damage could be done. i mean, he is going to be filled with hubris. if he thinks he can use his justice department if he got reelected to go after ex-presidents, you know, clinton and biden. he could go after, you know, former fbi agents, cia people. it's a big step forward to

having an authoritarian president, and i find it a sad moment that our supreme court came down with this ruling, but we still don't know all the ramifications of how this will play out down the line. the big thing is it's a day that donald trump can celebrate because this isn't going to come up before the election now, except biden will fund raise on it and say the stakes are high, you're going to get an authoritarian trump with immunity, ran into him by right wing supreme court if you don't elect me. >> jennifer, senate majority leader chuck schumer posted this reaction. this is a sad day for america and our democracy. the very basis of our judicial system is that no one is above the law. treason or incitement of an insurrection should not with considered a core constitutional power afforded a president. does this change the stakes in the eyes of voters, and how do democrats message this?

>> i did "meet the press" yesterday and on saturday we do a prep call, and david gellis the executive producer, the immunity case, it's such a big deal. will it change the election. you know, things can't get anymore amped up and then it happened, you know, sad day. it's five alarm fire. i mean, when you read sonia sotomayor's dissent, and she says the president could have seal team 6 kill a political rival, and he would be immune. trump's supreme court has decreed him a king, and now it's just up to voters to say do you want -- there are no guardrails now, second term for trump, there are no guardrails. >> the chief justice says, and i read this in the last hour, that this is a chilling doom scenario that the dissenters are making, wholly disproportionate to what the court actually did today.

>> and what assurance does anyone in america have that that supreme court would ever tell this man no? you know, i mean, this is just -- it's not anything i ever expected to see. i had no notion that america was on this kind of collision course. i think for the baden campaign and for people who, you know, after the debate we see the voters seem to be hanging in there with him, and i think now people, i think that this is going to dramatically change the race in biden's favor in terms of people understanding. they just said he could be king. you know, they are never going to tell him no. and there is one way to stop him, and that's to elect biden. >> if i can just say, i have known you for a long time. >> i know. >> way way back to some of my earliest campaigns in the '90s. or maybe early 2000s. . >> yeah. >> i worked in the white house when you were there.

i sat in your office, and we had conversations at times of great national import. i don't know if i've ever seen you this emotional. >> it is. it's so scary. it's just, it's like, yeah, it is. i mean, when you read, you know, everyone needs to read the dissents about what this could actually mean, and like, when sotomayor says, it's so chilling when she goes through the things he could do. he would consider to be official act of office. and of course justice roberts, you know, couches this to try to make it seem as if there's some kind of limits here, when have they ever limited him. it's terrible that this impacts jack smith's trial, the underlying case, but i feel like that's kind of beside the point in terms of what they're signaling they're going to allow this president, you know, if trump is elected, that president to do. >> this has been, doug, and maybe understating a little bit, an emotional time for a lot of people. an emotional time from what they

saw on thursday, an emotional day today in a ruling that maybe went beyond what they thought potentially even their worst case scenario realistically might be. i want to read for you, doug, what the "wall street journal" said. no case to date has put trump's personal interests in the hands of the justices he appointed and from who he has expected a sympathetic hearing. two other justices have familial ties to the cause. justice clarence thomas's wife, ginni thomas, urged white house steps to block biden from taking office. justice samuel alito's wife flew flags at the couple's homes like those carried by january 6th rioters, the justice has said. this is the "wall street journal." what does this likely mean for the public's view of, trust in, and how history will judge this court? >> well, history is going to judge that 2016 election as the pivotal moment when donald trump

beat hillary clinton, he was able to then come in and put those three supreme court justices on, and they were ardent, right wing conservative federal society justices. i don't think anybody should be shocked by what the supreme court said today in the sense that it's 6-3. we're living in a hyperpartisan time and the fact that trump got three justices and if he becomes president again, could get a fourth, tells you we're living in a, you know, we're going backwards in time here. but the supreme court's been in crisis. i mean, fdr, after he won in 1936 election and he tried to pack the supreme court, he tried to add justices to it, but he had his own party reigning them in. the problem today is the republican party is just celebrating. they have no desire to reign trump in. they want the supreme court to act in a hyperpartisan way and

they're getting the goods. i use the word sad. we could get more, you know, deep wounded about it, but the reality was since they got those justices on, this has been a -- we've seen roe v. wade disappear. we have seen affirmative action disappear. we decided what they decided in the supreme court about chevron, gutting environmental laws. we're living in a time of revolution. it's a -- where the power of the presidency is gaining, and if trump wins, he could possibly, probably would have supreme court in his hip pocket, the senate in congress, and that is a frightening scenario. i don't know where one checks him at that point. >> there's that old saying, jim, don't get mad, get even. but i do wonder, if this has a motivating impact, especially for some democrats who felt maybe after thursday, i don't

know if i can really get into this. i don't know if i can put my heart and soul into the race, and does it have the opposite, what's going on with the president, and still a decision that has to be made, and we haven't seen a reading off a teleprompter, a speech that was written for him. does this get lost in that? >> oh, i don't think this gets lost this that, when people are following along. i don't think any decision gets lost because it's just so, and wow, fourth of july week. they basically said, you know, again this was justice sotomayor saying -- they're saying the president can be a king, and doug said, as an authoritarian model. so i don't think -- i don't think, and i did before it happened on saturday, i just don't know that this is going to really ratchet things up anymore. everything is ratcheted up and things are divided but it's so

chilling to read the actual decision and then to understand the impacts that the minority opinion puts in there, that i do think it is -- it will be part of the other conversation, and i think, you know, when you -- it's like this really isn't about individuals. this is about a larger principle, and i can see republicans who maybe never in their life thought they would vote for a democrat, you know, voting for biden after this. i think that it just -- and i don't know if the supreme court, i mean, presumably they thought they were helping him in some way, and by releasing this so late in the -- >> in the term. >> yeah, but i just -- i think it's going to have an opposite effect. the argument against him is none of this is spin. none is hyperbole. he has project 2025. he said what he's going to do, and the supreme court is told

there are no guardrails. if it's official, you don't need to be held accountable. >> jennifer palmieri, please stick around. doug brinkley, always great to have you on the program. thank you. still ahead, one of the officers who defended the capitol on january 6th reacts to the news that donald trump has been given at least partial immunity. >> for most people january 6th happened for a few hours. for those of us who were in the thick of it, it has not ended. t. wait for insurance to approve

a test or approve a medication. we didn't have to worry about any of those things thanks to the donations. and our family is forever grateful because it's completely changed our lives.

dave's company just scored the

comcast business 5-year price lock guarantee. high five! high five... -i'm on a call. it's 5 years of reliable, gig speed internet... five years of advanced security... five years of a great rate that won't change. yep, dave's feeling it. yes. but it's only for a limited time. five years? -five years. introducing the comcast business 5-year price lock guarantee. powering 5 years of savings. powering possibilities.

for the former officers who were beaten on the capitol on january 6th, 2021, today's supreme court ruling is personal. >> it was for a prolonged and desperate struggle that riders attempting to breach the capitol were shouting trump sent us. i heard officers screaming in agony. i could feel myself losing oxygen and recall thinking to myself, this is how i'm going to die. joining me now that former capitol police officer, sergeant . he is author of the book, american shield, the immigrant sergeant who defended democracy. it's good to have you back on the program. chilling to her that testimony

of yours once again, and in that context and in the context of the court just ruling that donald trump, the man you've said sent a mob to tear down the capitol has some immunity in some potentially significant parts of the january 6th case, i wonder how you're feeling right now? >> today's decision is unprecedented and deeply disappointing, you know, given the fact that on january 6th, those elected officials who are defended have sided with the strained rhetoric, and especially with mike johnson and mitch mcconnell. they continue to down play what happened on january 6th and on january 6th, january 7th, they know what was possible, and they did so on the floor of the chamber, and to even state that the former president will face the justice system once he left office and today the supreme

court had a line with the same sentiment with mike johnson and mitch mcconnell, and not to hold the president accountable for. nobody wants to hold donald trump accountable for his actions, and they continue to down play, whitewash, and excuse his criminal conduct, and that's insane. that is very disappointing, and it is a desecration of the sacrifice that the officers like myself performed on january 6th. it's very troubling. because all the guardrails of democracy, the pillar of our judicial system where in the past has been said that no one is above the law, including the former president, and today's decision, they show otherwise that, yes, there is somebody who is above the law, and that's the president. while they fail to see and

realize is they themselves could be the target of the next mob, the next january 6th could be the target, could target the supreme court, not just the capitol, and that's very unfortunate because once they see that that was not a walk in the park, that it was not hugs and kisses that we were receiving in the tunnel while we were fighting for our lives and defending those officials, it was not something to reckon with, something that should be avoided at all costs. >> harry dunn obviously your former colleague, another capitol hill police officer said recently that donald trump is already planting the seeds, he believes, for another january 6th, or that could lead to another january 6th. i wonder if you share that concern and how consequential you see the stakes of this election in light of that? >> i mean, it's something very

possible. i mean, january 6th has not gone away for a lot of the officers like myself, while we continue to be involved with cases in federal courts. and today, the decision is very disappointing, like i said. you know, what has donald trump done to quell the political rhetoric. nothing. him and his maga ally enablers continue to excuse, whitewash what happened on january 6th, pretending that nothing happened, but on january 6th, they were running for their lives with the time and effort that we did. and today we have that political environment still with the same variables where the former president and his enablers have continued to pretty much given them the license of and make it

possible for future people to do the same thing that they did on january 6th without facing any consequences, especially the former president himself. >> sergeant gonnel, thank you so much for being on the program. >> what does the ruling mean if there's a second term. we may be getting a a -- preview. >> senior members of the justice department will be imprisoned for many many years. isoned for many many years. pickle! yeah, aw! whoo! ♪♪ these guys are intense. we got nothing to worry about. with e*trade from morgan stanley, we're ready for whatever gets served up. dude, you gotta work on your trash talk. i'd rather work on saving for retirement. or college, since you like to get schooled. that's a pretty good burn, right? got him. good game.

thanks for coming to our clinic, first one's free. [introspective music] recipes. recipes that are more than their ingredients. ♪ [smoke alarm] recipes written by hand and lost to time... can now be analyzed and restored using the power of dell ai. preserving memories and helping to write new ones. ♪

now that the supreme court has spoken on the issue of presidential immunity, what will it mean if trump is reelected. we may have gotten a preview from steve bannon, one of the architects of donald trump's 2016 campaign. in an interview with nbc news, he outlined what he called the future of the maga movement, which includes a campaign of retaliation against the justice department. in his justice department, to do what they should do, to start investigations of how the justice department weaponized the legal system against the maga movement and president trump and his followers. there's plenty of time for that. i understand it upsets people at msnbc when i say this, this is going to happen. i'm a betting man, and i believe merrick garland, lisa monaco, and senior members of the justice department will be

imprisoned for many many years. >> joining us now, sarah matthews, former trump white house deputy press secretary who testified before the january 6th committee. andrew weissmann, former senior member of the mueller probe, nyu law professor, and msnbc legal analyst. also back with us, nbc's vaughn hillyard. sarah, do you think that's just bluster from steve bannon who blusters a lot, or is he telling us what they're capable of? >> i think we should definitely take everything that steve bannon said very seriously, and look, trump has basically said that he wants to go after his political rivals as well. and even just the other kay, he re-posted an image on his truth social saying that liz cheney is quote guilty of treason and that she should quote be prosecuted and televised military tribunals. these are the kinds of things we're talking about in a second trump term. i do take it very seriously when

one of trump's top advisers, steve bannon is out there saying this is their plan. >> bannon name checked you in the interview. he's no fan of the mueller investigation, as you know. what do you make of these threats of retaliation, and what does it mean for our system? >> well, there are a number of things that are deeply upsetting about it. leaving me out of this, the one, we have a system of laws. and i'll get to the supreme court's view of that in a moment. but you don't weaponize, you know, that's just not what you do. the facts and the law still matter. so you can't just say this is what's going to happen. facts matter. you can sit there and say, oh, they should go after merrick garland and lisa monaco. that's maybe a bumper sticker. what are the facts to support that? what is the evidence to support that? the charges against donald

trump, the only one that's been allowed to go to trial, evidence was presented and a jury determined those facts beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously. the same way that steve bannon is reporting to jail today, and is also awaiting trial in a second case. i think one of the things that's particularly upsetting is the supreme court's actions today where they said that a president's interactions with his or her attorney general is absolutely immune. and that's in the face of the things that we're hearing from donald trump would know the allegations with respect to what he was doing during january 6th. to say that's absolutely immune, let me give you a hypothetical. imagine that there was a video tape, and let's see remove donald trump, where just a president is on video tape saying to the attorney general, i want you to bring a bogus criminal case where i'm saying there is no evidence, i want you to bring that against my

political adversary, and let's assume that's on tape, is the supreme court's decision today where it says communications, those are official actions, the president communicating with an attorney general, that's absolute immune, that is literally how the decision today reads. >> i think it's important to talk a little bit more, vaughn, about what steve bannon had to say. he is going to prison for defying a january 6th subpoena. you interviewed him just before he turned himself in. what else did he tell you? >> i mean, if donald trump gets back into office, too, he would be able to pardon steve bannon. this is another element of this here, and there's questions over whether there will be a potential reckoning of january 6th in the capitol attack or not, if donald trump is elected again. and steve bannon, that's where he makes the case that the maga movement goes far beyond. we saw the elections in france. there is people outside of donald trump that are looking to

have an impact. i want to let you listen to a little bit more of my exchange because steve bannon, the reason he's going to prison is because he defied the congressional select committee that was investigating the january 6th attack, and therefore he never had to answer questions about what he was doing at the willard hotel, and about what and how he was trying to keep donald trump in power. he had two phone calls on january 5th with donald trump that lasted 17 minutes. me talked with donald trump the morning of january 6th and that evening as well. take a listen to me attempting to ask him about those calls. >> what were you talking about in those calls? >> they were personal and private conversations. >> what about january 6th, you talked twice on january 6th. >> he's exerted executive privilege on that. you were not asserting -- >> hang on. >> on january 6th, you talked to him that morning. >> that's all to be determined. >> vaughn, hang on, that ought to be ascertained by the court. >> steve bannon said he wanted

to talk about january 6th, he wanted justice, he wanted january 6th to be adjudicated, at the same time in the interview, he said the january 6th prisoners, the defendants should be released. steve bannon has a microphone with his war room podcast. we feel it's important to talk to people like steve bannon. there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of americans tuning into this, a key source of disinformation, yet he has a direct pipeline to donald trump and his allies, those in the republican party understand that steve bannon is going to have an important part of any trump second administration and beyond. >> i wonder, what you think, sarah, and i'm not trying to ask you as a legal analyst or expert or as a person close to all of this, your gut feeling when you heard what the decision was today, and i wonder if these kinds of threats from people like steve bannon make you nervous? >> yeah, this decision was really disheartening because obviously this is just going to

delay this trial until after the election, and i do think that voters deserve to know heading into the polls if one of the candidates tried to overturn the previous election, and so they're not going to have that information to operate on. thankfully we'll have the facts from the january 6th committee that voters can use making that decision, heading to the polls. and i do think that the biden campaign needs to prosecute this case a little bit more vigorously in the court of public opinion as well, and they need to be reminding voters, that hey, this ruling is going to embolden trump if he's sent back to the white house and gets another term. i do think they are going to do everything they can to reshape our government as we know it. and that will include enacting revenge on political enemies like people from the previous administration, if trump is elected to a second term. so they will go after people from the biden administration. they'll most likely go after president biden. they're going to go after members of the january 6th

committee, and they're probably going to go after witnesses like myself and others who have been outspoken against trump. and so, yeah, that is definitely a concern of mine, but that's why i have been speaking out because this is so much bigger than just me, and there's so much at stake. and so i have been using my voice to try to get that message out there, and i'm hopeful that the biden campaign now will use this to remind voters, hey, look, this election is going to be about democracy. that's what's on the line here, and so today's ruling is a good reminder of that to the american people. >> all of these things, andrew, that play into how people feel about the justice system in america, their confidence in the justice system, includes what you mentioned, which was a conviction of donald trump and next week, we're going to get a decision on sentencing for donald trump in that context. does it become even bigger than it was before?

after we've seen what happened today, and what was said today. >> you know, i think it does because in any functioning democracy, and i would not include our country in that category because i don't think that if you compare how we have held leaders to account, we have really done a poor job compared to other so-called western democracies where leaders are held to account. it would have been so nice to have defendant trump have his day in court in the four cases. and let the people decide and the juries decide, and not do it based on hyperbole. and on either side of what's going on. like let's have a natural trial. that has been something that donald trump has fought. that is something the supreme court has aided. and so i agree with you that the manhattan case which is the only one that's going to see the

light of day, it will be important. one of the reasons it would have been so important to have other cases is because donald trump is going to say, oh, that's just a new york jury it's an aberration. it's a judge who's conflicted. it would have been nice to have all of the cases heard, and by the way, for him to get all of his rights as a defendant. i mean, that's part of his system. instead, i really think we are running, in many ways as a banana public. we are not holding our public leaders to account, with all of the due process that's entailed. >> i'll ask you for a short answer. the special counsel said no comment on this decision, and do not expect us to have a written statement. does the special counsel need to say something given the stakes here? >> you know, i've always advocated that i think the special counsel should speak more. there are limits because it's an ongoing case.

the one thing that seems clear is there will be some sort of hearing that this supreme court has said that the district court can have. i would expect that you're going to see filings by both sides with respect to that hearing. >> andrew weissmann, vaughn hillyard, sarah matthews, thank you all. up next on "chris jansing reports," the conflicting take on presidential powers from one of the men on donald trump's short list as a running mate.

one of the candidates vying to be donald trump's running mate, senator j.d. vance calls today's supreme court ruling a massive win, not just for trump but the rule of law. and in an interview yesterday, vance stressed the importance of presidential immunity, although he was less clear about whether it should apply to president biden. >> so you do believe that a president could pardon himself for federal crimes? >> i believe that the president has broad pardon authority,

margaret, but more importantly, i think the president has immunity. it's not about whether he should pardon himself, it's about whether he can be prosecuted for discharging his duties. >> in a trump vance, would your justice department prosecute joe biden, and if so for what? >> that would be the responsibility for the attorney general, margaret. >> carlos curbelo is a former republican congressman, jennifer palmieri is back with us. i wonder what you make of j.d. vance. it seems like, yes, to one president, maybe no to another? >> the gymnastics that some of these republicans will go through, especially if they're auditioning to be donald trump's running mate. i mean, conservatives have for decades, maybe even longer, advocated for limited government, for limiting the executive especially, and now they want more presidential power including pretty much

absolute immunity, and they want to support weaponizing the department of justice to prosecute political enemies, so it's that kind of republican party these days. if you want to be donald trump's running mate, you got to say what he wants to hear. >> so let me ask you about another vp possibility here, jen. north dakota, governor doug burgum, he was on "meet the press" yesterday, you were on "meet the press" yesterday. i want to ask you about your reaction when he made this claim? >> donald trump at the end of his term on january 20th left the white house. we had a smooth transition. and i think it's fair -- >> january 6th wasn't exactly a smooth transition, governor. >> i think we have to say that there was a smooth transition, and everybody in both parties is going to challenge elections if they don't think they're fair. >> i think we have to say there was a smooth transition. i wonder what you make of what is clearly an audition process

to be vp for donald trump? >> i mean, it was jaw dropping when i heard him say that. to describe the post election period as a, what did he say, smooth transition? >> smooth transition, he said it twice. >> smooth transition process. i mean it's cringy and appall to go watch him, rubio, j.d. vance, the machinations they go through. obviously i have zero insight into what and who trump would pick, but, you know, it does seem like money is important to him, and doug burgum's got access to a lot of it. by the way, a very lovely wife, like she would be an asset on anybody's campaign trail. these guys contort themselves. >> having said that, i'm not sure that donald trump feels like, carlos, he needs a vice president to help him in any way. we do know he values loyalty,

there is a question, and i ask this seriously given what happened to mike pence why there wouldn't at least be some level of questioning or nervousness to be a vice presidential running mate for somebody who has been so clearly able to be dismissive of people when they disagree with him. >> well, that's right, chris, and look, donald trump will put you to the test. he demands absolute immunity in everything he does, whether it's official functions, you know, personal matters. he demands absolute loyalty from the people around him, especially from someone like his vice president, and of course, as you said, we saw what happened to mike pence. mike pence was extremely loyal until he was finally asked to do something he was unwilling to do and he was literally hung out to dry. these guys have to know what

they're getting into. i think for a lot of them, the mentality is, hey, let me just get it, and we'll figure it out. sure, that's an approach you can take, but the risks are very high, and mike pence can tell us all the story. he has many times. >> carlos curbelo, jennifer palmieri, thank you so much. that's going to do it for us this couple of hours. make sure to joining us for "chris jansing reports" every weekday, 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. a lot more to talk about. our coverage will continue with "katy tur reports" next. inue wi "katy tur reports" next. the itch and rash of moderate to severe eczema disrupts my skin, night and day. despite treatment, it's still not under control. but now i have rinvoq. rinvoq is a once-daily pill that reduces the itch and helps clear the rash of eczema - fast.

some rinvoq patients felt significant itch relief as early as 2 days. some achieved dramatic skin clearance as early as 2 weeks. and many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin. 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. help heal your painful skin - disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. sara federico: at st. jude, we don't care who cures cancer.

we just need to advance the cure. it's a bold initiative to try and bump cure rates all around the world, but we should. it is our commitment. we need to do this. what if we don't get down in time to get a birthday gift for zoe? don't panic. with etsy we can find the perfect gift, and send her a preview right away. thanks guys. [ surprised scream ] don't panic. gift easy with etsy.

good to be with you. i'm katy tur. it is hard to read the supreme court's majority decision on presidential immunity with an eye toward the future, when it has such a major effect on the present. that is exactly what the six conservatives on the supreme court are mostly asking you to do. i say mostly because justice amy coney barrad