[ no aud wroe ] they are forced to sort of come up with adaptations, particularly of the gridlock in congress. what the court has done hamstrings those agencies' ability to take those steps and makes it, i think, probably easier for businesses to operate without regard to those sorts of health and safety concerns. >> lots of deference given to the executive and big money. thank you so much. that's going to wrap up this hour. don't you worry, i will be right back here at 3:00 p.m. eastern. coming up next, andrea mitchell is going to talk to house speaker emeritus nancy pelosi and anthony fauci.

the biden campaign working to reassure voters after the disastrous debate while attacking the supreme court. this hour, reaction from nancy pelosi and south carolina congressman james clyburn. the trump legal team files a motion to postpone the former president's sentencing and the verdict in his hush money case, overturn the verdict because of the supreme court decision. mr. trump delaying his vice presidential announcement for now, to not step on the damaging headlines coming from the biden campaign. my interview with dr. fauci who worked for both presidents, biden and trump, in 40 years of government service. ♪♪ good day, everyone. i'm andrea mitchell in washington.

the president and his advisors are in full damage control after last week's disastrous debate. according to one source, mr. biden is feeling humiliated and lacking confidence. reading from a teleprompter, he came out swinging last night attacking the supreme court and his opponent. >> the american people must decide if they want to entrust the president once again -- the presidency to donald trump knowing he will be more emboldened. i will respect the limits of the presidential powers i have. >> officials are circulating their internal polling numbers. experts point out it's too early to reflect the full affect on the race. they are touting $38 million brought in since the debate from donors, senior biden campaign officials spoke to hundreds of top donors last night. admitting the debate was a missed opportunity.

katy tur obtained audio from someone on the call. >> five sources tell nbcs that four days after the debase, the president still has not called top democratic leaders on capitol hill to shore up their support or gauge their reaction. joining me now, gabe gutierrez. what is the campaign and the white house doing to reassure democrats and donors? >> reporter: the campaign is doubling down as it tries to reassure those donors. a conference call late last night. it lasted about an hour. it was presided over by top campaign officials. you heard one of them telling the donors to take a breath and they're not going to take a defensive posture as part of this campaign. as you said, the campaign is trying to argue that it has raised quite a bit of money

following that debate. four days after the debate, raising $38 million. also, getting some 800,000 first-time donors in the last quarter. it is also talking about the internal poll numbers that the campaign says show that the race is still very tight. the debate hasn't had much of an impact. one donor told us that they weren't really impressed with the campaign's reassurances. if president biden stays in this race, this donor says that they will end up giving their money to outside get out the vote groups. this donor added it didn't buy the campaign's argument that this was blown out of proportion by the media, even calling that argument, quote, pretty trumpian. >> gabe, thank you for that. privately, democratic donors and office holders and lawmakers have been voicing their concerns about president biden since

thursday night's debate. some of those are making those concerns public. debbie dingell says one interview isn't going to fix this. ed campaign needs to listen to us, those on the ground, and rhode island senator whitehouse spoke to a cbs affiliate yesterday. >> your honest reaction to the debate. >> i think like a lot of people, i was horrified. i think people want to make sure that this is a campaign that's ready go and win. that the president and his team are being candid with us about his condition, that this was a real anomaly and not just the way he is these days. >> joining me now, we are pleased to have nancy pelosi join us. thank you very much, madam speaker, for being here today. >> always a pleasure to be with you, andrea. >> so i guess the first question, we understand from our reporting, four different sources, that top leaders on the hill have not yet had a call from the president. have you spoken to president biden since the debate?

>> no, i haven't spoken to him since the debate. i have spoken to him regularly. every time he has been on the top of his game in terms of knowing the issues and what is at stake. we all have been in touch with people close to the president. it's not a question of not having an opportunity to make our concerns known or have some questions answered. i think we have to spend a little more time viewing what is at stake in this election. today is the 60th anniversary of the civil rights act. what the republicans are trying to do, the trumpians and the court, is to undermine our democracy. their project 2025 would undo much of what is in the civil rights act. what the court did with roe v. wade is very clear to people in terms of liberty and freedom for women.

what they did this week was so undermining of the democracy, so dangerous in terms of a particularly dangerous part, official acts cannot be used as testimony in unofficial investigations or trials. this is very dangerous. this is the week of the 4th of july. i always like to use markers. civil rights act today. 4th of july this week. a time when our founders, our visionaries had such a vision for the future that was about a democracy, not a king. what they did this week was to make it an imperial presidency, an imperial presidency. the beat goes on with their project 25. let's keep an eye on what is at stake and how important this election is. i've had every role. i've been the chair of the democratic national convention. i've been the chair in another

convention of the delegate selection process. i've been the chair of the california democratic party. i know how this all works. again, we have a great president with a great record. it's up to him as we go forward. but as we go forward, it isn't unusual for people to question strategy, tactics and the rest in a campaign. >> let me dial back for a moment. given your perspective and many democrats' perspective of what is at stake, it's an existential moment for the country, according to your perspective, if donald trump is elected, that would posit you have to have the most important campaign led by the most important nominee. do you have questions as to whether this was a one bad night or whether there is something more serious involved? whether he needs to be more

open -- more open about his -- if he does have a medical condition, if he is slipping. everybody knows there's an age issue. he certainly did the opposite of reassuring people with that high risk potentially high reward debate plan that they came up with. it backfired. >> you asked me to speak from my experience. my experience with joe biden is in all the legislation that we passed, to save the country with the rescue package, money in people's pockets, shots in their arm, children in school, people back to work, with the child tax credit, the infrastructure bill, rebuilding the infrastructure of america in a universal way where people can participate in those decisions, the trips and science act to make us self-sufficient, pact act to honor our veterans and help those affected by burn

pits, the list goes on. the ira. we have all these things that he was masterful in helping to write and to pass. he has a vision. he has knowledge. he has judgment. he has a strategic thinking and the rest. he has a bad night. again, i think it's a legitimate question to say, is this an episode or is this a condition? when people ask that question, it's legitimate, of both candidates. what we saw on the other side was a line -- i tore up the speech when he lied to congress on every single page of his state of the union. we should be tearing up what he said the other day, because it was a pack of lies. it's very hard to debate somebody when you have to undo or debunk everything they are saying. both candidates owe whatever test you want to put them to in

terms of their mental acuity and their health. both of them. >> arguably, president biden should have been prepared for the kinds of lies that he says and that we have reported that donald trump says and all the fact checking is that there were at least 30 lies and not answering questions and pivoting back to immigration whenever he could. there's no question about that. >> but there's no fact checking in real time. that's what the problem is. >> no argument there. >> i never would have gone on a stage with him because that's who he is. >> president biden should have been prepared for that. we have a little bit of a satellite delay. i apologize for that, madam speaker. at this point, there's no one who knows the donor community better than you. you are a legendary fund-raiser. there's no one who knows the

convention rules better than you. i have to ask you, what are you hearing from the large network of people about whether he is up to it? >> i hear mixed. some people are saying because donald trump is such an authoritarian and autocrat, we have to win this election. this is not a normal election where you want to win, if you don't, you cooperate and do the best you can for the country and hope to win the next time. this is something that is undermining our democracy. he must be stopped. he cannot be president. therefore, people are very concerned. it's split. some are like, well, how can we subject the process to what might be possible? others are, joe is our guy, we love him, we trust him, he has vision, knowledge, judgment,

integrity. integrity. the other guy has none of the above. of course, great empathy for the people. it's going to be up to joe biden to do what he thinks is -- there's no more patriotic person in our country than the president of the united states -- this president of the united states. nobody less than the former president. joe biden -- i trust his judgment. i think that -- i'm not a doctor. i can't say what happens three, four years down the road. but i think that in my experience, which is what you asked me, i think that he will continue to be a great president of the united states. >> does he have to show the doubters right now that he can do an interview, he can do a news conference, a town hall meeting, he has to do something off of the teleprompter? >> you are so right. i think my recommendation is for

him to have some interviews with serious journalists. you among them. serious journalists, no-holds-barred, any question is fair, and just sit there and be joe. show your values, show your knowledge, show your judgment, show your empathy for the american people. i think that that would be a great thing for him. not one, maybe two. a couple of those. i think that is essential. i think it is essential for them to do that. your suggestion is exactly right. >> are you surprised he hasn't called the lead -- >> i don't know if it was a question or suggestion, but right on point. >> are you surprised he hasn't called the leaders to reassure them or you? >> i have a really good rapport with him. i wasn't expecting a call. i do communicate directly with

his folks. i know that he hears what i have to say. i'm not one of those people over time that always had to say, i have to speak to the president himself, nor do i expect the president to always sa he has to speak to me. but let us again in this time of -- 4th of july, it's my favorite civic holiday of the year. it's so exciting to celebrate what our founders did and what our men and women in uniform have done to protect all of that freedom as we just observed, and the invasion of normandy. saw the president so brilliantly there. again, about a more perfect union. let us celebrate the anniversary of the civil rights act, not try

to undermine it with their protect 2025, undermining democracy. >> nancy pelosi, happy july 4th to you and yours, your family. >> happy july 4th to you as well. lovely to see you. coming up, i will discuss the president's campaign with jim clyburn, the co-chair of the biden-harris 2024 who played a role in the president getting the democratic nomination. new polling, including one just released moments ago, gauging the impact of last week's debate. steve kornacki is at the big board. >> in the last 15 minutes, doing this on the fly. i want to take you through three polls we have gotten in the last 24 hours, all conducted after the debate. what, if anything, has it done to the race? this came out this morning, usa today and suffolk.

trump ahead. before the debate it showed a 37/37 tie. that's small movement, but that's a four-point jump for trump. that's a net shift of three points in trump's direction after the debate. we had a poll that came out of new hampshire, a statewide poll. look at this. this is trump 44, biden 42 in new hampshire. the context for this is, new hampshire in 2020, joe biden won it by 7.5 points. in four previous polls in new hampshire this year -- it's not been polled that regularly. but in four previous polls since last december in new hampshire, biden has led all of them by margins ranging from 3 to 10 points. the first time in new hampshire, a poll that has trump ahead. it's a big shift -- this poll is at least from the 2020 result. this is not definitive.

but this suggests certainly the possibility of a post-debate shift away from biden. in the last few minutes, cnn has come out with a poll. it's so new we don't have the graphic in. we do have the screen. this is a cnn poll that came out. i'm looking at it right here. they have biden at 49%. this is among registered voters. donald trump at 43%. i did that completely wrong. it's 43 for biden and 49 for donald trump. you can see i'm scrambling a little bit here. 49/43, trump over biden. that's a six-point advantage for donald trump. the context is the last time cnn polled this was back in april. they found the exact same result back then. it was 49 to 43 trump over biden. remember when that cnn came out in april, it was dismissed by folks as an outlier. nothing else was showing it like

that. now in the context of the debate and what we see in the other polls i showed you, this 49 -- what a mess i made here. this 49/43, folks might be less eager to dismiss this as an outlier. we need to see more numbers, but that's three polls right now, two of them in the numbers suggest a shift away from biden. it's a six-point advantage for donald trump in this poll. that literally from cnn just came out in the last 15 minutes. apologies for the graphic. three polls now in 24 hours. i don't think you classify any of them as reassuring for the biden campaign. >> steve kornacki, thank you so much. coming up, how will the immunity decision affect the other trials against donald trump? that's next when "andrea mitchell reports" is back in 90

seconds. you are watching msnbc. seconds. you are watching msnbc of dawn. watch it make soap scum here... disappear... and sprays can leave grime like that ultra foamy melts it on contact. magic. new ultra foamy magic eraser. (aaron) i own a lot of businesses... so my tech and my network need to keep up. magic. 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.

dr. alvin -- excuse me, d.a. bragg's prosecutors have told the judge they don't object to the former president's request to postpone next week's scheduled sentencing because of the supreme court's immunity decision. the trump team is requesting that the verdict be set aside, claiming some of the evidence introduced in the trial should not be allowed. joining us now is columnist for

"the washington post" ruth mark markus and ruth vance. thanks. joyce, do donald trump's lawyers have an argument for postponing the sentencing and overturning the verdict? if they are successful in postpoing the sentence, what's the possible impact of that? >> the manhattan d.a. is wise to agree to postpone sentencing. that gives everyone the opportunity, including themselves, to brief the issues, to create a record so that when inevitable there's appellate review, the judge's decision is on a firm footing. it's very unlikely that donald trump has a significant issue. he will try to focus this in terms not of he is entitled to reversal because of the supreme court's decision, but he will argue that some of the evidence that prosecutors used, as you pointed out, should not have been admitted into evidence in

front of this jury and that that invalidates the verdict. prosecutors have a lot of responses, starting with, no, that's not the case. working through some technical legal arguments, including whether there was other evidence to support the verdict. lots of mileage to cover on this one. i don't think donald trump should be optimistic that this case will follow the trend in the supreme court. >> ruth, when it comes to using evidence from so-called official acts, justice amy coney barrett dissented. talk to me about her argument and what the long-term implications of the decision are. >> first of all, i completely agree with everything that professor vance had to say. this is yet another opening for donald trump's and the mischief the court hated.

what justice barrett argued was that it should have been permit permitted to bring in evidence of official acts even if you -- i'm sorry, i'm losing my train of thought. should be able to bring in evidence to prove criminal conduct. she thought the court had an unduly narrow view of the evidence permitted. that's relevant to the bragg prosecution. there's going to be an argument that whether tweets the president issued when he was president are official acts or unofficial. he has been all over the lot on that issue. the broader implications of this decision are really shocking. i thought the dissenters did a powerful job of laying that out. the court had concerns about wanting to make sure that

ordinary presidents aren't chilled in the effective and energetic prosecution of their jobs by being worried about criminal prosecution down the road. but they just went way too far in doing that in two ways. they set out this area of core absolute immunity. then they set out this presumption of immunity for other official acts. it just goes way too far to protect normal presidents and way too far to enable and really unleash donald trump if he is re-elected. >> joyce, do you agree with those who have said one of the more frightening aspects of this ruling -- it will hold. it does stand. it's the supreme court. is that his communications with his own justice department, some of which were really, according to the grand jury, according to the prosecutor and according to the jury, criminal acts. not the jury in this case.

but according to the grand jury and the judge were criminal acts that needed to be adjudicated. some of those communications to try to overturn the election with his own justice department, which is basically what richard nixon was found liable for. that's why he was impeached and stepped down. >> right. if richard nixon had seen this opinion, he would not have resigned. right? this changes the landscape entirely. the real problem here with this opinion is that it's written the way we are used to seeing legal opinions drafted. it sets out three different categories of presidential conduct. it sets up rules for when presidents get immunity. it cloaks it in this notion of separation of powers and protecting the prerogatives and power of the presidency. the problem is the way the supreme court applies its rules

to these different categories. there's overbroad protection of a president. and to the point that you are making, this notion that a president can insulate himself or herself from criminal prosecution simply by carefully picking their co-conspirators so that they are all members of the federal executive branch is a real road map for crime. the supreme court makes the point that they're not worried so much about the personalities involved. that's their way of saying, donald trump. but they should be. this is a road map for him in a potential next term. >> ruth, i was struck by clarence thomas in his concurrence, bringing up the legitimacy of the special prosecutor, jack smith, which seems to be, even though it's not part of the decision, giving a green light to the judge in florida where that is a live issue right now for her decision. >> it was a big you go girl to judge cannon in florida, who

seems to be taking this matter seriously. it was completely outrageous for justice thomas to raise this in this case. it hadn't been briefed. it hadn't been discussed except in a question that justice thomas threw out in oral argument. i thought he was out of line. i think it's going to give aid and comfort to judge cannon if she's thinking seriously, which they seems to be, about disqualifying jack smith. >> it was remarkable to read judge sotomayor writing, with fear for our democracy, i dissent. the whole experience of reading this was just remarkable. thank you for your legal opinions. i appreciate both of you. up next, veteran congressman and biden-harris campaign co-chair jim clyburn joining me. you are watching "andrea mitchell reports." this is msnbc. iberogast bloating iberogast thanks to a unique combination of herbs,

iberogast helps relieve six digestive symptoms to help you feel better. six digestive symptoms. the power of nature. iberogast. (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. when we're young, we're told anything is possible... ...but only a few of us go out and prove it.

witness the greatness of anna hall on a connection worthy of gold: xfinity mobile. only xfinity gives you the most powerful mobile wifi network, with speeds up to a gig in millions of locations. and right now, xfinity internet customers can buy one unlimited line and get one free for a year. get the fastest connection to paris with xfinity.

you could argue that joe biden would not have won the democratic nomination if not for jim clyburn. his endorsement after biden had lost iowa and new hampshire decisively. what is the veteran congressman now saying and hearing from his colleagues after watching thursday night's debate? joining me now is congressman james clyburn of south carolina, co-chair of the biden-harris 2024 campaign. congressman, it's great to see you. >> thank you very much for having me. >> you have said that the president was overprepared for the debate. are you confident that that was the only issue? was it over preparedness, badly preparedness, trying to memorize statistics rather than speak about his policies and his values, or is it something else? could there be another problem? >> as you may not, i did a lot of debating.

i was in our debating society. it's best in a debate -- i don't think you should get bogged down in statistics, in specifics, but to lay out themes and lay them out in such a way that you can deflect what may be coming from the other side. i noticed early on in the debate -- in the first question that the president seemed to be groping for numbers and for talking points rather than just laying out the theme of whatever the question may have been. on the other side, you had his opponent, nothing to do with the question and never offered any substance. joe biden has a life of experiences that's substantive when it comes to democratic principles and democratic

priorities. i thought he was short on that in this particular debate. whether or not the history of stuttering, other things that could come into play were the only reasons, i will tell you, i come the 21st of this month, i turn 84 years old. that makes me almost three years older than joe biden. there are times when i have my glasses on and i'm looking for them. these kinds of things happen. i will have to wait on the experts that are in medicine to give their opinion, because i'm not a doctor. i don't have no idea the extent to which all of this may have occurred. when you are 81 years old, you are not as nimble as you are at 21. >> let me ask you, you have a very special relationship with him, a very close relationship.

has he called you? >> i don't think so. i told his staff on friday morning -- or friday evening i left. i went to florida. then from there, i went directly to wisconsin. i spent the last two days there until midnight last night. i'm told i have a scheduled call with him later today. >> we would love to catch up with you after that. what are you hearing from your colleagues? you were on the floor on friday presumably. >> as nancy pelosi said earlier, it's mixed. i only had one from our colleagues to say to me they thought there should be some replacement. everybody else expressed

concern, but they dug in. i can tell you what i found in wisconsin, i did ten events in three cities, madison, milwaukee, and the democratic voters, the grass rooters, they are dug in on this. most of them are very sensitive to the fact that joe biden has a record that they want to see built upon and that his opponent has a report of being against everything that they feel is important to the future growth and development of this country and to the opportunities that they have for fulfilling dreams and aspirations and leaving the country for their children to be proud of. that's what i heard for the last three days. i think that is going to hold. joe biden may decide otherwise. but i think the people that i have been around the last three

days are dug in in their support for joe biden. >> congressman, how would you feel if there is a decision for him to step down? if he decides that and he has to decide that? or if the party pressures him to do that, how would you feel if they worked around and try to go around kamala harris because of her lack of high poll numbers and popularity and broadly based? do you think it is hers to have if it's not his? >> i will support her if he were to step aside. but i'm going to support her going forward sometime in the future. i want this ticket to continue to be biden-harris. then we will see what happens after the next election. no, this should not in any way do anything to work around miss harris. we should do everything we can to bolster her whether it's in

second place or the top of the ticket. >> congressman james clyburn, i want to thank you for your role, your late wife's role, the whole movement. it's the 60th anniversary of the civil rights act, something we shouldn't forget on this important day. i want to thank you for being with us today. >> thank you very much for remembering my late wife. i met her in jail while we were fighting to get the civil right act. >> that was called making good trouble. >> absolutely. >> thank you. up next, damage control. new nbc news reporting revealing what biden campaign officials are telling donors behind closed doors. you are watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc.

from pep in their step to shine in their coats, when people switch their dog's food to the farmer's dog, the effects can seem like magic. but there's no magic involved. (dog bark) it's just smarter, healthier pet food. it's amazing what real food can do.

biden campaign aides tried to quiet the concerns of donors in a conference call last night. the campaign invited a group of prominent conservative never trumpers to meet with senior campaign officials yesterday. joining us is charlie sykes, former editor and chief of "the bulwark" and adam chetlerson. charlie, you were listed at one of the former republican never trumpers who was part of the meeting. did people come out of that meeting reassured?

where are you on whether the president should continue on and step aside? >> that meeting was private. i'm going to keep the conversation confidential. i am where i have always been, which is that we can't continue the denialism and gaslighting. president biden has clear options right now. number one, he is either going to have to have a long-form press conference or a sit-down interview to prove that he still has it. we have to have credible medical information about his condition. if he can do that, there's a potential he can turn this around. if he is not able to do that and he has not done that so far, then i don't think that there's really any alternative. the american people saw what they saw. 50 million people saw with their own eyes. you can't simply say -- the party simply can't say to the public, ignore the evidence of your eyes.

right now, i think that the biden team is trying to create an alternative reality bubble in which they are denying the problem. they're going to have to confront it. this is not going away. >> i would only say the interview should be with chris -- kristin welker. she's done the late debate before this one and is a tough interviewer. adam, what more can the campaign do to alleviate worries about the president's performance? >> i agree with charlie. the concern was about the performance, the concern that many lawmakers have. what would be good is to see a better performance. i think the ability to speak without notes, without teleprompter in an interview format would be excellent. the president looked great and

energetic and on point in the rally in north carolina the day after the debate. that was a good start. i think more things like that, flood the zone with him, show him in his element, show him responding on policy questions, on legislative strategy, talking about his accomplishments, making the case for why four more years of his administration is the right direction for the country and for middle class families. >> adam, you worked for harry reid for years. you worked in the senate. how complicated would it be to try to replace him? if that were the case, would the party have to turn to harris if only because of the money? >> it's a very complicated question. it's complicated and at the same time simple. i think if everybody -- bought into that process, people will find a way to make it work. i would say that there's a lot of advantage to having some semblance of a process here so

that whoever the nominee is can say -- can claim legitimacy, not to have been anointed but to have been selected as the nominee by a process. it's not primaries, obviously, or caucuses, because there's not time for that. there can be a process by which the party collectively decides who it wants the nominee to be. i think if there is a nominee, that person should welcome that process because that is going to be what confers legitimacy on them, not just somebody who was anointed as the next person in line. >> charlie, what confidence would you have going forward very briefly if the president does not start doing interviews, news conferences and the like? >> i think that's a tell. staff will not put him out, will not reassure the public, then i think that they are going to continue to try to gaslight us about this. it will fail. i don't think we should be confident in that. if they are saying there's nothing wrong, there's no

cognitive decline, then show us that. that's what the american people want to see. they will make that judgment. either do what you have to do to provide those reassurances, or you have to go. i agree with adam, leaving now is messy, chaotic. but there's no alternative. when you eliminate the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable is the answer. that may be it. >> thanks to both of you. up next, dr. fauci on his experiences with presidents biden and trump and his long career in public service. you are watching "andrea mitchell reports." this is msnbc. and keeping it off? same. discover the power of wegovy®. ♪ ♪ with wegovy®, i lost 35 pounds. and some lost over 46 pounds. ♪ ♪ and i'm keeping the weight off. wegovy® helps you lose weight and keep it off.

i'm reducing my risk. wegovy® is the only fda-approved weight-management medicine that's proven to reduce risk of major cardiovascular events in adults with known heart disease and with either obesity or overweight. wegovy® shouldn't be used with semaglutide or glp-1 medicines. don't take wegovy® if you or your family had medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop wegovy® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis and gallbladder problems. wegovy® may cause low blood sugar in people with diabetes, especially if you take medicines to treat diabetes. tell your provider about vision problems or changes, or if you feel your heart racing while at rest. depression or thoughts of suicide may occur. call your provider right away if you have any mental changes. common side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. with wegovy®, i'm losing weight, i'm keeping it off. and i'm lowering my cv risk. that's the power of we.

♪ ♪ check your cost and coverage before talking to your health care professional about wegovy®. 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, and stop further 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. dr. fauci is known as the public face of the nation's fight against covid. those years fighting the pandemic were the capstone to nearly four decades of service to public service and public health. he led the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases as the leading infectious disease expert, advising seven presidents, facing down two global pandemics, covid and aids and his contributions saved millions of lives. being at the center of public crises made him what he calls a political lightning rod, a figure who represents hope to so many and evil to some, beyond my control, i became, he writes, a

symbol of the provide divisiveness in our country. dr. fauci explains it in his memoir "on call, a doctor's journey in public service." dr. anthony fauci is here with me now. it's great to see you again. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> the book is extraordinary. it tells the narrative of an amazing career of public service. i want to start with the contrast between presidents whom you have served, most obviously president biden and former president trump. you worked with president biden. you called him a no nonsense vice president, guided by integrity and empathy and a president actively inviting back and forth nonsense vice president, guided by integrity and empathy and a president actively inviting back and forth discussions who took what you were saying seriously. given your expertise and personal experience with him, what did you think of his

performance on thursday? >> well, you know, i can't comment on that, because that becomes a political issue. i can just comment about what i know about joe biden. >> what do you know about him? >> well, i know that he's a very insightful guy. when we brief him, he asks very probing questions, he's very reflective, he thinks about things, he is firm in his decisions, and he's a very positive experience of working with him and i worked with him on a much more regular basis during the two years i was in the white house with him in the sense we -- >> chief medical officer, he made you chief medical officer. >> indeed. and it was a very positive experience, one because he always wanted to know what the data was, he wanted to know the information. you don't go into the office with joe biden and just make a statement without being able to back it up because he'll question you, are you sure of that, where did you get that information, has that information been verified. it is a very good active back

and forth i had with him. it was a very positive experience. >> you never saw him in your experience just losing trains of thought? >> no, no. not at all. >> so let's talk about donald trump. >> all right. >> donald trump who, it can't be said often enough, lied in almost every answer and you about him, he wanted covid solutions that were not there and was obsessed with injecting bleach and you say this about your last call with him, he said what the eff are you doing, everyone wants me to fire you, but i'm not going to fire you, i like you, but so many people hate you because of what you're doing. the president talked over me, it was as if he was speaking to himself, rather than to me. did you have concerns about his ability? >> no, i don't think i had concern about his ability to express himself. i had disagreements with him. and that's it. >> but his thought process in coming to these conclusions that

were so nonscientific? >> again, andrea, i can't focus on what's in his head, i don't know. i can only -- i can only relate to you honestly what i said in the book is that in the first couple of months of the outbreak, he was listening to what we were saying and then when it became clear to him that the outbreak was not going to go away like magic, which he wanted it to, because he wanted to get on with the election cycle, he started to say things that were just not true. and i felt it was my responsibility not only for my own professional integrity, but for my responsibility to the american public to disagree publicly with some of the things he said and that was very difficult for me because i have a great deal of respect for the presidency of the united states, but that's what i had to do. so my experience with him was, you know, a bit somewhat contentious, but not only with him, but with his staff. he seemed to be able to brush off when i would say something that publicly clearly contradicted what he was saying,

like about hydroxychloroquine and how the virus would disappear. it was the staff around him that began to undermine me and tried to destroy my credibility because i was disagreeing. >> one of the prices you paid for all of that is the way you were demonized, in the public, the maga base, whoever, and living with threats against you and your family. threats that continued and that required security. what's that been like? >> well, that's been very disruptive of a normal life, i can tell you that much. for me, particularly, but also some reflection and overflow to my family, my wife and my children. you know, when you have people who are extremists and say, you know, very ridiculous things the way steve bannon and other people have said that, alex jones, well, it is just metaphor or symbolic and has nothing to do with reality, but when you say things like that, a very

small fraction of the population takes it seriously. and then that's when you get the threats. >> they were credible threats. >> yeah, couple of people are in jail because of that. >> anyone who would say that your conflict with president trump was political, you worked so closely with bush 41 and particularly with george w. bush on pepfar, which ended up, you know, being a program that helped save the lives of at least 25 million people in africa and he gave you the presidential medal of freedom, awarded that to you as just an example and wrote to you of how much you really would miss you and how much he loved you. >> i think that's a great example for the people, the extremists who say that when i was in the trump white house because i had to disagree with him because i felt my responsibility to the american public that i was trying to undermine trump, i was not. i had no antipathy to him, no intention whatsoever of undermining him. they say, well, that's because

of your political persuasion. anybody who knows me over the 40 years i was director knows i'm not a little person. i had as much important favorable contributory things with george h.w. bush and george w. bush than i had with anybody else. there was no difference in how i interacted with the bushes than i interacted with obama and that i interacted with clinton. so anybody that tries to create that narrative that i was somehow trying to undermine trump because of any political ideology is nonsense. >> and finally, hiv/aids, your journey through that, it is an extraordinary part of the book, it is how you welcomed the protesters against you from the aids community. and sat down with them and they -- larry cramer and others became very good friends. >> they did. and they pushed back on some of the established things, the mostly young gay activists, but

what they were trying to do was good things, you know. i think about it, and i describe it, you know, the iconic civil rights leader john lewis who said they made trouble in the civil rights movement, but they made good trouble. and the aids activist back then in the '80s, mid'80s, early '90s were making good trouble because they were trying to get us to appreciate things that made our activities better and actually more productive. so it was a very positive thing. unlike the kind of vitriol that we're seeing today. >> dr. anthony fauci, the name you were called until you became tony fauci. it is great to see you. thank you very much. thank you for your service. >> thank you for having me. >> and that was my conversation yesterday afternoon with dr. anthony fauci. and this just in, congressman lloyd doggett, democrat of texas, just called for joe biden to withdraw from the presidential race. he's the first sitting democrat we know of to publicly do so.

nbc news has been reporting at least four our democratic lawmakers have done so privately. that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." more next with chris jansing reports after this. ts." more next with chris jansing reports after this 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.

good day. i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. no road map, no guidance. nothing like it has ever been seen