for palestinians. there's a lot of shooting that is going on here. according to the idf, one of the main challenges they are facing here is a highway of tunnels that run underneath the border with egypt, which is only just a couple of meters behind the camera. all the way underneath here, into rafah which runs into a tunnel system further into the gaza strip, it has been carrying in contraband and weapons for years now. that's one of the things that they are very carefully trying to dismantle. you can hear there still a lot of shooting going on. the idf of said they are entering into a third phase or a phase c of their fight in the gaza strip. that is kind of allusive. we are still hearing, as you can here, a lot of fighting. there's a lot of action and a lot of destruction that still is going on. hamas, according to the israelis, friends of the idf, is still very much active here. matt bradley, nbc news, psaki,

gaza strip . >> is going to do it for me today. we will be back next saturday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. prime weekend is next. next. top stories. ♪. >> i am sitting at on this

special edition of alex wagner tonight. in the last hour we heard from the president of the united states in his first extended on- air interview since last week's debate. 22 interrupted minutes. president joe biden standing firm, despite concern, even among those in his party, he is staying in the race, he is the man who can defeat donald trump in november. in an exclusive interview d wit abc news anchor george stephanopoulos, president biden was asked about his fitness to serve. >> elections are about the le future, not the past. about tomorrow, not yesterday. the question in so many peoples minds right now, can you serve effectively for the next four ct years x expect george, i am the guy who put nato together and the future will only be fu expanding. i did things no what the could happen. i put together a south pacific initiative and i am the guy who got 50 nations not only in york but outside of europe to help ukraine. i am the guy that got the japanese to expand their budget. i mean, for example, when i decided we needed computer chips, the computer chip, so we

are down to virtually nothing. -- i convinced south korea to invest billions of dollars. now tens of billions of dollars being invested in the united states, making us back in a position where we can be strategic. >> addressing his poured performance at the debate, biden said he had a cold and it was just a bad night. ju >> i guess the question or problem is for americans watching, as you said, going back to 2020, watch me. o for people who are concerned about your age, you know, 50 million americans watched that debate, it seemed to confirm fears they already had. spent look, after that debate i did 10 major events in a row, including until 2:00 in the morning after that debate, i did event in north carolina. i did events in georgia, i did r events like this, large crowds,

overwhelming response, so i just had a bad night. h i don't know why. >> biden reiterated nothing will convince him to step down from the race unless, in his words, the lord almighty comes , down. at one point, george stephanopoulos asked him to reflect. >> are you sure you are being honest with yourself when you say you have the mental and physical capacity to serve another four years. >> yes, george, the last thing i want to do is not be able to do that. i think as some senior economists and senior foreign- policy specialists say, if i stop now, go down in history as a pretty successful president. no one thought i could get done what i got done. >> are you being honest with yourself, as well, about your ability to defeat donald trump right now? >> yes. yes, yes, yes. s. >> i will hear more from

president biden as he continuesd to campaign next week when he is expected to hold the solo news conference are the nato summit in washington. joining us now is nbc's in your newness reporter and white house correspondent, who was with the president in wisconsin ahead of the abc interview and white house reporter for the "washington post". thank you all for joining us. i want to start with you because you have literally known george joe biden the longest and have traveled for him a long time. there is no question how he answers george stephanopoulos. we are all older than we were seven years ago, 10 years ago, 15 years ago. what is your sense of how he responded and what sort of de biden world in the senti performed today? >> the view of the campaign tonight is when you take gh

tonight's interview, in which he took every tough question george stephanopoulos could muster and you combine that a with the rally i was covering in wisconsin this afternoon, you see a president that se continues to energize and motivate the core group of supporters in that room but or also still has the values that got him into this office in the first place and is focused on the right thing for voters and can still beat donald trump. now, as i have been working and looking at my phone every minute since this interview was over, it is not clear to me that the audience he needed to c reach and convince tonight was satisfied. a lot of democrats i cehave bee

talking to throughout the past n week feel like it has been two steps forward and three steps back. maybe this interview would have been more effective had he did t it in, nation with that rally last week in north carolina the day after the debate, rather than something that builds over time to some sort of a super bowl level type of importance by the buildup to this. so watching president biden there, i just see the person i have been covering now for overg 16 years now, somebody who is very proud, very proud of his record. he thinks he has done more in four years as president than any president before him. he thinks he still can and will beat donald trump. the audience that needs to be convinced is in his party. i think everybody watching tonight will take away maybe they thought he had held his own but the debate performance last thursday, we can't overstate what a seismic momentt that was an changing the countenance of democrats. it will take more than one rally in one interview to shore up democrats. it will take every appearance going for. democrats will continue to be walking on eggshells until this is resolved. >> yes, you had an interesting article in which you interviewed a lot of people

about joe biden and sort of the changes to him. you make an interesting point, which is why i was asking mike memoli about this. those who do not interact with biden regulate, such as democratic donors and foreign leaders, those are often the er ones who noticed the change most acutely. signore to interact with biden regularly say they have not rl noticed start changes. that is pretty logical, right? i think we could probably all think about that in our own lives. if you don't see somebody for a year or two, you will notice weight-loss or if they seem -l older or younger. the people around biden are pe encouraging him to stick with this our family and friends and people who work with him every day. >> that is exactly right. t my colleagues today had a story about how senator mark warner, head of the senate intelligence committee committee or chairs the senate intelligence committee is trying to convince president biden to exit the

race. senator warner is a serious senator, he has a good r, relationship with the president. he has been critical, at times, of the administration but people have said his family and close aides are not likely to tell him to exit the race. if anybody is ultimately going to prevail upon him, that it does not mean they will, it would be senators, given that be he served in the senate for 36 years. in the article, there was talk e about the president seemingly to accelerate in the last few months, according to people who interact with them, they talk about different traits and the different gait, he just moves around slower. they also mentioned more frequent lapses, briefly losing his train of thought before getting back on track or seeming less lucid. one of the most striking and it does we got in that story is that leaders of the g7, who typically only see the president

once a year, every few months if they come to washington for bilateral meeting, were specially struck by how much older he seemed when they saw him and came away with the impression of wondering that he seemed able to do the job now but they could not fathom how he would be able to do it four years from now that is the question a lot of voters are grappling with when they see him. he can give speeches, he was energetic at the rally today but the physical appearance, in many ways, bears on voters' impressions on if he can continue to do this job for another term. >> one of the interesting things from your reporting is that while joe biden was pretty clear, stephanopoulos must have asked him a version of this a dozen times about what he would do about considering stepping out, and he said, not unless the lord almighty came down himself. your reporting is otherwise. you say he is torn between this idea of staying in and what happens if the wave of people calling for him to step aside gets substantially larger? >> that's right, ali. a big goal for president biden was to assure the generally

anxious democrats that the debate performance last week was an apparition, not the norm. there are a lot of democrats who are skeptical. over the last 30 or 40 minutes, they are talking to democratic lawmakers and officials who watched the debate. i don't think he has convinced them. this was not the disastrous as performance they witness last thursday, it is very clear he wasn't quite as incoherent. he was able to put his thoughts together. he did this thing the biden often does, he trails off into a tangent and then catches himself and says, anyway, and tries to pivot back. a lot of people are familiar with that. there are several things that stuck out to the democratic sources i talked to. one democratic lawmaker texted me saying biden looks shaky,

even under controlled conditions. that last response is the one sp that has gotten democrats most nervous, where he was asked ou what happens if you lose to donald trump and it was something along the lines of, i am the best person to do this and i will give it my all and do it to my best and that is what it is about. one democratic official said they were sick to their stomach hearing that. this was not use sports. biden himself says it was vital to democracy, the fate of the e republic is on the line and all he is saying is i can only do my best. there is an element of denial that is sticking with some democrats about the polls, about the state of the race. we know that joe biden consistently feels under supported and has beep in that regard but when it comes to general election polls, the 2020 election polls showed him crushing donald trump and a narrowly beat donald trump at this time he has been losing. he says the polls show what they did last time. is he taking a clear eyed view of where he is in this race and is he going to give them something to try to right the ship and turn things around? a

at this moment, i don't think democratic officials heard what they thought of that lasts, something needs to be done big to turn this rare. >> there are sort of a bunch of people for whom this discussionf seems very important. some of them are democrats, some of them are the chattering class, some of them are the punditry and some of them, joe biden talked about it in one of his responses when george stephanopoulos asked him, do you sort of understand where so this pressure is coming from? he said, the media. i want to understand from your perspective, how should this conversation be going on and sa where should it be going on? i don't buy the argument that it should not be happening at all. what is the way to do this? your concern is that democrats have a tendency to eat their own. >> that is true. at every level. some of it is campaign craft.

if you are, if your party is in power and you are going through a moment like this where your president needs you, you know, what do you do in that moment? you could say something like, well, you come on tv and you say, you know what? you are a great president, the last four years he has been a great present. he is entitled to make that decision and he will make that decision now. behind-the-scenes, you realize you have real issues to ondeal with. there was a time crunch. you don't have that much time until the convention or the general election. any party would have to introduce themselves to the voters, all those things. there is a whole lot that needs to happen behind-the-scenes. i think one would be concerned it was being brought to the public. that, in and of itself, does not necessarily so confidence in the apparatus. the campaign craft is really important here. from a media standpoint, i do think it is important to acknowledge what voters are thinking of how they are feeling, but also be able to be

able not to create an equivalency with what we are . told that we joe biden and everything donald trump that has he has said has been a lie every time he opened his mouth. right... for a better clean with less... it's got to be tide. we've always loved taking care of our home. but last year, grandpa here broke his arm. we realized some home maintenance jobs aren't worth the risk. that's when we called leaffilter to protect our gutters. leaffilter's patented filter technology keeps debris out of your gutters for good. they gave us a free inspection and we had the system installed that week. my only regret is not calling them sooner. now we can focus on what we really enjoy. join millions of satisfied homeowners. call 833 leaffilter today or visit leaffilter.com

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. ♪ [suspenseful music]

trains. [whoosh] ♪ trains that use the power of dell ai and intel. clearing the way, [rumble] [whoosh] so you arrive exactly where you belong.

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.

♪♪ one might argue that it isn't plausibly legal to order s.e.a.l. team six and i don't want to slander s.e.a.l. team six because there -- seriously, they are honorable. they are honorable officers and they are bound by the uniform code of military justice not to obey unlawful orders, but i think one could say that is not plausible that is legal and that action would be legal. and i am sure you have thought -- i thought a lot of hypotheticals, i'm sure you thought of a lot of hypotheticals, where a president could say i'm using an official power and yet the

president uses it in an absolutely outrageous manner. >> reporter: it was raised as an extreme trivial, a silly and absurd argument in oral arguments before the supreme court a few months ago but conservative justice samuel alito, no less, showed what could come with the ex- president's demands and absolute immunity. it is a scenario so imaginable that it drew laughter in a very solemn place, the supreme court. cut to the political earthquake ushered in by the court's decision on monday, the same court giving permission to that worst case scenario, a president using the office to assassinate a political rival without the backstop of the threat, promise of criminal law and prosecution. experts are now warning what that absolute immunity looks like on every level of government, especially national

security. the court's opinion, as "politico" reports, did not attempt to directly carve out such extreme examples. that immediately raised alarm among national security experts. the majority, instead, accused the dissenting justices of fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals. the liberal justices in their jik dissents showed us what we could be looking at in a few months time. justice sotomayor wrote this, if the president orders the navy's s.e.a.l. team six to assassinate a political rival? in you. organizes a military coup to hold onto power? immune. in ever use of official power, the president is now walking about the law. justice ketanji brown jackson acknowledged the president may have the authority to remove the attorney general. for example, the question here is if the president has the option to remove the attorney general by, say, poisoning him to death? more from "politico", the

biggest challenge for a president ordering an assassination would be finding military personnel willing to carry out the order, legal experts explained. the president himself would have the protection of immunity but others involved would remain vulnerable to prosecution because the supreme court's decision doesn't make the underlying act legal. if they were given an illegal order by the president or by someone who was directly answering to the president, they may be in a position they are subject to court maestro court-martial at either direction, that is according to a professor of national security law at the university of pennsylvania. a lawless president, however, could get around that problem by promising to pardon anyone who carried out his orders. it is not a likely scenario for former president donald trump. he is already carried out illegal orders with border security. alarming scenarios are alarming

questions and shooting protesters in the legs could play out entirely differently. that already happened, too. this also happened. the former joint chiefs of staff chairman general mark milley told the atlantic this, if trump ordered us to do x, why or z and it was legal, we would do it. if it is not legal, it is my job to say it is illegal and here is why it is a legal. that, all that, at best, working out. the former assistant director for counter intelligence for the fbi, the former cia director and now senior security analyst, the former acting attorney general for the justice department is here. i will ask you to start out by just kind of explaining your old job. national security is, in pop-

culture, more closely associated with the c.i.a. it really is with the department of justice. explain why and how monday's decision makes that even more the case. >> you know, the department of justice, the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, they are part of the president's national security team, along with people like john brennan, when he was the director of the c.i.a., the intelligence agencies and all of the national security agencies. they sit together at the white house in the situation room in, you know, a sensitive compartment information facility and talk about this on a daily basis. the president seeks the advice not only of his legal advisor within the national security council, but also the advice of all of the, you know, the principles part of that national security community. the department of justice, also through its office of legal counsel, is a really important part of ensuring the proposals that are brought to the president, the policy proposals, the actions, are consistent with law. that is domestic law and international law. and i will tell you, in my

experience, the premise that undergirds the majority opinion here, that in order for presidents to act fearlessly and boldly in our national security and other matters, they can't be chilled by the prospect of criminal prosecution. that is just not what is driving these discussions about how to respond to national security issues, whether they are defense-related issues, intelligence related issues, terrorism issues or so many other things that come before the national security council and president on a daily basis. this notion they need to provide this broad criminal immunity to ensure that presidents can do their job, i think that is just a fiction. i think that was an excuse to write such a capacious ruling that expands presidential functions, what are called in

this decision core executive functions, that derive from allegedly the constitution, this compay shows, expansive ruling really doesn't have any grounding in constitutional text or history and it is not wanted by any kind of practical necessity. one of the thing i would say, this opinion also seems to assume we have other functioning remedies for a president who does something that is, you know, that meets the criteria that we just talked about. those other methods, things like impeachment, those have failed us in recent years. the notion that now there is no backstop, that is why you have people so concerned about this opinion. >> so, director brendan, tell me how this happens

operationally and functionally, if the president of the united states, as trump did last time he was president of the united states, was to do something else he legal and his lawyers have said, no, that is illegal but he would write that down and have his notetaker write it in her notes, too and then send it in a memo saying you can't, for example, prosecutor hillary clinton and jim me because it is illegal. we know less about what he wanted to do at the intelligence agencies. we know more about what he wanted the military to do at some point, jail, he wanted to jail migrants and other points, the insurrection act another point but if he is not stopped by the fear of the consequences of criminality, then what happens? >> well, a lot happens. it is not good. it is hard to be shocked during these abnormal times but i am truly shocked by the breadth of

the supreme court ruling. as mary noted, there are legions of lawyers and the government to ensure all the actions officials take will be legal. when the president is going to authorize some type of action, whether it be a covert action or some type of military action, there is rigorous legal review that is done at the white house by the legal counsel but also by the interagency lawyers to ensure that every order of president gives is going to be solidly anchored in the law. this is not to protect a president's eventual criminal liability. it is because under the six presidents i serve, all of them made sure that everything they did, everything their administrations engaged in would be lawful. so the president of the united states is the chief executive of the executive branch. as mary mentioned, the breadth of this ruling is really

astounding and i don't think the justices really understand the applications. all the agencies, in terms of military personnel, law- enforcement, intelligence, homeland security, there are so many different opportunities for there to be some type of nefarious action that a president would authorize. as was pointed out in your lead in, it is possible that a president could, in fact, issue preemptive pardons to those individuals who would carry out this unlawful act if the president alone is immunized against some type of liability but they are not, lest they are actually given a presidential pardon. the scope of this, the implications of this, especially if a lawless, corrupt president will be in the white house, it is really quite chilling in terms of what could happen. >> you know, frank, we often cover trump like he is a question. he has answered it. he wanted to break the loss. he wanted to have evidence manufacturing and make up things that did not exist to get out of criminal exposure,

he wanted border patrol agents to do illegal things and he dangled pardons in front of them. we also know what he already did in his department of justice when it came to wiretaps. we found out at the end of his presidency, he was listening to all manner of journalists, he was listening to lawmakers. what about the absence of any peer of criminality, what do you assess trump would do with the awesome powers of the fbi? >> yeah, as you said, he told us what he is going to do and he has already done some of it. it is engraved over the national archives in washington, the past is the

prologue, exactly, the past will tell us where we are going in the future. i often think of i am contemplating what the effect is on the national security community with this ruling. at first, my reaction was, boy, we can have a lot of people in the intelligence community during this time doing unlawful things. i stopped myself and reread the opinion. it is worse than that. we have redefined what lawful means in this ruling. you know, it will be lawful or unlawful, no. if the president says it is lawful, it is in the scope of his official duties, his core duties, he is consulted with his attorney general or his department of defense secretary, then it could be deemed lawful. it is not the unlawful fact i am worried about, it is the so- called lawful acts. in regards to sam alito's concept that they are just talking about extreme hypotheticals, none of this is hypothetical. we need only go back to the mid- 1970s and the discovery in america that the fbi and the cia were spiking unlawfully on our citizens domestically and then the senate had to convene something called the church committee, named after senator frank church. that committee, which sat for over year, what did they discover? they were systematic spying on

no court authorizations, they were black bag jobs, which means break-ins and illegal search warrants by the fbi. there was unlawful wiretapping of anyone deemed a threat by j hoover, including martin luther king and he tried to convince king to kill himself. including by fti findings that accorded with an intel unit at chicago police department to murder a black panthers leader. all of this extrajudicial. there were no rules. when anybody says don't worry about it, things will work out, no. we have been there. now we have rules that came out of that church committee that

actually are the operating guidelines for the fbi, for the c.i.a. things had to get very ugly literally murdering somebody deemed a threat because the fbi director thought the guy was a threat. that is where we are headed here. "prime weekend" continues with my colleague rachel maddow. maddow.

♪♪ thank you so much for doing this. >> thank you for having me. >> you do not have to do this. i was very surprised you agreed to do it. i have been looking really forward to talking to you for a really long time. i guess i mostjust want to know how the last few weeks have been. this has been a many year saga for you. this is a different time since the conviction. >> yeah, it has been a lot. it has been intense. i think that part of it comes from my mistake of in my mind thinking this would be an ending, this would be the light at the end of the tunnel, this is what i was working towards, it would be like a movie when the judge hits the gavel, the credits would go and it would

be wrapped up in a gift bow and it would be done but that is not how life works. my friends are, you know, celebrating and send me messages and text messages, not just friends, everybody, people who are happy that the verdict came down and it was over. meanwhile, i knew for me it was just getting started because for every person that was excited and thrilled and congratulating me, there was somebody else that was very upset. and it just poured gasoline on some of the stuff i have been going through the entire time. you know, it is common knowledge now, there were a lot of people that were doxed. i was . it happened while i

was literally on the stand so i know it was related. >> what are the consequences? >> my mailbox was destroyed. my animals have been injured. my daughter can't go outside. there is preston looky-loos out there. i am afraid to even go outside. i am afraid to go out to mow my lawn. you know, i can't go anywhere. i am so afraid of being followed. death threats are so much more graphic and detailed and brazen. people don't care. it is scary, you know? leading up to the trial, it was hard enough, you know, flying up here repeatedly and sitting in the room and reliving all these terrifying moments, the only thing that kept me going, i guess, was just thinking there was there and there is not. >> is there any sense of, i mean, vindication? obviously, trump being convicted, this is a case you brought, prosecutors brought, you were here to testify, you

were subpoenaed to testify, you had no choice about it, it was not your case. the way the case was presented to the jury, i mean, the prosecutor described to the jury in his closing arguments, stormy daniels is the motive, saying how crucial your testimony was, your testimony was not only riveting, it was integral to the case. does the board it sort of feel like an indication to you at least in the sense that the story is straight now and the jury has agreed he was wrong? >> yes, but no. [ laughter ] i mean, i don't understand. life is not fair. i am getting constantly attacked. it was called the stormy daniels hush money trial. that is not what it was. it was about the falsification of business records.

i was the most exciting part, you know? i was the one that took the stand. i was the one whose testimony made such an impact. there are so many other people that could have been called, karen mcdougal, you know, so it was vindication. when he was found guilty, for that brief moment, it was worth me testifying because at first i wasn't going to. i was basically, by choice, sequestered. i didn't tweet. if you know me, that is a big deal. i did not tweet because i did not wanted to be misconstrued or entered into evidence and fodder for the prosecution or get the case thrown out or prevent me from testifying. did i want to testify? no. do you know how scary that is? especially when you get up there. if i knew how nasty they would be to me, i might not have. i also knew if i did not testify, then it would look like they didn't want me to and i was not to be trusted. that there was a reason they did not want me to testify so i

knew i had to. as soon as he was found guilty, i knew i did the right thing. in one aspect. the other side of that, like you said, i didn't bring these charges, i did not ask for it. i was subpoenaed. drop the charges? [ laughter ] i didn't sue him. i am getting nothing. it cost me so much to come up here and testified. i was not paid. i am a registered republican. [ laughter ] sorry. >> when you say you paid to come up here, you paid your own expenses to testify? >> of course. multiple times. i wasn't compensated, written a check or anything like that. i got nothing. this has cost me so much money. i wasn't paid by anybody. i was subpoenaed. everybody considers me to have done this great duty and say i am a hero, which i am not, i just told the truth but i didn't do anything heroic, i didn't go into a burning building, you know?

i just said the truth. i have never changed my story. despite what other people say. go back and look at interviews online from 2019, 2020, 2021, my story has not changed at all, it is the only one that has been consistent. ♪ ♪ onsistent. ♪ ♪ eed to do th is.

[♪♪] did you know, how you feel can be affected by the bacteria in your gut? try new align yogurt coated probiotic fruit bites. with a delicious apple and blueberry-flavored fruit center and yogurt coating, each bite is infused with added probiotics, to help promote a healthy digestive system every day. plus, they're packaged in individually-wrapped pouches, for daily digestive support on the go.

look for new align yogurt coated probiotic fruit bites online and in the digestive care aisle of your local retailer. brand power, helping you buy better. ♪♪ project 2025 want you to know that donald trump will be responsible for what they are calling their second american revolution. >> no credit. we want the american people, if president trump is elected again, president trump and his administration to take credit for that. >> the backlash to the radical maga agenda is drawing while developments today just on that. stick around. ♪ ♪ nd. ♪ ♪ ♪ trains that use the power of dell ai and intel. ♪ to see hundreds of miles of tracks. ♪ [vroom] [train horn]

[buzz] clearing the way, [whoosh] so you arrive exactly where you belong. home inspectors, general contractors, roofers; all kinds of pros recommend leaffilter. why? it's engineered for performance. because with leaffilter's patented filter technology, there's no gaps, no openings, no place for debris to get in at all. leaffilter is a permanent solution we install on your existing gutters. you'll never have to climb a ladder to clean out your gutters again. our installation process is simple and easy. just give us a call and set up an appointment today. we'll come out and give you a free gutter inspection. if your gutters are sagging, we'll repair them. if they're broken, we'll replace them. if they're in good shape, our local trusted pros will install leaffilter in as little as a few hours. and the best part? leaffilter comes with a lifetime transferable no-clogs guarantee! you'll never have to worry about costly damage from clogged gutters again! it's peace of mind, and then some.

call us today to get started. join millions of satisfied homeowners, schedule your free inspection today! call 833 leaffilter, or visit leaffilter.com

♪♪ as we have been covering on the program, project 2025 is a maga world manifesto and vision of implementing a startling leap of authoritarian

form of u.s. government. it is 900 pages long. you can go live right now and read it. it is chock-full of wildly unpopular policy proposals. you got everything from using a 19 century obscenity law to shut down all medication abortion and the mailing of all birth control to outright outlawing pornography and throwing people in prison over it to weaponize and the department of justice to be used exclusively as a tool of vengeance for donald trump. republicans realize that project 2025 's ideas are wildly unpopular, or at least they are beginning to get that is why today donald trump is desperate to separate himself from it all. trump does not want people to know about the entire vanguard of extremist weirdos around him and what their plans are for when he governs.

with the project 2025 plans lying in plain sight, they are planning a comically preposterous and fraudulent plan. donnal post posted today, i like this, he knows nothing about project 2025 and has no idea who is behind it. you can go to the website. they are listed there. the group behind it all is the heritage foundation, you see their logo on the screen behind him. we all know trump spoke to them while he was present. paul dans, a senior aide in the trump administration is the project director of project 2025, can in charlie ken cuccinelli who pushed his policies wrote a chapter in the manifesto. jack john mcatee is a senior advisor, he has been doing bedding on the personal database to see hugh they will staff. if trump has no idea who is behind it, he is far too senile to be allowed to continue his campaign. either that or he is line. a senior politics writer was salon right today project 2025 may be backfiring on trump. the work on campaigns and is

now supervisor the lincoln project. they join me now amanda, why do you think it is backfiring? >> i think, first of all, they gave it a weird, sinister name, project 2025. so i think the original goal was to put it out there and hope that the maga people would hear it and the progressives would get all freaked out and laugh at how they were triggering the liberals. i don't think they thought that ordinary people that might be swing voters in the election would hear of it. i don't think that is true anymore. we are seeing evidence that is breaking the barrier and the radar of people that don't pay super close attention to politics. >> i had a conversation with the guy on the street the other day actually, he said i had been checked out of politics four five years.

he said, what is going on? i said, where do i start? the only question, his only question was, what is this project 2025 i keep hearing about which suggests to me it has, to amanda's point, it has taken on a kind of virality out past the sort of circle of people that are avid news consumers. >> yeah, look. this is [ laughter ] the day after july 4th. if they don't know about project 2025 now, they will know in november when people start voting. part of what is happening here, there is a complete void of policy on the republican side. >> yes, yeah. >> of course, this is filling in. this is a serious question. is there any republican running for election that is running an ad or talking about a bill they actually voted for? i am not aware of any. talking about stuff like j.d. vance, you know, the benefits of the infrastructure act he

voted against. what did the republicans accomplish where they can say trust us, put us in power and give us more power and we will deliver? i don't know what this bargain is they get. you have project 2025, which is basically an attack on the future. this is some sort of effort to turn the clock back, which is what the msnbc trump candidacy is about. trump is against mandatory school, not. it, but if everything. maybe there could be polio, whooping cough or measles but not many of them. >> this absence of platform or policy is so key. i think, amanda, there are a few things, one is a super authoritarian cult around trump, whatever he wants. famously in 2020, they just said they would not do a platform. there are also some, there is some sort of feral intelligence to this from to if you don't

write anything down, you don't have any positions. i keep bringing this up. what is donald trump's position on gaza? he won't write it down. he did say he wants to let israel finish the job, there's a his words, i don't know what that means . this is an example to me to stuart's point, amanda, that this is all written down. it was such a tell for me for trump to run away from it. >> one of the goals of having a jik outside firm do this might have been -- >> exactly -- >> put distance between this and trump. like you said, there are so many staffing people in common with his first administration . there are just so many connections, it is hard to run away from it. to the point that ordinary people that pay attention to politics, they aren't going to be tuned into those kind of

fine distinctions for exactly that reason. they are not looking at it and they are just hearing the name. >> this has been "prime weekend". i am chris hayes. catch us on hayes see you then. ♪ ♪ . ♪ ♪ t fast relief with new tums+ upset stomach & nausea support, and love food back. (♪♪) everywhere but the seat. the seat is leather. alan, we get it. you love your bike. we do, too. that's why we're america's number-one motorcycle insurer. but do you have to wedge it into everything? what? i don't do that. this reminds me of my bike. the wolf was about the size of my new motorcycle. have you seen it, by the way? happy birthday, grandma! really? look how the brushstrokes follow the line of the gas tank.

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

good evening, and welcome to politics nation. tonight's lead, reenergized.