>> all right, sidney blumenthal. the book is "self-made man." abraham lincoln is the first of a four-volume biography you have been working on for quite sometime. >> nearly a decade. >> nearly a decade. >> nice to have you on. >> nice to be here, chris. >> that is all for "all in." >> that was riveting. that was well done, my friend. >> thank you. and coming up, we have dan rather here in just a moment. we're excited mr. rather is here. the censor of the political reporting universe today was this, this weird slow motion/no motion hours-long blanket coverage of a meeting that took place in washington, d.c. this morning. it was a meeting between two politicians. it took place behind closed doors. nothing in particular was expected to happen at that

meeting, as far as we know nothing did happen at that meeting. and so behold, we are transfixed. there was blanket coverage of the politicians' arrival at the meeting. there was even breathless coverage of the politicians' departure of the meeting. and the outcome was nothing, because nothing was supposed to happen at this meeting and apparently, nothing did. tada! i do think we're pretty good as a country at paying attention and covering stuff that does happen. but turns out we are maybe even better at covering stuff that

doesn't happen, that we nevertheless ingest with fake meanings as we talk to ourselves about what is politically important. today was a tremendous ado in the political media, tremendous ado in washington about a closed-door meeting that nobody could cover, from which there was no outcome. a meeting at which nothing happened and that ultimately will mean nothing. and here is sort of the lurid way of understanding that that is true. here is part of how we know that is true. this is a man who was the speaker of the assembly, do we have the -- man who was the speaker of the assembly, the equivalent of paul ryan's job for the state of new york. the man who had the paul ryan job, not at the federal level but in the state of new york, a man named shelden silver who held the job for more than 20 years. and he was just sentenced a few days ago to 12 freaking years in prison. previously years. the speaker of the house.

now, that turns out to be a pretty stable part of the legislature in the state of new york. they had this -- the one leader, the house speaker in position holding that job for 20 years. there he is, shelden silver. but now, he is no longer the leader of the state assembly, no longer the speaker of the house. now he is out. and he is going to prison until he is in diapers. 12 years. now, that is the assembly, that is the house. the senate, in contrast, turns out that one turns over all the time in new york. the last three guys who have been the top leader of the senate in new york, first, a guy named malcolm smith, then a guy named pedro espada, those three guys, the last three leaders of the state senate they are also, all of them, now in prison. the first two guys, smith and espada are already in prison today, and we learned today that the third one, the most recent

leader of the senate is about to join them in prison, getting sentenced to five years today. so the last three leaders of the senate will all be in prison at the same time alongside the guy who was speaker of the house in the last 20 years. now, incidentally, this guy who is going to prison, the most recent leader of the senate is soon to be joined by the guy who was the minority leader in the senate. so the guy in charge of the republican party and the guy in charge of the democratic party at the same time in the senate they will both be in prison together along with the previous two guys in charge of the senate and the guys who were in charge of the house at the same time. the minority leader of the senate is due to be sentenced next week and could look at 20 years. and when he gets there after his sentencing next week there will be nine state legislatures, including four of the last leaders of the legislature, all in prison all at the same time. all from the same state.

and the only reason it's not ten all in prison at the same time is because one deputy majority leader from the senate who got convicted and would have been sent away, instead he got house arrest and was sick and passed away last week while still on house arrest, but had he been well enough to go to prison, there would have been ten of the same legislators all in prison all at once. and the truly amazing thing about this is, it's all for different crimes. it would be one thing if it were leaders of different things, in different houses, or if they were all in one big scheme they were all convicted on. no, no, no, they were all convicted on their own separate schemes. briberies, shakedowns, extortion, they all had their own thing going, enough to put nine in prison and another on house arrest. and i should mention nine other

state legislators from the state legislature had served their time and just gotten out of prison in the last few years. so that brings us to 19. not that big of a legislature. just astonishing corruption. they could form a new york senate softball league in federal prison. and some members might find it hard to get a spot on that team, it would be competitive. but new york, as astonishingly corrupt and criminal as it is, new york does not have a monopoly on this particular time of crime. shaka fattah is under indictment for 29 counts and was known to be under indictment for 29 counts, fattah did not resign from office, and decided to hold on to his seat. it was apparently too much for

his voters of his district to elect him right before his trial started on the corruption charges, so on april 26th, he lost his seat in congress because he lost the democratic primary for his own seat in pennsylvania. and that turns out to be of national importance. because it turns out that shaka fattah is the only member of congress or the senate to have lost his or her seat for any reason anywhere in the country this entire year. i mean, you look at new york on a day like today and you think oh, we're a country that is inured to have truly epic levels of corruption, we're totally inured to it. new york didn't even blink when a third straight leader got sentenced to prison. but we are sort of inured to it.

but at the federal level, i can still say this. it can hurt you to be under indictment on dozens of corruption charges when you're trying to get reelected. and apparently, that is the only thing that can hurt you if you're a member of the house or senate. nobody else has been out other than shaka fattah, and he is on trial. there is noise that republicans are in trouble if they have donald trump at the top of their ticket and they're very worried if he is their nominee and will take steps to distance themselves from trump if and when he gets the nomination for the party. but you know what? donald trump has led the numbers, he has effectively been top of the ticket in all of the 40-plus states that have voted thus far in the presidential primaries. and the net effect of all of

that on down ticket races across the country has been nothing. no income has been lost this year in either party anywhere in the country except for this one guy who is under indictment and now on trial for corruption charges. and that had nothing to do with donald trump. so there was blanket coverage today of this summit. this meeting between donald trump and the republican house speaker, paul ryan. as if something amazing might happen between the two of them. as if there is a meaningful split in the republican party driven either by some principle rejection of mr. trump, who may somehow be at risk of losing their seats in a way they never would without trump in the running. the split in the party, the split in the party. everybody tune in. this was the punch line. after blanket coverage of this

big meeting about the split in the party this was the big overt manifestation. this was how we got described to us from the horse's mouth, this big important split in the republican party today. >> do you accept the endorsement? >> yeah, i think this is going in a positive direction. >> i know the republican party is inherently more interesting than the democratic party right now. it's like, it's sometimes like watching a reel of hockey fights strung together instead of actually having to watch hockey games, which we usually like to cover the democrats and if you're like me you're nearsighted and can't even see the pucks so it looks like they're just swinging sticks around for no reason. but in this case, the whole reason of whether or not the republican party will unify behind donald trump. this is not a hockey fight. they're fine. >> do you expect the

endorsement? >> yeah, i think this is going in a positive direction. >> yeah, i think i expect you to endorse him, too. let us actually count the number of elected republicans in washington who have said that they will definitely not support donald trump. can we count them. there is this man, his name is senator dean heller of nevada. he says i oppose the nominee. and this man, i am as frustrated and saddened as you are about what is happening to our country, i cannot support trump. and there is senator lindsey graham who says, i cannot support donald trump. there is three in the senate, the house, two, carlos carballo of florida says i cannot support trump, a moral decision. so that is it, and scott rigell, three members of the senate, two in the house.

of elected republicans, that is it. five people. i don't know of any others in washington. five, you could fit the entire never trump movement among the elected republicans in congress, right? you could literally put them in a station wagon with a lot of room left over for groceries and pets. if you had no pets or groceries you could fit them into a nissan sentra. there are five of them total. and only one of them that anybody has ever heard of is lindsey graham. there is a lot, a lot of noise. and today, blanket coverage over this split in the republican party that everybody believes has been caused by donald trump. the split is made up. do you expect an endorsement?

i spend long hours with her checking her heart rate, administering her medication, and just making her comfortable. one night britta told me about a tradition in denmark, "when a person dies," she said, "someone must open the window so the soul can depart." i smiled and squeezed her hand. "not tonight, britta. not tonight." [ female announcer ] to nurses everywhere, thank you, from johnson & johnson.

>> yeah, i think this is going in a positive direction. >> that was the outcome of today's big clash between paul ryan and donald trump. the top two politicians in the supposedly fractured and divided republican party that doesn't seem all that fractured and divided. i think i'm missing something here. here to help me find it is the great dan rather. mr. rather, it's always great to have you. >> great to be here, rachel. >> i feel like this is one of those days when i feel like the tide is all going one direction and i'm facing the other direction and i just see things very differently. is this something important about this split that everybody is watching for and talking about in the republican party that i just don't get? >> if so i don't know what it would be. first of all i recognize for a lot of cable news network people and people like myself today it

was a big news today because trump met ryan. but if you analyze it carefully, not much went on there. and even whatever went on there, trump has his own consistency now bigger than the republican party base itself. and they don't care what paul ryan thinks, what paul ryan says. he is not a factor. there is some question how big a consistency paul ryan has. so that is one thing. but frankly i see this as kind of a kabuki dance, not much going on there. masks, posing, one way or the other. in the end, paul ryan may swing around to officially endorsing trump but he is never really going to like trump. trump today, yesterday and tomorrow, for paul ryan, trump is like bad chili. he doesn't want anything to do with it. but he has to. and he is in a position now where he wants to see kind of which way the wind blows.

he is kind of in a lot of pressure in the lower house of congress, but in the senate there are a lot of worried senators. so if you want to know how this will likely turn out just see the way the wind blows, if the republican senators were up for re-election this year and the word about trump at the top of the ticket. there are many republicans who believe that trump is absolutely lethal for the republican brand. and this gets to the very core of what is the party about. paul ryan is miles apart from trump on everything from immigration to trump's words about the ku klux klan. on trade, on taxes, on continuing to support social security and the way it's been supported. all of these things. they're way apart. but there may yet be a shotgun wedding, or whatever it's called, a wedding of convenience between the two. but even if paul ryan comes around, he won't like trump, but in the end he probably will come around, but i have a hunch, no reporter worth anything reports

the hunches, but there is still a possibility of toying with the idea of putting a third man in the race. and whether that is trump dog-paddling for time to see whether it develops, unlikely but possible. but if not, where this plays out is that ryan officially endorses trump and holds his nose while doing so. but as of today, there simply was not a lot that went on there. >> and it got me wondering if the whole thing that we're looking for is just something that actually never exists in nature. i feel like on almost every election cycle you hear about the party being torn apart. whether it is somebody who is seen as sort of a moderate like john mccain being nominated, the social conservatives in the republican party said that they were going to schism, that the

base felt abandoned and that would tear the party apart. and then you go back to something more radical like 1964 and barry goldwater, and the amount of people at the time that the nomination of goldwater would be suicide for the republican party, that is what george romney's dad said, it would be suicide. even if there were big breaks, it seems like we have had two paries for a long time. >> don't forget the 1972 election, when the party veered left and nominated george mcgovern. and there was a lot of talk when the democratic party is finished it's too split apart. didn't happen. >> you know, you have to bet that the two parties facing, remain a two-party system. but there is some danger, occasionally the party splits so

deeply that it disappears. for example, in the 1850s, the predecessor to the republican party, the whigs, split apart and that was the founder of the republican party with lincoln coming on. and keep in mind, rachel, whether you're paul ryan with his demeanor and his beliefs, who doesn't like trump, the dislike of trump doesn't match their hatred of hillary clinton. and trump's best argument is listen, guys, whether you like me or not do you want me or do you want hillary? and in the end, insofar as the republicans become united that is what will unite them. and i said before it's a mistake to underestimate trump. he can win. i'm not predicting he will win. but he is showing the kind of strength that very few people expected. and he is on to something. a combination of anger, fear, resentment, the toxic mix of racial prejudice in.

and he is speaking a language that a lot of people understand. if he gets into the polls in november. again, i'm not saying he is going to beat hillary clinton. hillary clinton has the potential for a so-called blowout, but trump can win. >> dan rather, that is scary, but really good to hear it from you but it makes sense when you put it that way. host of access tv, dan, thank you. >> thank you for having me, always a pleasure to be here. >> and coming up, something very hot going on in the democratic party. stay with us.

right now, of do we? yes, we do. senator bernie sanders speaking in south dakota. south dakota one of the states that votes on essentially the last day of the democratic party. this live shot of the rally in sioux falls, but we have a report next, including a live

report. stay with us. while this street circus and

media circus and political circus played out in d.c. today, well, the beltway was focused on this meeting of paul ryan and

donald trump to the exclusion of anything that may be happening anywhere else, what actually started to happen on the other side of the country today and in the other party, something that bernie sanders has been saying for months now that he intends to win the california democratic primary, which would be huge in terms of the sheer number of delegates available. california is the biggest prize in the entire race. senator sanders says that california is a state he wants to win. he believes he can win it. he said as much to me at his home just a few days ago. >> well, i think we have a good chance to win california and that is something i very much wanted. we have a good organization there. we have a lot of support and we're going to fight as hard as we can to win the largest state in this country. >> now, senator sanders has been actively campaigning in california this week, including in front of some very big crowds. but now, something interesting has happened with just a few weeks to go before the california vote. this sort of cap stone to the whole primary campaign. the guy running things for the

sanders campaign in california has suddenly left the campaign. now, the california state director, michael siroco has now just quit the california campaign ahead of the primary. he was known as organizing the digital part of the sanders campaign. he told reporters in california there had been a split in the sanders campaign over whether to focus on that kind of grass roots on-line organizing, or whether it would be better to focus on running tv ads in california, since california is such a vast playing field. well, in that strategic debate, apparently the digital guy lost telling reporters quote, the campaign wanted to go in a different direction with the california strategy so we mutually parted ways.

but if that was the fight, grass roots organizing or tv ads, and the grass roots organizing guy says he lost that argument so he now left the campaign then you would expect the sanders campaign to start running tons of tv ads in california, right? i mean, the sanders campaign has run a ton of tv ads, spending more than 20 million, in california, the state the sanders campaign says is absolutely crucial to their strategy, they have spent millions in cable ads thus far. but here is the other thing, they have just told msnbc news that they will probably not spend money on ads in california, nor on broadcast ad buys in california at all. so what is happening here? the digital grass roots organizing guy says he left the california campaign so that tv ads could take the lead instead. now the tv ad side is letting up on the throttle as well,

essentially stopping their work, as well. is the campaign in california out of time or money or not sure what would work best for them in california? we know senator sanders wants to win in california, they feel they basically need to win in california. and senator sanders has said he can win california. can he still get there from here? and the question now is, is he still actually going for it? if the sanders campaign gives up for california? what does it mean for how the race ends and when it ends? joining us, danny freeman, joining us live from sioux falls, south dakota, danny, great to have you here. i know it's hard to hear me. just signal if you can't. we're trying to take in this news on the sanders campaign, apparently ousting in california, what is going on there?

>> well, it's interesting rachel. thank you rachel, for having me on. it's interesting, i just spoke to jeff weaver, senator sanders' campaign manager and he basically laid out what the strategy would be. you are right, they have not spent by huge amounts. so rather they will target three different pillars here, the first one i'm told by campaign manager weaver, they will focus on the big rallies and hope to get a lot of earned media from that. the second thing they will do is focus on college campuses and will make a big effort to register students early on ahead of the june 7th all-important date. and finally, this is interesting, rachel, they're making a large push for latinos in california, one of their most important place where they really think they can do well. we're told they have a team out there in california that is dedicated to making the events

that are taylored to the latino community all across the state of california. there are 60 staffers, plus out there they say they may increase the number. but as far as tv ads and advertising they are probably not going to rely on that as heavily as they have in other states, rachel. >> danny, the reason the tv ads seems like such a salient point is just that california is so massive, a state with a huge geographic area, a lot of different senators, california politics say there is no way to run statewide without being all over television. did they take this decision to get off tv out of financial necessary or is there strategic thinking about it not being something they need to do in order to win? >> it's interesting, i spoke to jeff weaver and other campaign aides about that question. what does it mean that they're not spending as much money? the fundraising, the numbers are up this month.

kind of cut in half after senator sanders faced big losses. but i think they are confident in their strategy, we are talking about state director, who just left. and the state director is coming in, a veteran of their campaign. he was in charge of iowa, in charge of their big upset win in michigan. and they really do believe he is their big dog and big gun to come in. and it is clearly because they feel that he has the trust of the senator to get things done. and the way that i'm told that, it's again, around the big rallies. and i spoke to senator sanders a week or two ago in a press conference, are you going to change your strategy and move away from these big rallies and go to other events and take a different approach to all-important states like california. and he said he will mainly focus

on these big rallies. but again, he will target latinos specifically, perhaps the showing of a bit of a change of strategy. >> nbc's danny freeman, covering the campaign for us live tonight in south dakota, danny, doing great work, modulating your voice so as not to disturb those around you, well done, my friend. again, i know that the focus on the republican campaign is almost physically impossible to stop from the news media right now. but i do actually think there is something potentially determinative going on in the democratic campaign right now in terms of this california decision and some other things going on with the sanders campaign and the way the clinton and sanders campaign may not be running against each other anymore. but the democrats have something going on right now, i'm just saying. all right, stay with us.

oh, look... ...another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works... ...in one week. with the... fastest retinol formula. ...to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®.

...another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works... ...in one week. with the... fastest retinol formula. ...to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. we'll be right back. last month, the republican presidential frontrunner proposed abolishing a frontrunner that no republican frontrunner had proposed that before. the reason they never proposed abolishing it before is because it does not exist. >> largely, we can eliminate the

department of education, the department of environmental -- i mean, the dep is killing us environmentally, it's just killing our businesses. >> the department of environmental. the federal dep, the dep, johnny, for short. the dep, that is not a thing, that doesn't exist. but abolishing parts of the real government is something that also got put on the table today ...in one week. with the... fastest retinol formula. ...to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®.

...another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works... ...in one week. with the... fastest retinol formula. ...to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®. in a way that is likely to make a lot of very influential people very mad, and that real story is next. i supported him, i supported him for president. i raised a million dollars for him. that's a lot of money. i supported him, he lost, he let us down. so he lost, i never liked him that much after that because i don't like losers. >> before you get to that -- he is a war hero. >> he is a war hero because he was captured. i like people that were not captured, okay? i hate to tell you that.

>> donald trump in july saying that john mccain was not a war hero. he likes people that were not captured. that incident came back this week, mr. trump was asked if he regretted calling mr. john mccain not a war hero. what he said in his remarks, turns out now he believes john mccain is a war hero. but he doesn't regret those last comments, specifically because they helped him in the polls. >> frankly, i like john mccain, and he is a hero. also heroes are people, you know, whether they get caught or don't get caught, they're all heroes as far as i'm concerned. and that is the way it should be. >> so do you regret saying that? >> you know, i like not to regret anything. i mean -- you say things, and what i said frankly, is what i said. and you know, some people liked what i said if you want to know the truth. i mean, there are many people that liked what i said. after i said that my poll numbers went up seven points. >> so therefore it must have

been a good thing to say. we used to think that disparaging veterans, insulting veterans, crossing veterans would be kind of a third rail in national politics. is it? today, the donald trump for president campaign announced that they want to get rid of the v.a. they want to scrap the veteran's administration. donald trump says he would be happy to privatize the v.a. as part of the national campaign, telling the washington street journal, saying we want quality care from top to bottom. we want national privatization, we don't see anything wrong with that. you know, for all the problems in the v.a., in recent months, years, the long waits, employee misconduct. given that, when it comes to killing off the v.a., veterans really do see something wrong with that. you may remember last summer ben

carson who was then doing well in the polls running for president, ben carson proposed doing away with the v.a., but the response he got from seven different veterans groups, who don't always agree on everything, but who then wrote a letter to ben carson saying they strongly disagreed with his proposal to, scrap the v.a. veterans like the v.a. they don't want to kill it. ben carson proposed killing it when he was still one of many people seeking the republican nomination and he got burned by veterans' groups for that very quickly. now donald trump, the de facto republican nominee has proposed the same thing. now what happens next? isn't this also a third rail, if there is a third rail isn't this it? how do we as a country make sure that it gets treated as a third

rail, if it's stopped being treated that way. joining me the congressional reporter for the military times, i read everything you write. it's very nice to have you on the show. >> i appreciate you covering veterans issues, not a lot of folks do anymore. >> this issue of privatizing the v.a. keeps coming up and seems to have accelerant in it. is this a popular idea? >> very few people said the word, privatization, that is a four-letter word in the veteran's community. you hear quite a lot of talk about expanding choice or access or making private care more easy, but to hear the trump campaign actually use the word privatization is fairly shocking, because folks tend to avoid that and all the connotations that go with it. >> and we then didn't hear ben carson talk about privatizing it very much thereafter.

it seemed like he was very stunned by that. i wonder if there was a different calculus by mr. trump, the veteran's funds, not necessarily giving them to the veteran's groups that he raised in a very high profile way in their name. i wonder if he has a different calculus on the veterans benefits? >> the reforms have been very broad. so to say they're considering some form of privatization, that is not very specific. it could mean simply expanding the popular choice program. and it could mean he has a magic bullet for fixing the wait times issues. but it's tough to pin him down on any specifics. so he may be able to get away

with the word, without getting tied down to some of the bigger meaning or concerns with it. >> let me ask you about another thing that happened today. across my desk because i saw the press release that iraq and afghanistan veterans of america put out. very angry press release, i think you tweeted it today, as well. where they're really upset about the veteran's legislation that is moving in congress. almost nothing moves in congress, but there is a piece of veteran's legislation that is moving. and at least one very influential vet's group is mad about it, saying it would be a very big cut to the gi bill. what do you make of their criticism? >> you know, this is actually a point of funding in the group that a lot of veteran's groups hate, now what we're hearing is that the good outweighs the bad. but this is a rollback for the stipend for just about every veteran going to school on the gi by. some have raised a stink about it saying look if you're going to fund veterans programs you can't make a victim of other veteran's programs.

it is worth noting that donald trump was confronted about it, he wavered, saying he doesn't know about the gi bill and cuts about that. both hillary clinton and bernie sanders are strongly saying they will not cut the gi bill. they received praise on this. this is another issue where donald trump ends up going counter to a lot of the veterans groups and we'll see exactly what that means in a long run. >>? a normal political universe that should burn him. we'll be interested to see if it does. we learned this year it is not a normal political universe. >> absolutely, there are a whole different set of rules this time around, that goes for military veterans and members, too. >> one of the best military reporters in the country, again, i do read every single thing you write. you do a great service. you're a good beat reporter.

this is one of the most important ones there are. i'll keep reading. >> thank you. keep reading. so when we started the show and not enough time in my kitchen. (announcer) need to hire fast? go to ziprecruiter.com and post your job to over 100 of the web's leading job boards with a single click. then simply select the best candidates from one easy to review list. you put up one post and the next day you have all these candidates. makes my job aot easier. (announcer) over 400,0 businesses have already used ziprecruiter. and now you can use ziprecruiter for free. go to ziprecruiter.com/offer6

this was not on our radar tonight, but it broke recently. late-breaking news that msnbc should say has not confirmed test what they need to do to ensure that children are not discriminated against. now, if the times is right about

this, it won't come with the force of law. they note in this breaking news story, the letter from justice in education, did does contain a threat. in the times' word, schools that do not abide by the abomba interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid. this comes in the middle of the fight with north carolina over transgender rights, and the overt discrimination bill signed into law, the attorney general said that the they would sue north carolina over the law. the big headline, not confirmed by nbc news, is that obama administration is about to issue what is called a sweeping decree, that transgender students need to be able to use

the bathrooms of their choice. tomorrow will be a busy day. [ nurse ] i'm a hospiceurse.

britta olsen is my patient. i spend long hours with her checking her heart rate, administering her medication, and just making her comfortable. one night britta told me about a tradition in denmark, "when a person dies," she said, "someone must open the window so the soul can depart." i smiled and squeezed her hand. "not tonight, britta. not tonight." [ female announcer ] to nurses everywhere, thank you, from johnson & johnson. i have some specific questions about something that is due to happen tomorrow at the white house. tomorrow night there will be a state dinner at the white house. which is a neat thing. state dinners are like the prom, christmas, and comic con. as fancy as washington gets. for the first time in four

decades, there is not going to be a state dinner. there will be a states dinner. a state dinner honoring multiple countries at once. they almost never do this. it is not a state dinner for us and one other, it is a state dinner for us and five other countries, finland, sweden, norway, denmark, iceland. all five. that is happening tomorrow night at the white house. here are my questions, all equally important. first, do the five countries mind that they are all combined into a single state dinner. even though they are not one state, they are five states. is there potentially a nordic country beef that we don't know about? finland and sweden and norway saying, who invited iceland. that is my first question. my second question is about this boat.

the white house made this boat to signify the waters and excellent fisheries of these five there will be one of these boatos every table. it flies each of the five nation's flags, the white house is proud of it. advanced notice, advanced pictures of this boat. released a list of the boats' ingredients, made of chocolate and something called gum paste. so, my question is, can you eat the boat? will they eat the boat? will heads of state hack off pieces of the boat, or just the cookies around it? chocolate and gum paste it is a decorative icing i want to know

if people are going to eat the boat. i should mention, there are thing that is light up in that boat. the windows apparently, light up. and apparently, whatever it is floating on, i see alumination, and a lot of work went into decorating and publicizing it can they, will they eat the boat? the third and final question about the states dinner tomorrow night. is a question that is a serious question, not meant to be mean at all. it is about the entertainment. there is a young pop star, named demilovatto, it is not a nordic place. why is that? i am not saying, she is great. she has, as they say, the jams,

but why? i some questions, the state dinner is tomorrow. if we get answers to those, we will hear them on this show. put it in your calendar. for your calendar tomorrow, set your watch for this one. noon. noon eastern time that is when the judge in the bridgegate case in new jersey, that is when that judge set the deadline for the release of unindicted co-conspirators bridgegate scandal. we don't expect there will be any legal wrangling between now and noon tomorrow. if there is we will let you know. and one other thing in your very near future, i will be on late night with seth myers tonight. >> we have had a cast of characters, is there anyone we are down to three people.

anyone that you missed? who do you miss the most running for president? >> so many of them. >> so many. >> i think i miss lindsey graham. for, on a serious note, there, there is a lot going on in terms of foreign policy, and stuff going wrong in the world. in afghanistan, iraq, the fight against isis, and russia is going nuts, a lot going on. i wish we wering having a, he was a guy that wanted to run on national security. he seemed like he was little drunk. like little tipsy. some of the debates, he would turn up at the bar, hope that reporters would be there. and so, i miss that i will bewaring bright blue shoe, it goes on from there. that does it from there.

see you tomorrow. now, it is time fingerprint to. i'll be wearing bright blue shoes. . "first look" is up next. >> it is friday, may 13th. right now on "first look," the obama administration will issue a directive to america's public schools on transgender bathroom access. what came out of that much hyped donald trump meeting with the gop leaders including republican wiseman james baker. one brave woman takes on two armed carjackers at gunpoint. plus, a survivor story involving that plane and 17 sky divers who walked away. that and much more. "first look" starts right now. good morning, everyone. i'm dara brown. today the obama administration will issue new directives to all public schools across the country on the