>> nancy pelosi's husband on

the stand, what he says tonight about the intruder looking for his wife nearly killed him. tonight on the workers live. so, what is it about the political rhetoric in this country that got us here? in 83 year old man hit in the head with a hammer in his own house, his skull was fractured. allegedly by a man looking for his wife. then house speaker nancy pelosi. now, the defendants own attorney says the attack was motivated by david pups believe, belief, that nancy pelosi was part of a, quote, a plot to manipulate the country, to spread lies, and to steal votes from donald trump. now, he has pleaded not guilty in this matter. the paul pelosi testifying today about the moment he woke

up at 2:00 in the morning to find a stranger in his bedroom. quote, it was a tremendous shock to recognize that somebody had broken into the house and, looking at him, and looking at the hammer, and the ties, i recognized that i was in serious danger. so i tried to stay as calm as possible. pelosi is testifying that he led the intruder downstairs, thinking that police could grab him maybe more quickly there, saying, quote, i knew that my only shot was that, if we were downstairs and the police came, it would be much easier to arrest him. god knows what would have happened if we were upstairs. remember the police body cam video of what happened next? we're going to show it to you. i remind you that it is difficult and disturbing to watch. >> how are you doing? what's going on, man?

drop the hammer. >> no. >> what's going on? [bleep] >> disturbing is the word for that. what is also disturbing, the graphic illustration of the consequences of our poisonous politics. >> the person was searching for me and my dear husband wasn't even that political, actually, paid the price. >> as nancy pelosi says, her husband paid the price. and it is a terrible price. but one big question that i cannot get off of my mind is what price america will pay for what seems to be increasingly so, our politics of violence. i want to turn out to danielle harvin, he's the former head of intelligence for the washington d.c. homeland security department, and currently a faculty member at georgetown university. darnell, it's so good to see

this evening. united spoke about this case when it first happened and just the overall rhetoric that we have seen in this community and this country over the past several years at the very least. i'm wondering, from your perspective, how did we get, and how did you get to the point where the husband of one of the most powerful people in government is attacked in his home by a hammer wielding assailant? >> laura, how we got here is that paul pelosi is a victim of the caustic political environment that we have had over the last, at least a decade. nancy pelosi has been the bogeyman for detractors for over a decade, and the issue is that, really, with the rise of trump maga, this is some on the far right that are addicted to this malignant miss and disinformation and conspiracy theory movement. and words and tweets that are

put out by politicians and people on the far-right media, it is just words for them. but they are individuals who are sitting at home, who are very unwell like the one it has been charged with paul pelosi's assault, that are ruminating on this. and they are not happy people. they're not going out, enjoying life. they're taking these words, they are doing in them, and this is what we would call, in terrorism, caustic terrorism. somebody who is demonized is, essentially, assaulted. so this is the environment that we're in right now. what kind of terrorism? >> so caustic terrorism. >> when you demonize an individual long enough, those words will manifest and just, like this individual, this is the manifestation of misinformation, conspiracy theories, and demonization of a political party.

>> when you talk about that way and why this is so relevant even today, of, course is paul pelosi on the stand testifying today, but even after he was attacked, and people went straight to conspiracy theories. floating rumors that he was, that he was having an affair, and also the overall distortion of truth in society more broadly. people can be very susceptible to hearing something over and over again and having a face of who they are told is the villain. it's supposed to be demonized, and when that happens, all sorts of things can go wrong. you are sounding the alarm, for example, leading up to what happened on january six and people choosing the particular villain. in that case it was political as well. >> yeah, unfortunately, i had to stay, this but for those of us in this business, the targeting of political figures is, really was not something that was a surprise. what was surprise was, literally, as this man was getting operated on, prominent

members of the far-right and of the republican party went to twitter, went to social media to make fun of this, to make light of this, to put memes out. what that does is it normalizes this type of violence. it almost makes it okay. i would love for you to put up on your screen, for the, viewers the official statement from the rnc announcing this, but there was none. and so this is where we're at. many americans would find political violence unpalatable, they think it is something that happens in failed states. but, unfortunately, unless the rhetoric is going to be brought down, people are going to have to get used to this kind of targeted, individual violence until things get better. >> juneau harvin, thank you for coming. i can imagine a lot of people are going, oh yeah, i think i remember this particular case? even hearing about it today, and it was an extraordinary moment and people thinking about all the different things that have happened since, the normalization, look

compartmentalization, and then, of course, the dismissing of what has. happened thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. >> i want to bring in sarah matthews, a former trump white house deputy press secretary, also republican strategist for michael singleton. i'm glad you brought here. a lot of people forgot about this happening and they were surprised in the trial of still going on, that there is a testimony from paul pelosi. it does speak in many ways to how distant memory people make things that were completely outrageous when they happened because of all that was going on. what is your reaction, thinking about, are we in for a great deal more of political violence? and the rhetoric eating up more? >> i think so. i think delray just a great point about sarcastic terrorism, and i was brought out of a populism. if trump were to go away, or if you are go away that things would somehow be better. i'm not convinced of that, gloria. i think there are a lot of

people who feel marginalized, economically. i think a lot of people feel marginalized politically. i think a lot of people feel marginalized because of the cultural changes that have occurred in the country. i think it is easier to point to a political leaders rhetoric, and that's not to say that rhetoric can't inflame tensions, but it doesn't get to the crux of what people are dealing with. and that is something that i think about often in my moments of solitude. how do we get the country to move forward as a whole regardless of who's in charge. i don't think we're talking about that. now >> i'll talk more about your moments of quietude -- . i want you to hear this, because when the reason that is so relevant right now is because the rhetoric has not stopped. we talked about tim scott dropping out of the race, because it wasn't hitting for a lot of people. yet, you've got this grievance based political structure, people saying that i like the anger because i feel angry too.

listen to this, though. we saw a result of some dangerous rhetoric recently. listen to what trump said over the weekend. >> we pledge, to you, that we will root out the communist, marxist, fascist, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country. >> not exactly our parents a version of political campaigning. why is this resonating? >> i think that donald trump knows that this is a type of rhetoric that his base wants to hear and he is always focused on his base and this will riled up. but i do think that it serves to just further divide americans. look, republicans are really upset when hillary clinton called maga supporters deplorables, but when trump says that he wants to root out the -- vermin that are as enemies,. oregonians are silent.

the rnc chairman was asked about it over the weekend, said she wasn't to make a comment on it. the only republican that we've seen make any sort of comment on this is liz cheney, who obviously has largely moved away from the party or has been pushed out mostly because of her willingness to call out donald trump for this type of rhetoric. and, i think that biden won in large part in 2020 because he said that he was going to heal this country of our divisions and it's a battle for the soul of the nation. unfortunately i think that americans are still really divided and that's a large part of why people are maybe reluctant to support him again in 2024 because they thought that a vote for biden in 2020 would move the country in a different direction, unfortunately a lot of republicans, a lot of americans are still suffering. >> certainly the idea of one person being able to be the solution is always going to be elusive for people. but just the vermin comment,

maybe one thing. but there is also reporting from axios, and i want to share with you. and they say, i am quoting, here former president trump's allies are prescreen-ing the ideologies of thousands of a potential foot soldiers as part of an unprecedented operation to centralize and expand his power at every level of the u.s. government if he wins in 2024. by the way, shermichael, it is up to 54,000 of them. that is an astonishing number. >> i think it is lessons learned, i would suppose, or from the first time. we remember within the first year, or first couple of months, actually, this process of going through people social media to see if you are critical of the former president. i was one of those individuals. if you, were than you got the boot, you are fired 40 immediately. but, i think this goes back to the point i was making about this political disenchantment among a sector of the republican base. and i think that trump has figured out, and we can debate whether or not this is good or

bad, but he is figured out that these people are starving for somebody to be an answer to what they perceive as a political corruption by this elite class, not only just from democrats, laura, but from republicans themselves. this, as long as trump continues to pick himself as i and the answer, the resolution to this corruption, that he is going to continue to have support. >> i'm always tickled that trump is supposed to be not a part of the elite class. sara, does this scare you? wildly before it was about having adults in the room, i joined because i wanted to be the adult in the room. but to the recruitment around political philosophy rather than experience or credentials or legions is really scary. >> i think this is one of the things that most concerned about, if donald trump were to win a second term is who would be staffing this second administration? i think that, you look at the first administration and, whether you are liked all the

people who worked for him, i do think that the real people of good character who were in positions of power who did pushback on trump's worst instincts and who thwarted a lot of his more extreme plans that he wanted. i'm thankful that we had people in positions of power like bill barr or general kelly or, even mike pence, because he did not go along with donald trump's plan. >> will others come, now? >> i do think that there will still be some good people, but i don't know if in large part that is going to be the case. i think that it is going to be mainly yes men who are willing to carry out trump's marching orders and will not push back. >> can i say, laura, this is part of a plan right? if you are a supporter of trump and your ideas and the first time the agenda was not fully realized, or fully actualized, the only way the agenda can be realized is by having like-minded people at the close to 100% as possible. so you're not gonna get a lot of pushback from the rnc chair woman, or many of the

republicans who want to be close to trump because, if the idea is to promise to the base that, in order to receive this make america great again idealism we have to have people fully believe it who aren't going to check the president was his worst instincts take control. >> i tell, you paul pelosi on the stand today is the illustration of what happens when political violent rhetoric manifests and focused on a target and the collateral damage that ensues. we think about this is the husband of somebody who is in government. thinking about what's happening there. sarah matthews, michael singleton. you might not want people to see a trial on television. well, donald trump does. why he is making his election subversion trial in washington d.c. d.c. must-see television.

has donald trump ever seen a

camera that he does not like? and, i'm asking you a rhetorical question, right. this is the man who introduced himself to america on tv. >> your fired. your fired. your fired. your fired. your fired. >> and the man who, now, is demanding that his election subversion charles right here in washington d.c. be televised. unless you think i'm overstating it. here is what the former presidents attorney wrote in the filing just late friday night. and i'm quoting here presidential bob salute lee agrees and in fact demands that these proceedings should be fully tevised. now, media organizations, including cnn, by the, way have asked for permission to broadcast the trial. i want to bring in trial attorney and defense attorney for convicted murderer alec murdaugh jim griffin. now before the murdaugh trial

he was a big advocate for cameras in the courtroom. jim, thank you for being here this evening. you actually changed your mind ever since that trial about having cameras in the courtroom. why? >> yes, i sure did learn. thanks for having me. i was a big component of cameras in the courtroom, going into the trial, i traveled a couple of other cases where there were quite tvs. and i felt it was important to educate the public on how trials operate. and better educated and hopefully have the faith in the judicial system. but the murdaugh trial was a whole different character, i mean it brought out probably the worst of the viewing audience. we had people traveling from around the country to come to the courtroom, just so they could get on television. we had sort of devolved into a sporting event. at times, the jurors and the

gallery and the courtroom would clap when the judge would rule against us. and there is really a tremendous temptation, if you're on that type of a stage. trial lawyers are, actors they love the stage. and you do lose track of what the focus of the trial us and the jury. and i think in the murdaugh case that happened to some degree, to all of. us quite official, lawyers. and then there was a tremendous circus atmosphere on the outside of the courtroom. and, when the jurors would lead, they would seem tense and reporters from major networks and you're -- cnn, another networks. >> well, jim, firstly i understand the trial attorney's big hands. we indict ham sandwiches. were attempts in the courtroom. i get it all.

but what you described couldn't that be contained by minimizing who's present in the courtroom? and allowing cameras to be there for the greater audience? i mean a case like this of course, we have a former president on the stand and a former president in the courtroom. aren't there ways to change what you saw a circus like? >> when that's a lesson learned and if i were to be faced with the same situation again i would know better to ask for more restrictions on how the media is placed outside of the courthouse. but you, know media had the first rights. it's a real balancing test for judges, balancing the first amendment right to the medias and the public's right to access charleston defendants for a public trial. and i have to tell, you i understand why president trump and his lawyers a friend of

mine who have worked with why they would want to have cameras in the courtroom. because they want as much spillover effect to what happens outside the courtroom would impact the jury. and we felt like, in the murdaugh case, there was a spillover effect of what happened outside the courtroom that the jurors couldn't ignore. and, murdaugh was a renowned defendant. he was doing some real bad things financially, stealing from his clients and he was not like. president trump is liked by a lot of people and so i can understand why they would want a broader audience coming into play and the jurors hearing from them. and that data that may be, that they sequester the jury. that jury was sequestered for months on end. >> well, look -- >> maybe that is in the answer, but it's a pretty draconian response. >> i think everyone right now

is changing their address. they don't want to be in one that's as long as the oj trial. but jim, let me ask, you when you balance it out at the end of the day you've got two competing interests. you mentioned the first, on the transparency and being able to have people see the process of justice. especially because trump will be outside the courtroom, undoubtedly, talking about the new york civil fraud trial about what he proceeds us injustice inside the courtroom. so when you balanced to, what is better? to have that transparency in the courtroom in realtime? or to just have a transcript at the end. and having a hallway discussion for the cameras? >> well, i can tell you without a doubt for president trump's trial it would be best that it be broadcast. all of trump's supporters, and trump has made a political career out of attacking the media, the mainstream media and the enemy of his people. and if the verdict comes back against donald trump, and all that donald trump supporters

have heard mainstream media's filtering our interpretation of the evidence, they will not accept it. so, i strongly believe that an unfiltered public broadcasting of president trump's trial would be in everybody's best interest. now you have to take cases, individually. if i had to do the murdaugh case again i would tell you the complete opposite. i would not want cameras in the room. >> really interesting, we'll see what the federal court says about it. you're not normally allowed in court rooms for any reason so this will be a real departure from what is the standard. jim, nice to talk to you. thank you so much. >> all right, thanks for having me on loin. >> and don't forget to check out jim's crime podcasts. the presumption. wherever you get your podcast it's also available on youtube. well she pleaded guilty in the georgia election interference case and now we're hearing what former trump attorney janet ellis told prosecutors about the final days in the white house of ways to overturn the election. running out.

he said the boss is not going to leave under any cicircumstanceces. wewe a are just gogoing to statn power.

my sport propels me forward. contra costa college saw potential in me that i didn't know i had. focus. determination. drive. contra costa college helped me blaze the trail. now i'm a comet, and there's no stopping me. come on, this is your shot. take it. join the team at contra costa college. start today at contracosta.edu

well we've got news out of fulton county tonight, abc news obtaining video connecting to the first plea deals in the georgia 2020 election subversion case. -- condense giving. don't give you, know where bill, the former president did not plan to leave the white house. >> he said, to, me in a kind of exciting tone we don't care and

we're not going to leave. and i said what do you mean? and he said, well, the boss meaning president trump and everyone understood the process because that's what we all called him. he said the boss is not going to wave under any circumstances. we're just going to stay in power. and i said to him, it doesn't work that way. and he said, we don't care. >> now ellis pleaded guilty to lesser charges in exchange for testimony, scavino did not answer to abc news. talking to senior legal analyst, former white house ethics czar and trial and compliance attorney -- telling your last name? >> i did it right the first time. well, see, you're here with the courtesy of course of getting your name right. thank you for being here today. i'm glad to hear. we're gonna begin with. you when you heard this from dana sellers, did it surprise you? does it transform her into a more important witness? >> well, laura, as you know

when the jen ellis plead broke, i wrote for the new york times this is going to be fani willis 's star witness. and when we heard those words, the boss is not gonna leave under any circumstances, we are just going to stay in power. but two loss we don't care that summarizes what the prosecution 's case in georgia and federally it's all about. the illegitimate desire to hang on to the white house even though you lost the election. dynamite video from jenna ellis. and she's going to be the star witness against trump now, it's clear. >> well i wonder because there's also sydney powell testimony abc news heard from her. listen to this. >> what was president trump's reaction asked the advisers would say, that you lost?

>> they would say that and then they would walk out. and they would say, this is what we deal with all the time. >> i would, say with respect, trump's lead counsel in fulton county, abc news said that the private conversation he called, absolutely meaningless. and i wonder what the combination your tackling, why? >> well he's probably seeing anything that he can. but the reality is that this is really hitting. one of the most difficult core aspects of a prosecutor's job is to find an evidentiary door to open into the minds of the criminal defendant. and this is really a door that can open because you are seeing instances where mr. trump is apparently showing this state of mine, by demonstrating that he realizes full well that he didn't win even though mr. scavino said that he's not going anywhere. now there is going to be a little bit of evidentiary challenge for journalists, because there's going to be a hearsay objection. but i think that can get

overcome. she will say dance gavino told me that donald trump told him i'm not going anywhere. but they can't get over that hurdle, because they just have to put scavino on the witness list. so this is not good for mr. trump and this on top of what's going on in the new york trial shows that he's not having a very good win. >> speaking of, that, don jr. on the stand, again, it wasn't déjà vu he wasn't to repeat. it really was a new statement testimony happening. how do you think he performed today? >> well, it was like an infomercial for trump properties. but it didn't go to the core issues in the case. he talked about how great the properties were. but this case is not about are they good or bad, it's about the evaluation. and the over valuation. sometimes many times over. indeed, some of the evidence that came in today was actually harmful. they put a brochure into evidence that said 40 wall

street was 72 stories. but, according to public records it's 63 stories. so, they actually made the states case for them today. i thought it was a face plant. >> what do you think about eric trump taking the stand again? likely donald trump as well if don jr.-based plants, what's gonna happen then? >> i think a lot of the opportunities are at a loss, quite frankly, because going into the trial for the day one defense today, don jr. was really one of the most important witnesses at the defense. the trump organization is a big support right now. and they needed to deliver today. especially when his father and his sister went to the white house, he was in charge. but his defense, delaney, i just own the company it isn't really effective. and the fact that he was just rumbling, on and saying that his father was an artist, it was interesting. it didn't really hit the bull's-eye. so i think that they're really going to be having a big problem as that case goes down the aisle. >> maybe you should've called

him an artist somehow that makes more sense. seth burns wise -- i'm a quick learner and -- >> the tension over the israel-hamas war it is still echoing, all across this country. but, for a divorced israeli american and palestinian american couple the conflict is strengthening their bond. they join me and tell me why, next.

tomorrow tens of thousands of people were going together at the national mall for the march for israel rally. law enforcement are increasing

security ahead of the event in the wake of antisemitic violence across the country. now tonight tensions are still raw. and there's new video that shows some ucla student striking piñatas plastered with the face of the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu and also president biden. the ucla issues -- condemning the hateful behavior, and bigotry amid the intensifying protests on their campus. my next two guests, the divorced couple, one is really american. the other palestinian american. they say that this war has actually made their bond stronger than ever. she is a mohammed doordash. thank you both for joining me tonight. we begin with you maya. you say that no one understands your pain, at this time better than one another. tell me about how that is? >> well, because we both love the land, and we both love the people in the land lavoie >>

mid? you know, the idea of that comment love, bond, so unbelievable and so wonderful. and, yet when we see this outside of a vacuum we see the struggles that are happening in the region, here at home the conflict. but you and maya don't always agree. but you managed to create a peaceful save space where you can hear each other. and for many they're wondering how did you do that? >> because we start with love for human beings. and that's how we want everyone to look at the people, it's just a humor -- >> but that is the his shoe. >> only us can protect each

other. and we want to keep them safe. >> it really speaks to the future, and what people are hoping to have been more. brought you, and mohammed actually divorced in 2022 after eight years of marriage. but as mohammed mentioned, you both coal parent your children. i do wonder, how are you explaining this conflict to them? >> well our children are seven, and six. so they're quite young. we haven't really given them much beyond the broad brushstrokes. but it's between the israelis and the palestinians. and we try not to talk. we try not to give them any of the details. because the details are horrifying on the side. and tragic and we've given -- i told her that people have

died on both sides and it's hard, tragic and shouldn't be happening. but beyond that, we are trying to protect them. >> did she understand in that moment? >> yes, definitely. her daughter's superbright. our son is to but our daughter definitely gets it and i think she also consent from the way that we're talking about. it when we say, something the subject is than closed. she's not pushing too hard, for more information. i appreciate that on her part because i know what i would do if she pushed for more information. we're just kind of taking it as it comes. when there is no template. for how to deal with. this there's never been an escalation this bad since 1948 it's the worst fighting we've seen since the creation state of israel. and, yeah we're at a loss for words. together as a couple, much less,

even worse that we weren't children. >> i appreciate your honesty in trying to figure out what the follow-up would look like. and we hope that there is not the one question, where that inevitably ends with you not knowing what to say. i know i felt that way as a mother, so many times. and wahab it, understand that you are family. actually, rejected the idea of you even marrying mya because she was jewish, and israeli citizen. when you think about that context, now do your families understand your positions now? >> they do, and they know that she does not represent the schedule for israel or support what they do. and maya when you think about the that so many of the conversation surrounding what tapping right now --

and who is the proxy for somebody else and who is accountable and the civilians are talking about versus the government. and i wonder how you both are feeling about the u.s. response to this war. i mean, my, out the youth collectors have enough being done? or the conversations that are had at the political level, are they sufficient? >> i feel that there has to be a cease-fire, period. i don't feel that what israel is doing right now to gaza and to particular the civilians and gaza is going to actually bring the israelis more security in the long run. i don't think netanyahu has a endgame. if he, does it's not a valley intelligent and game. so i think that there needs to be a lot more pressure on israel to stop what it's doing right now. there has to be a cease-fire. and you, know the u.s. government, obviously, played a huge role in that.

and i think that the u.s. government is not handling this will either. the u.s. government should be intervening as a peacemaker and not arming israel more than it's already harmed. >> mohammed, how do you feel? >> i feel shocked though using my tax money to bump my own people. it's hard to explain to myself for my children when they grow up out their own people were killed in this world. i don't find the words to explain. >> my, mohammed, thank you so much for allowing us a moment with both of you to better understand how both of you have come together and they're trying to grapple with what so many families are thinking about now. how do we explain any of this to our children? thank you so much. we'll be right back. >> t thanks s for havingng us, k

you.

the highest court in the line, with a drip question, well in might be tightening the faucet. how? while the supreme court, now, has a code of ethics. and that code only coming after a mountain a puppet scrutiny. justices single lack of cold, as quote, lead in recent years to the misunderstanding that the justices up this court, unlike an other jurist in the country regard themselves as unrestricted by any ethics rules. misunderstanding, well, it may be one way to phrase it. but could that misunderstanding have anything to do with all that report about undisclosed

lavish gifts and trips that clarence thomas got from a gop megadonor? he could have something to do with sammy alito's undisclosed luxury fishing trip, organized in part by prominent conservative. could you have something to do with the ethics question also facing neil gorsuch, amy coney barrett, and so the mayor. now regardless of how we got here, here we are. a code of ethics, and we'll see draws by the way that lower courts have been required to follow. one legal observer, is calling it a, quote, copy and pieced job. the outlines a lot of what justices should not be doing, like taking part in activities that the track from the dignity of the office, or raise questions about once impartiality. there is a lot of questions about how this will work and who will actually enforce it. because, frankly it doesn't say who will enforce it. and now if there is no

authority to monitor whether the justices are following their own rules, you have to wonder how much a code of ethics is really worth. it ultimately, then, is going to come down to trust. and that trust is obviously an absolutely critical with the highest institution of one of our three branches of government. any country is only as strong as the institution that it's built on. and public opinion, for the supreme court is at record lows. we've got polls putting the approval rating at 41% and this code event thinks, i wonder, will reverse the downward trend? a trend i should say that rest with the justices themselves from the ethics questions to unpopular rulings like the overturning of roe v. wade. i guess time will tell. thank you all for watching our coverage continues.

c'mon, we're right there. c'mon baby. it's the only we need. go, go, go, go! ah! touchdown baby! -touchdown! are your neighbors watching the same game? yeah, my 5g home internet delays the game a bit. but you get used to it. try these. they're noise cancelling earmuffs. i stole them from an airport. it's always something with you, man. great! solid! -greek salad? exactly! don't delay the game with verizon or t-mobile 5g home internet. catch it on the xfinity 10g network.

>> tonight on three 60, our closest look yet from the inside gaza with israeli troops covering hamas's underground infrastructure, u.s. officials saying that one hamas command poses under gaza's main hospital. also tonight, day one of the former president's defense in new york civil fraud case with donald trump jr. taking the stand, calling his dad a, quote, artist with real estate. we begin keeping honest, former president is now saying about his opponents and how his allies are reportedly planning to target them. good evening, thank you for joining us. by now, it's no secret of the former president lies nearly all the time. what's also becoming clear i