was presented by house impeachment managers today. the case is based on facts that are not in dispute by anyone and conduct that played out in full view of the public. the only question for republicans will be, will you lay down in the face of trump's incitement of an insurrection that was carried out by groups now considered domestic terror threats? or will you take your first stand in the trump era for the rule of law? we're going to read you a long portion from the 80 page case presented today by house impeachment managers as a check against some of the lies and misinformation we've been hearing for weeks from trump and his allies in the gop. here's the case laid out by house democrats. quote. president trump's responsibility for the events of january 6th is unmistakable. after losing the 2020 election, president trump refused to accept the will of the american people. he spent months asserting without evidence that he won in a landslide and the election was

stolen. he amplified these lies at every turn, seeking to convince supporters that they were victims of a massive electoral conspiracy that threatened the nation's continued existence, but every single court to consider the president's attacks on the outcome of the election rejected them and state and federal officials from both parties refuse president trump's increasingly desperate demands that they break the law to keep him in power. with his options running out, trump announced a save america rally. it was an january 6th. he promised it would be, quote, wild. each of those facts cited by house democrats is indisputably true. goes on to draw on donald trump's exact words at the january 6th rally. words we can just play for you because trump said them publicly in front of cameras. >> we won this election and we won it by a landslide. we're going to have somebody in there that should not be in

there and our country will be destroyed and we're not going to stand for that. we're going to walk down to the capitol and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we're probably not going to be cheering so much some of them because you'll never take back our country with weakness. you have to show strength and you have to be strong. and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. we're going to try to give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country, so let's walk down pennsylvania avenue. i want to thank you all, god bless you, and god bless america. >> and we all know what happened next. donald trump and his attorneys filed their response to the impeachment charge against

trump. their argument centers mainly on process points. claiming that it's unconstitutional to impeach a president once he's out of office. we'll work to debunk that in a moment but first, their arguments on substance, especially the words uttered publicly by their client are interesting too. what appears to be the very best they could come up with. quote. it is denied that the phrase "if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore" had anything to do with the action at the capitol. as it was clearly about the need to fight for election security, what? that's not how the insurrectionists took trump's words all all. watch. >> we're going to walk down to the capitol. >> we're going to walk down to the capitol. >> capitol building. >> take the capitol. >> take the capitol!

>> take the capitol. >> take the capitol right now. >> and this complicates the defense lawyer's case too. so we all know now that donald trump went home and watched the insurrection unfold on live tv for hours and hours and hours. didn't even take calls. and he never rushed to twitter to clarify, whoa, whoa, wait, my supporters misunderstood me. he never addressed the american people as president until much, much later. until much of the damage was already done hours after the capitol was breached and even then, he told the insurrectionists he quote, loved them. the case against donald trump with some of our favorite friends. dan goldman, lead counsel during the democrats' first impeachment as well as former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. now lucky for us an msnbc

impeachment analyst. you need one nowadays. co-founder and then elizabeth newman, threat prevention at the department of homeland security now director of the republican accountability project is also here. dan goldman, let me ask you about the case made by the house impeachment managers first and then we'll get to what seems like some silliness on the president's legal team. start with the case laid out by the impeachment managers today. >> i thought they did an excellent job of putting everything that we've been talking about in bits and pieces throughout the last couple of weeks into a very impactful and persuasive brief. ultimately, it's not just about january 6th. that was the culmination of a month's long effort to overthrow the election and in the end, january 6th was the final fuse that lit the bomb so to speak

but donald trump had been planning for this rally for a long time. his supporters had been eyeing it. hotels in washington, dc closed down well in advance because they understood that violent protesters were going to come to washington, dc for no good reason and the house, i think, did a very good job of linking all of this together. linking the ravnsberger call and saying it was going to be wild with the statements he and others made on january 6th and as you rightly point out, nicole, his inaction after the rioting began, i think, is the most telling evidence as to what his state of mind was and what his expectation was for his words that day. >> dan goldman, i don't want to

spend a ton of time on the defense because i think in a real court of law, i'm not sure they mount statements like this because they're demonstrably false but let me read some of them. it is denied that president trump intended to interfere with the counting of electoral votes. so the problem is their client blows that one up. let me show you some of donald trump on january 6th talking about exactly what he wants mike pence to do on the day that they were counting the electoral votes, which his lawyers say he didn't intend to interfere with. watch. >> i hope mike is going to do the right thing. i hope so. i hope so. because if mike pence does the right thing, we win the election. >> i mean, what he wants pence to do and he said it in georgia what he wants pence to do is exactly what the lawyers deny that he wanted pence to interfere with the counting of the electoral votes and the insurrectionists stormed into

the mob chanting hang mike pence because by the time they breached the capitol, he hadn't done what trump directed him to do. i hope mike pence does the right thing. is there any consequence for the lawyers' lying, dan goldman? >> no. there's no judge to rule them in contempt, there's no judge to prohibit any of these arguments. if we were in a court of law, their argument about the unconstitutionality of this trial and their argument about somehow donald trump's speech being protected by the first amendment would both not be permitted to be used against a jury but of course, nicole, we are not in a court of law. we are in the senate chamber and anything goes. and they are looking for anything that 37 republicans or 34 republican senators can glob on to to avoid actually addressing the conduct and i'll

give you my favorite example of what their defense is. and i think last night on television, one of trump's lawyers said, oh no. he's not guilty of inciting the insurrection because the insurrection had already been planned before his speech. it is absolutely amazing that that article, in effect what he's saying is, no, donald trump's conduct was even worse than we expected but it wasn't a technical term of the article of impeachment. what he's saying is that donald trump has actually conspired with the protesters to interfere with the capitol but that's not what he's charged with, only charged with inciting them. >> it's unbelievable. steve schmidt, i think that one of the mistakes the media covering the first impeachment made was to constantly push it through a political filter and through that political filter, the republican senators, jurists were fact immune and they so much as admitted it after the

fact. i think this time, this impeachment is really not about politics. trump's out. he's basically deplatformed, but there is a homeland security crisis that in some ways he brought in to full view by revealing what "the new york times" started reporting on pretty aggressively, ties between republicans, sitting republican members of congress and domestic terrorists and white militia groups. i'm wondering if you think these republicans seem to do, through their inaction, what donald trump did in his debate with joe biden. basically telling the militias and domestic terrorists to stand back and stand by, we're not going to touch trump. >> if that happens, if there is no accountability imposed for the inciters along with the incited who committed acts of violence, who, for the first time in american history since 1797, bloodied the peaceful

transfer of power, that's what they did. the capitol fell to those men and women. they tore down the american flag, raised the maga flag. if there's not accountability, this will happen again and there will be political violence in this country. this was a crowd that was filled with white supremacists, with white nationalists, extremists, militias, neo-nazis, proud boy fascists, and this group that's being arrested all over the country was incited. they were incited by trump. they were incited by hawley, cruz, the big lie that the election was stolen and during the months where that lie was propagated as it spread around the country by donald trump, by fox news and news max and oan, the consequence of that was the poisoning of democracy and the attack. the attack where the capitol of

the united states fell for a period of hours to violent insurrectionists who tore down our flag and raised the maga flag. >> you know, steve, it seems like this vote isn't even about staying in the good favor of the trump base. this is about whether or not you want trump to take over and lead the party again in four years because the notion that that isn't the clear intention, that's what this vote seems to be about and i think if you've got mitch mcconnell speaking out now about the qanon character in the house and you've got liz cheney under, i think, a pushback that may not have been anticipated that i think people thought she was safe as a house republican could be. she's now got matt gates and all the trumpists in her district attacking her. what do you think this vote is about about whether to convict donald trump? >> it's about whether they'll be

faithful to their oath of office and they'll be faithful to their oath as jurors. if they will consider the facts or they've decided to nullify the evidence by placing their loyalty to a man, trump, above their oath. and most of them have done that and have continued to do that for some time now, but that's fundamentally what this is about. you know, look in the end, liz cheney is the leader of the democracy caucus, a minority of house republicans. kevin mccarthy is the leader of the autocracy caucus. matt gates said that donald trump is the forever leader of the republican party and declared him the leader of the america first movement which likely last movement is a fascistic movement. donald trump is of course in control of the republican party. the qanon movement is in control of multiple republican state

parties. the walls have been breached. mitch mcconnell tried to ride the tiger for a very long time. he thought that he could maneuver his way through this. but the insanity that has let loose that did not face any resistance has now consumed republican party. that's what this vote means. >> you know, elizabeth, as sort of the student of extremism and counterextremism, i've been so drawn to your analysis of what extremists here in our politics and with all the reporting about ongoing threat, the federal law enforcement, the dhs issued a bulletin extending through april 31st warning of an ongoing threat from domestic violent terrorists associated with the insurrection of the capitol. what would the acquittal over the incitement of the insurrection, how would that be read by the extremists

themselves, elizabeth? >> it's likely to further embolden them, that there is at least a willingness on the right for them to continue to associate politically and just be encouraged by right-wing movement or figure heads. put another way, if he is impeached and they actually convicted him, the impact that that has is for the, i think it's an estimated 57 million people that still believe that the election was stolen, 57 million of his voters, if you convict, then there's this opportunity to educate and inform the 57 million that in fact, he lied to you. the election was not stolen but that has to come from voices that they were listening to. it is sadly not this show or my voice, it's not steve's voice. it has to come from the people

that voted for trump, in large part, the elected officials that represent in congress. if they would come out and say he lied to you. i lied to you. i am sorry for that, the election was not stolen. what that does is shrinking the 57 million down to a much more tangible or a number that security forces could actually handle because i think, and again, i'm not saying 57 million would radicalize to violence but some small percentage of them will be vulnerable to neo-nazis. they're actively recruiting them. i'm reading online postings of neo-nazis and proud boys, they're giving instructions with how to go about approaching a disheartened qanon adherent. here's how you talk to them and encourage them to move away from the gop and into this fascist third way that they describe. that is a very frightening thing that when you have 57 million

americans who are very angry that their government is not legitimate because it was, the election was stolen from them, they could be prey for these extremist groups. so if we do not debunk this lie through the impeachment process, we are likely to see increases in recruitment and increases to violence. if you insert doubt into that information cycle that the conservative infotainment, it won't reduce everything but violence in the next few months but maybe not as much. >> to hear we'll still have violence you fear in the next few months, i mean, what is your threat assessment of the chances or propensity for violence around the impeachment trial next week, elizabeth? >> well, i think that the law enforcement notification, the

bulletin, the fact that the capitol has this massive and i could be wrong and i hope i'm not. my bigger concern would be as we start seeing more gatherings, those are targets for extremists. they're looking for civil war and opportunities to accelerate the societal collapse and january 6th was a victory for them, a symbolic call to arms that now is the time we can actually do it and have this civil war overthrow the u.s. government and establish our white nation. so the violence is still going to be there. we need to shrink the number of people that are associating with these. >> dan goldman, what is your advice to the impeachment manager on how much to make what

elizabeth is talking about and steve about the ongoing threat that the extremist elements inside the gop now present, how much do you think that should be an emphasis in terms of the damage done by trump's big lie in incitement of the insurrection? >> well, there's a combination of things. adam shiff with why conviction was so important. it played out worse than he could have ever feared with what has been going on right now. but the idea of sending a message to the extremists, to donald trump, future elected officials and to the international community that the united states will not accept this type of anti-democratic violent behavior and this runs

counter to our fundamental values, so i do think that they will spend some time stressing the impact of the senators' votes. it didn't work last time. thank you both so much for starting us off. elizabeth is sticking around. when we come back, we now know where mitch mcconnell's line is. mcconnell slamming the anon member of the house. four years of aiding and abetting trump's overtaking of the gop, we'll ask one of his former colleagues with mcconnell's stand is too little, too late. bob corker who early on remarked publicly that trump lacked fitness for the office he held will be our guest and alexandria ocasio-cortez known for her polished and precise terms in hearings and interviews gets very raw and very personal about

the attack on the capitol and explains why she thought she was going to die. all those stories and more when deadline white house continues after this. don't go anywhere. no dad, it's a video call. you got to move the phone in front of you like..like it's a mirror, dad. you know? alright, okay. how's that? is that how you hold a mirror? [ding] power e*trade gives you an award-winning mobile app with powerful, easy-to-use tools and interactive charts to give you an edge, 24/7 support when you need it the most and $0 commissions for online u.s. listed stocks. don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today. man: i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now, there's skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months after just 2 doses. skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs,

or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. man: i feel free to bare my skin. ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. >> man: what's my safelite story? man: i feel free to bare my skin. my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ok everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. whoo-hoo! great tasting ensure with 9 grams of protein, 27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health.

senate minority leader mitch mcconnell making waves today with a rare rebuke of a fellow republican lawmaker. the qanon supporting congresswoman marjorie taylor greene. in a statement, he says this. loony lies and conspiracy theories are cancer for the republican party and our country. somebody's who's suggested that perhaps no airplane hit the pentagon on 9/11, that horrifying school shootings were pre-staged and that the clintons

crashed jfk jr.'s airplane is not living in reality. even though mcconnell doesn't mention greene by name, she got the message loud and clear firing back with a tweet, quote, the real cancer for the republican party is weak republicans who only know how to lose gracefully. this is why we're losing our country. if marjorie taylor greene seems undeterred is because this is what republican leadership has been up to. house republican leaders in the last week have been mostly silent as pressure mounted to respond to the cascade of ms. greene's problematic social media posts and videos that have surfaced in the last week in which she endorsed an array of conspiracy theories and violent behaviors including executing democratic leaders. at the same time, weighing calls within the ranks by former loyalists to strip representative liz cheney the number three republican of her leadership post as punishment for her vote to impeach mr. trump. joining our conversation, msnbc

political analyst, gibbs and then elizabeth still here. robert gibbs, i'm happy, i guess is the right word, to see mcconnell find some religion, but i'm shattered by the cowardice that put all of this in motion because it's too late right now. the republican party is now indiscernible from extremists and qanon. >> yeah, absolutely. this is a little akin to building a fence long after the horse has left the barn. i think what senator mcconnell is doing is putting a decent amount of pressure on congresswoman mccarthy, as they go into the 2022 elections where they think they can gain the majority, that marjorie taylor greene doesn't become the defining caricature of the republican party. i think mitch mcconnell has

flashbacks from 2010 and 2012 when as many as four senate seats slipped through his grasp in colorado, nevada, missouri and indiana because they nominated candidates that were far out on the fringe and even in conservative states, democrats could win because they could position themselves as the only candidate left inside the mainstream. >> i want to show you how that's going to play out in the future campaigns. this is the ad telling mccarthy and seven vulnerable republican lawmakers to qanon. >> qanon, a conspiracy theory born online. took over the republican party. sent followers to congress and with donald trump, incited a mob that attacked the capitol and murdered a cop. then trump and republicans in congress sided with the violent qanon mob, minority leader kevin mccarthy should have stood with us but he was a coward, voted to

protect trump. leader kevin mccarthy stood with the q, not you. >> it's all out there. i'm surprised this ad wasn't put together sooner. it is all out there and the fact there's hand wringing about who to side with, liz cheney. there's no story suspense anymore in where the republican party is going. >> this is exactly what happened at the capitol. it's different when you warn of something that might happen and then turn on your tv and see that it isn't and it is happened in a way that has left all of surprised, even those that understood this could, making that and replacing those images that warning with those real images has crystallized in

people's minds that they have to take action and at least that enough has spurred mitch mcconnell to begin to try to do something. >> elizabeth, i want to read you something that my former colleague in the bush white house wrote today in the "washington post." writes this. some have adopted a very different political philosophy than the founders held. this approach to government promises the recovery of mythical past. emphasizes emotion over reason, denigrates experts and expertise, slanders outsiders and blames them for social and economic ills. it warns of global plots by jews and shadowy elites. it accepts the lies of a leader as a deeper truth and praises law and order while reserving the right to disobey the law and overturn the political order through violence. this is a reality i have resisted naming. the 45th president and significant portion of his supporters have embraced american fascism.

what do you think? >> i think mike got it spot on. i've been reading through a book by an extremism expert that talks about mainstreaming of extremist thought and how over the last decade, we've seen things that used to be relegated to the far-right fringes become a normal part of conversations on the right. this book was written before january 6th, and in many ways, what we saw happen physically on january 6th, the organized extremist groups in person with their flags. they have an identity. but intermingled with them, qanon, this amorphous group, some of which, there are adherents that committed acts of violence in the name of that ideology, so in the sense, in

nature but then you had trump supporters and they're all physically there intermingling with each other and kind of is a representation of what has happened on the right. so if you ascribe, if you say you're a republican anymore, the vision that the bulk of us in this country have is what happened on january 6th. now, that doesn't necessarily mean you had to storm the capitol but just being in the same venue, in the same place protesting alongside white supremacists and violent extremists. what does is that say? and i have to say, when i read mcconnell's statement, i'm with you, it's better than nothing but he describes it like a cancer. it looks like stage four cancer in the way we deal cancer in this country, early screening and cutting it out before you get to stage four. he had multiple opportunities to address this and he thought he

could handle it and i'm sorry, when you are faced with evil, you have to denounce evil. if that overwhelms any sort of political calculation that you have, and so in many ways, i think the republicans are dealing with all of now six years of complicity with trump. this is the party. and i think there are people that don't want the party to be this way. that's a separate conversation when you do with the relatively small remnant that rejects the conspiracy theories and the violent extremism, but we can't deny. this is what the party is at this point. >> robert gibbs, i never ask questions about what the democrats should do from a place there's any deficiency in the democratic response but now it's from the place there's only one functioning political party. the other one is now, as elizabeth just articulated indiscernible and not offended by conspiracy theorists in the ranks and for ones in congress on 9/11 to sit shoulder to

shoulder and share committee assignments with this woman is something i can't wrap my brain around, but i wonder what you think democrats can do to flip the label. i mean, republicans have described democrats as the radical left. there really is a radical party in this country that isn't the left, it's the right. >> yeah, absolutely. i think if you're a democratic strategist, having a conversation with democratic senators, it is to focus on what has to get done in this country. i think the juxtaposition of dealing with conspiracy theories and jewish space lasers starting forest fires with a focus on making sure we get vaccine in people's arms and an economy open again and a sense of normalcy in your everyday life, i would think that's a pretty good juxtaposition to take into an election in two years. >> robert gibbs, elizabeth neumann, i'm sure this

conversation is to be continued. thank you both for being with us today. called the trump white house an adult day care center. we've been wanting to talk to him since. bob corker joins us next. m sinc. bob corker joins us next e or wh. ♪♪ ♪ this could be ♪ hi. you just moved in, right? i would love to tell you about all the great savings you can get for bundling your renter's and car insurance with progressive. -oh, i was just -- -oh, tammy. i found your retainer in the dryer. - i'm norm. -oh- i'm szasz. -- -oh, tammy. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little

more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

leadership is not just simply reflecting people's darkest fears back at them like has been done for the last decade or two. it's actually inspiring people to a better future.

it's been this qanon, stolen election garbage that has reflected back to people and we're paralyzed to criticize it because, gosh, we've got to have those votes for the next election but start asking people. the next election for what so that we can be in office and peddle conspiracy theories again, so that we have to be beholden to proud boys? no, you know what? they can leave and if it costs us an election, great. >> well, he said it. republican congressman adam kinzenger. steady stream of revelations about extremist lawmakers like marjorie taylor greene and the majority of the gop senate voting even against holding a trial for donald trump. can the party be saved and should it be? joining us now, former republican senator bob corker of tennessee. i have wanted to talk to you since you've showed up at an event in your state and looked

like it pained you to say it, he hasn't displayed the fitness for the office you held and what did you mean then and did you see this coming? >> good to be with you. took a two year sabbatical after leaving the senate two years ago, january 3rd and except i did step back after the election. good to be with you. look, i'm in turn the page mode. we've been through all that we've been through and as adam was mentioning earlier, i really think we've got to start focusing on policy issues and moving ahead. you know, as you know, having served in the white house, when you have the leader of the party being a certain way, the party unfortunately can adopt that way and that's no longer the case. the standard bearer for the democrats is president joe biden but the republicans don't have one. it's time to have a debate about who we really are and talk about

policy issues instead of reliving things that aren't true, conspiracy theories. it is amazing to me how many people believe these things. i still cannot believe that i have friends who are hard working thoughtful people that believe some of the things that have been put out, but hopefully, as we move away, we'll get back to a place that you recognize and i recognize that is talking about where we're going to go as a country and without a standard bearer, that means there's going to be a debate. >> i was in the white house and i was in the white house the last time in the nation's capitol area, attacked with a terrorist attack, flew planes into the pentagon and push you, how do you do counterterror policy with a member in the gop caucus who doesn't believe in that attack or this one? >> yeah, i mean, that's probably, that person is

probably not too influenceable and i don't know that person. that person is not so far from here. not far down the road, but look, i think when people, over time, people marginalize themselves by saying things that are just too crazy to believe. you know, the world is flat or whatever, and i guess there are some people who still believe that, but look, they marginalize themselves and the party moves on to more thoughtful people who are actually talking about real issues that the american people need to be dealing with. which is not quite there, we're not quite there. go ahead. >> i was going to ask you. people like liz cheney, there's a legitimate and robust policy debate to be had with liz cheney if you're a democrat and you disagree with her foreign policy views but the republicans are looking at punishing her for the votes and the statements. that doesn't seem like turning

the page from the trump era. >> yeah, no it doesn't and there are some people that are going to hang on, showing as much fulity with favor by our former president but i think that dissipates over time. i really hope that it does. i know y'all were talking about senator mcconnell earlier. actually, i've been heartened by the things that have been said recently in defense of liz cheney, john barrasso doing the same thing and the fact is those are tough votes to make for people. they take courage to make and everybody has to form their own opinion about what to do, but, you know, we don't march in lock step. you remember president bush, some people disagreed with what he was doing but they weren't outcasts. they weren't thrown out of the party for having, not following

him in lock step. i disagree with a few things. we've moved to a place where it's all about personality. we've just never been in that place before. we've been about fiscal issues and leadership in the world and we may disagree on a policy, it's going to take a while to get there but that's where we have got to go as a country because personality, worshipping personality as we have seen is dangerous for our country. our democracy is more fragile than we ever anticipated and we've got to move to a more mature understanding of what politics is about. it's about policy, not about some person always being right when we know many times they were actually telling untruths. >> did you vote for joe biden? >> no, i didn't vote for

president trump and i didn't vote for joe biden. i couldn't vote for president trump just because of all the things that have been said. but i didn't like the policies that i know joe biden would put out. i like him. i served on the foreign relations committee when he was chairman. his life story, his truly remarkable, like him as a person but the policies would be different. so i wrote in a senator's name who i thought had conducted themselves best throughout all of this and i wish joe biden well, but i just couldn't go there with the policies that i knew were going to be put forward. >> you talked about having friends that are good people who believe mistruths. i have family and friends who believe them too. how much responsibility does fox news and the conservative media echo chamber have for what your

friends and mine believe? >> you know, i think, as you know, what happens after about 7:00 on all of the channels, you know, it seems it becomes more opinion, right? and i think that, you know, people, i put the responsibility no doubt on all of the channels who focus on an audience as a business model, but i do tell people it's their responsibility to understand and to be educated and not to just read something on social media or see a tweet and believe it to be true. that's the part that's been fascinating to me and, you know, we had someone over at our house yesterday. i'll be honest, and i wasn't there but, you know, there's just so much, i don't know where people get their information. i mean, part of living in a

democracy is having the responsibility to understand enough about the issues to actually have an opinion and what's happened, unfortunately, nicole, is the media is not trusted and so when a president tweets out things and they don't trust the media anyway, people begin to believe things, but put aside, this is a thing that's tough for me. put aside whether you thought the election shouldn't have been mail-in ballots in certain states and all of that. move beyond some of the concerns people had about the election, and we do need to do a better job in that regard and it needs to be much prompted as far as getting results. but then to say that for people to believe that congress could overturn an election and people believe that or that vice president pence could overturn an election, i mean, i'm sorry, that's like basic civics that

maybe in about the sixth grade or seventh grade, eighth grade. those things can't happen, so, you know, if we're going to thrive as a democracy for hundreds of years, it is the responsibility of citizens to actually know a little bit more about what's going on and not just take what people are saying at face value. many of these people, as you know, most of these people, hard-working americans who care about our country who followed an untruth to a place and let's face it, legislators gave them reason to believe by saying they were going to object to the election but legislators gave them belief and that was irresponsible, but anyway, i'm ready to move on to where we're going as a country and the republican party being the party

of fiscal issues and economic growth and leadership in the world and building alliances and appropriate immigration and i hope that's where we're going to return. >> senator, i am interested in those things too. i've given up on the dream that you can work toward those issues with all the disinformation, so i'm going to put you on the spot and ask you to come back. it sounds like your friends and my friends are getting their information from some of the same sources and i think you are still in the senate when russian disinformation was such, my former colleague general hayden described it as a political 9/11. the russian disinformation attack. we have our home grown disinformation and love to pick up on that next time we're lucky enough to have on our air. >> if i could, all of these fishers created, people are out there with other countries,

exacerbating those, which is all the more reason people need to get their information from reliable sources. thank you so much and have a great day. thank you. >> thank you, sir. senator bob corker, thank you for spending some time with us. up next for us, with impeachment just a week away, we could be reliving some of the stories and images of the capitol hill attack all over again. for alexandria ocasio-cortez, she says we can't ignore and move on from that day. those who should do it for their own convenience. we'll bring you her own words next. own convenience. we'll bring you her own words next

are you managing your diabetes... ...using fingersticks? with the new freestyle libre 2 system, a continuous glucose monitor, you can check your glucose with a painless, one-second scan. and now with optional alarms,

you can choose to be notified if you go too high or too low. and for those who qualify, the freestyle libre 2 system is now covered by medicare. ask your doctor for a prescription. you can do it without fingersticks. learn more at freestyle libre 2 dot u.s. ♪♪ never run dry of... killer attitude. or hydration. neutrogena® hydro boost. the #1 hyaluronic acid moisturizer delivers 2x the hydration for supple, bouncy skin. neutrogena®. and i just hear, where is she? where is she? and this was the moment where i thought everything was over. i mean, i thought i was going to die. all of these people who want to

tell us to move on are doing so at their own convenience. these are the same tactics of abusers. and i'm a survivor of sexual assault and i haven't told many people that in my life. but when we go through trauma, trauma compounds on each other. >> you do not see that very often in american public life, let alone in american politics. bravo to congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez for opening up with an incredibly personal and gripping and powerful account of the capitol attack. the insurrection. comparing calls from her republican colleagues to move on to tactics deployed by abusers, familiar to sexual assault victims like herself, as she said there. her deeply moving explanation of

the day's events, in which she describes hiding in a bathroom and mistaking a capitol police officer who she says was angry and hostile with her for a rioter. joining us now, democratic congresswoman linda sanchez of california, who we spoke with on this program as that day unfolded. you have stuck with me every day that i have covered this, that the night before the insurrection you called your husband and told him where your will was and i know we've spoken since but i saw you tweeted today you're still reeling and i wanted to start by asking you how you're doing. >> yeah, thank you for asking. it was traumatic, and i think what people don't understand is, you know, members of congress who experienced that, we're still picking up the pieces. we're still trying to process it. we're still trying to heal ourselves, and we're getting all this pressure from everybody to do this, do that, you should be doing this, you should be doing that, or just get over it, get beyond it, and what people don't understand is you have to process it.

you have to heal. you have to, in order to move on, feel like somebody takes responsibility for what happened, and that there is accountability for what happened. otherwise, you really can't heal and move on, and it is, as my colleague said, you know, a tactic that abusers use. they abuse you. you're hurting, you're reeling, and they cavalierly say, well, just move on, let's forget about it and move on. you cannot move on without healing, and you cannot heal without that sense of accountability. >> what do you hear from your republican counterparts, save for the ten that voted with democrats in the bipartisan impeachment of donald trump? is it denial? is it political pressure? why isn't this an all against insurrection moment for the congress? >> that's what i don't understand because i will tell

you, in those moments of that insurrection, the mob was not defining who was a democrat versus who was a republican. they were coming for all of us. all of us could have lost our lives that evening. and they specifically were looking for vice president pence, who is a republican. i mean, the crowd was not discriminating, and had they breached that chamber with the members in it, i can tell you there would have been casualties on both sides of the aisle. i can not fathom why i have colleagues, republican colleagues, who refuse to denounce those actions, who refuse to stand up and hold the president that incited these people to account. it escapes me why they would continue to repeat these lies unless, a, they don't live in reality, b, it's politically expedient for them and for their

own wishes of power to deny what happened, or c, they're nihilists and they just don't care what happens. but any way you look at it, it is frightening. it is tense, having to work with people that you feel like don't want to acknowledge what happened or denounce it in any way. and you know, as i laid -- as you know, huddled in my office in the dark with a baseball bat in my hand and the door barricaded, you know, waiting to see if these, you know, rioters and, you know, secessionists and, you know, insurrectionists would reach me, i thought to myself, there is no way that our president should get any glory for inciting hate and insurrection, and as i sat there, i vowed that i would introduce a bill, and i have,

that would prohibit anything that has a penny of federal money in it from being named after him, and it would also strip him of all of the benefits and honors that former presidents get so he would not get a travel budget or a staff budget or a pension, because you cannot be a traitor to democracy in country and profit from it, in my view. >> and the white house has said that they're reviewing whether or not he should still receive any sort of even limited intelligence briefings, so he is certainly leaving office in a way that no one else has. congresswoman linda sanchez, you've added so much to our understanding of the events of that day. we're really grateful to you. thank you. >> thank you so much for keeping on this. it's important. >> of course. so important. the next hour of deadline white house starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. we're just getting started. eak. don't go anywhere. we're just getting started missi)

the ink! dad!!! dad!!! i'm so hosed. yeah, you are. (shaq) the epson ecotank printer. no more cartridges. it comes with an incredible amount of ink that can save you a lot of trips to the store. get ready for the dean's list. who's dean? the epson ecotank. just fill and chill.

so, you have a birthday coming up? >> yeah. >> how old are you going to be in is >> nine. >> are you hoping to get anything for your birthday? >> yeah. >> what do you think you're going to get or what do you want to get, buddy? >> my dad. >> you want to get your dad for your birthday. that would be a nice present, huh, bud? >> yeah. >> hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in the east. it was one of, if not the cruellest and most disturbing chapters of the trump presidency, ripping migrant families apart under zero tolerance policy and keeping children in cages. over the course of the policy, nearly 3,000 families were separated at the border, and more than 500 of those children are still not reunited with their families. just moments from now, president biden will sign three executive actions to address immigration and begin to fix what one administration official called a moral failing. the first action will establish

a task force that will reunite the children still separated from their parents. that task force will be chaired by the newly confirmed secretary of homeland security, alejandro mallorcas. he was confirmed this afternoon. president biden's other immigration executive action will evaluate programs currently in place, coordinate the federal government's strategy to promote integration and inclusion of immigrants. the new white house has stressed the need for immigration reform after four years of amoral practices and is taking a comprehensive look at what needs to be changed. from the "washington post" reporting, quote, biden officials said they have a plan to transform the migration dynamics along the mexican border by addressing root causes of immigration from central america and helping vulnerable groups find safe refuge closer to home. the administration also plans to restore a program allowing

minors to apply to legally reunite with parents already living in the u.s. instead of risking a dangerous journey with a smuggler. president biden's focus on returning to humanity as it tackles the tricky issues of immigration stands in stark contrast to trump's policy where the cruelty of them was the point. trump's main immigration focus, of course, building a wall across the southern border, one he wanted painted black with little prickly things on top so it would be too hot to touch and those spikes were meant to impale people that tried to get across it. trump attempted to roll back the daca program, which allowed immigrants brought here as children to remain in the country without any fear of deportation. he essentially dismantled the system for those seeking asylum from persecution. and the horrific act of separating young children from their parents and keeping them in cages, the administration saw not just as a by-product of their policies but as the policy itself, as the tool to deter

more migrants from coming across our border. the undoing of trump's immigration practices is where we start this hour. nbc news and msnbc correspondent jacob soboroff is here. also joining us, msnbc contributors eddie and yamiche alsindor. i have to start with you, jacob, because you're the person who i credit with bringing me most of the most tragic and disturbing reporting about this chapter, and i want to start with whether we know everything. i think that i.g. report that looked into the child separation policy done by d.o.j. came out at the very end of trump's presidency. it indicated a larger role for rod rosenstein and it described the policy as not even keeping infants who were breast-feeding together with their mothers. it said, separate them as well. is there more -- are there more shoes to drop on just how awful trump's policies were, or do we

know what we're dealing with? >> what we don't know is who's going to be held accountable. i think that is by far the most important question here in addition to how, when, and where the families that were tortured in the words of physicians for human rights, will be given relief. and so, while we have reports from inspectors general of homeland security and health and human services and now the department of justice, as you said, nicole, we don't know much beyond what we've heard today from the white house. we know that all of the families who remain separated will be searched for and offered the opportunity to reunite. but what we don't know is what about the families that were separated, tortured, sent back to their home countries and remain there today with their children? they have the same trauma, the same impact, the same cruelty perpetrated upon them by the trump administration as the rest of the separated families, and i hope we'll get some clarity today when the president signs

the executive order in the oval office in a matter of minutes. it is a day for the history books. it has been over three years since the trump administration first started systematically, deliberately, and cruelly taking children away from their parents. but after all that time, we still do not know how far this administration is willing to go in order to rectify what i think universally can be described as one of the most horrific chapters in modern american history. >> i want to ask you what the groups and what your sources on this story over the last three years think of today's actions. do they describe them as a good first step? what do they think about what president biden is expected to announce today? >> i think that there's a lot of cautious optimism, but i think that there is a lot of deep concern at the same time, that this isn't going to go far enough. how much of a pivot is this away from the cruelty that we've been talking about for three years at this point? four years, if you go back to what the president said as he

declared his candidacy for the -- the president of the united states, president trump, i mean. and so, while they're looking very closely at this, i don't think that there are celebrations. in fact, i know for a fact that there are not. there are a lot of questions from advocates, from the families themselves, and from the lawyers representing them about getting more specific here from the administration, and i think it was perfectly summed up in the briefing room today, not a repeal but a review of trump administration policies, and i think folks were expecting much more than that. >> yamiche, let me play some of that briefing with jen psaki, white house press secretary, earlier today. we'll watch it and talk about it on the other side. >> this is going to be really big news across latin america, especially in the countries where people have come from. what is the biden administration's message to people who may see this in the news in the next few days and think, oh, they're changing the policy, now might be a good time to go north? >> well, the message continues

to be what it has been, and i appreciate you asking the questions because it is confusing as we take a lot of these steps forward. one is that this is not the time. we want to put in place an immigration process here that can -- that is humane, that is moral, that considers applications for refugees, applications for people to come into this country at the border in a way that treats people as human beings. that's going to take some time. it's not going to happen overnight. >> a very careful answer there from jen psaki, and she appears to be trying to lower expectations. >> that's right. biden officials really don't want to have the message going out there there is now open borders in the united states and that americans are just welcoming people who come to the border illegally and are in some ways, they're really worried about undocumented immigrants

coming to america and thinking the biden administration is going to be more lenient on the border. president obama was called the deporter in chief. his policies were seen as hardline, not as cruel as president trump but still hard line. i think the big issue here is that biden is taking over from a president who had a policy where cruelty was the point, where separation was the point, where the deterrent was to try to torture immigrants at the border to try to get them to stop coming. the biden administration is saying they're not going to do that, but they also are in some ways not saying exactly what they will do. they don't know how many children very separated. that's a question that's still hanging in the air. court documents say it could be around 600, white house officials tell me and other reporters a thousand, but there's a real question of what did president trump actually do? there are reports and in my reporting i found that there wasn't on the front end all of this information gathered in order to make reuniting families

easy. i remember i will never forget talking to a father who was deported without his daughter into central america. there are all these immigrants who suffered at the hands of the united states government that really are now looking at this and saying, is this a time now where this government is going to be more lenient, and the biden administration is really, really being cautious about that. i think the other thing to note here is that there are thousands of immigrants that are now waiting in mexico that were asylum seekers that were not supposed to be sent back to mexico, and the biden administration is saying, we won't have people enrolled in that program again, but those same people, they're going to have to wait a bit longer, so there's real tense and real -- there's a real tension here with the fact that the biden administration is saying they want to do something while they want to be humane, but there are also immigrants who are saying, this is urgent. not only are we still separated from our children, but we're also living in dangerous conditions that international organizations say was not the way this should be handled. >> you know, eddie, it feels like it's important to separate

out all the aspects of the story that jacob and yamiche have to cover, and i think to focus in on the one feature of the trump presidency that was so completely outed by this basket of policies, which was the dehumanization of migrants, and i think yamiche just articulated an explanation for why the last three -- trump didn't try, but the three presidents before him failed to muster bipartisan support for comprehensive immigration reform. george w. bush tried with john mccain and ted kennedy. president obama tried with rubio as an ally in the senate. and trump obviously didn't try. but no one has dealt with immigration at its root level and then trump turned human beings into political pawns and took pleasure in torturing them. that's what biden inherits, and we've spent so much time talking about what he inherited on the pandemic. what he inherited on immigration

is just as dire. >> you know, i completely agree, and what trump did as he did in a number of different areas is he took an aspect of the debate and exaggerated, made it a caricature. there was always this element of the debate around immigration, nicole, that carried with it a certain set of assumptions about the humanity of those who were trying to make their way to the united states. so i think it's important, as you rightly say, to make a couple of distinctions. we need to, i think, and they're analytic distinctions between the moral and ethical considerations around child separation, around spiked walls, and the like. and what we need to do as jacob said to hold people to account, to hold the likes of steven miller and others, and to engage in concrete efforts to repair, to repair the damage done, to respond to the ethical and moral not just lapse but the cruelty that the policy represented. and then there are the political issues that, of course, these are only analytically

distinguishable. the political issue. of course you need to distinguish your policies from the trump administration where cruelty was the point, as we've said. but you also need to distinguish the policy from what yamiche said. that is the obama administration, which was subject to enormous criticism by folk because there are political implications in terms of the coalition that brought biden into the white house. he needs -- they need -- the biden administration, inmy view, need to figure out how to change the frame around the immigration debate. if they don't, they will end up repeating some of the elements of that -- of the debate that have, in some ways, flummoxed three administrations as you've just laid out. >> jacob, jump into this wider lens around the conversation. what is it with all of your expertise? what are the urgent actions and what is sort of the reframing and the wholistic approach that's needed? >> professor glaude is 100% right. the reason donald trump was able

to separate children like this is because there has been a decades-long immigration enforcement system in this country held by democratic and republican presidents that has dehumanized and treated migrants as something to be pushed away. something to be scared away, something to be deterred from coming to this country. president bill clinton started it officially in the modern era with a -- literally with a border patrol policy called prevention through deterrence that made migrants take dangerous and deadly journeys through, quote, unquote hostile terrain in order to come to the country. basically, die trying if you want to try. george w. bush created, obviously, department of homeland security in the wake of 9/11, but with that, exponentially increased the size of the border patrol and then barack obama, it is no secret, deported more people than anyone in the history of the presidency of the united states, and so, while donald trump is gone, the underlying currents that professor glaude described, that have made up our immigration

enforcement system for decades so easily enabled president trump to torture, in the words of physicians for human rights, and commit government sanctioned child abuse, remains. so if the biden administration wants to have a clean departure from that, there has to be an acknowledgment of it as well. it can't just be, we're going to review and tweak. it has to be a wholesale re-examination of the systemic issues, the underpinnings of the system that allowed this to be so easy for donald trump to commit, i think, what universally now is decried as unbelievably horrific. >> and i think, yamiche, the best evidence of that is that people who were part of the trump administration fear being associated with this policies as they should. for their roles in it, either by staying silent or by going along with it. jacob and julie ainsley have had remarkable reporting over the years and there's a lot of it. and i wonder if that -- what is the impact of that on the new

biden administration, their homeland security secretary, as we said, was confirmed today. do they hit the ground running on offense, knowing they're on the right side of some of these moral and ethical questions, or are they tentative about the politics? >> the biden administration comes to this with history having its eye on president biden after what we experienced with president trump. let's remember that president trump, for all the things that he did in the four years that he was in office, family separation in particular will go down as one of the most signature dangerous, cruel, dehumanizing things that a president has done in the history of the united states. it cannot -- it can be compared, in some ways, to the middle passage, separating african-americans and throwing them across the united states. this was a policy that ripped children out of the hands of their parents and their guardians and you can't unsee the images that we saw at the

border with crying children, with children in cages, with young children trying to care for other young children because their parents were kidnapped, essentially, from them. biden now has to come in and say, i'm going to do this differently and he has said that he's going to do this different. he has said that he's going to look at immigrants in a way that is not dehumanizing, and i think that's going to be the policy that they're going to try to enforce, and i think they're going to be journalists like me and jacob and others who are saying, what is owed to these immigrants? i know we've been talking about family separation but the remain in mexico policy. i went down to mexico and interviewed a woman who was kidnapped along with her young daughter while being forced to remain in mexico, again, a policy that was decreed by international agencies, it was seen as inhumane and completely not part of the asylum seeking process that was illegal, essentially, in the eyes of the international community. that woman was kidnapped. what is she now owed and how are

we going to find her? these are the questions that the biden administration has not answered yet but these are going to be the questions at the heart of the policies, not just how are they going to tweak and change things but also what are the reparations in some ways owed to so many of these americans -- so many of these immigrants, rather, that were now in some ways thrown away by america, and i have to say one other thing, underscoring all of this, as we talk about this racial reckoning is xenophobia, racism, white supremacy. when you separate brown children, especially, from their mothers, we have to ask ourselves how was that allowed to happen and what role did white supremacy play in that? >> absolutely. i mean, i think that's at the root of all of these conversations. you're not just reducing, reversing heinous policies. it's, again, as with the extremist threat that we've all been warned about persisting through april 30th, it's the danger of mainstreaming and what trump ushered in was white supremacy, making it --

legitimizing it as a factor in american political life. that part of the conversation is to be continued as my dogs try to barrel into the studio. jacob soboroff, yamiche alcindor, thanks forrtg us off. the case before donald trump means to be an american. that story next. and later, in the race against those new variants of coronavirus, health experts are taking critical steps right now to increase the amount of vaccine doses we have available in this country. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. don't go anyw.

hi, i'm pat and i'm 75 years old. we live in the mountains so i like to walk. i'm really busy in my life; i'm always doing something. i'm not a person that's going to sit too long. in the morning, i wake up and the first thing i do is go to my art studio. a couple came up and handed me a brochure on prevagen. i've been taking prevagen for about four years. i feel a little bit brighter and my mind just feels sharper. i would recommend it to anyone. it absolutely works. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

with house democrats releasing their impeachment brief today to the senate, we are now beginning to see the case that they plan to make to convict donald trump for inciting the insurrection that took place on the capitol on january 6th. putting their republican colleague liz cheney, the house impeachment managers write this, none of this would have happened without the president. the president could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. he did not. there has never been a greater betrayal by a president of the united states of his office and his oath to the constitution. and they're right. no president has ever betrayed that solemn oath more than trump, but as former bush sweech writer writes, it's more than a betrayal of the his oath. it's a betrayal of the core and heart of the idea that is america. he writes this. it is revealing how a political movement that claims to be dedicated to the recovery of

national greatness has so readily and completely abandoned many defining national ideals. trump's promise of american strength has involved the betrayal of american identity. joining our conversation, ben rhodes. eddie is still here. i have read the both sides arguments and again, the facts are not in dispute. the conduct was in full public view. and i ask you something that i asked steve schmidt in the last hour. what do you think is at stake in what the senate does in terms of conviction? >> well, what's at stake is american identity and american democracy. if the president of the united states can incite a violent insurrection that includes an -- a mob overrunning the u.s. capitol and face no consequences, then how can we credibly claim to stand for democratic values? how can we prevent that from happening again?

what accountability is there that sends a message in the future that this kind of behavior is unacceptable? i think it also speaks to what i care about, in part, which is our capacity to speak to those things around the world. you know, we've got navalny thrown in prison in russia. we've got a coup in myanmar. we need to stand up for democratic values and if people see that the president of the united states can get away with essentially trying to overturn the results of a democratic election, we lose all standing to ever talk about that ever again anywhere. so, for the health of our own democracy and for the sake of what america is supposed to stand for in the world, there has to be accountability. this is a no-brainer. it's impossible to think of a more slam dunk case for impeachment than the president of the united states seeking to overturn a democratic election. >> you know, eddie glaude, i have this sense, when the insurrection was happening, in realtime, and amid all the horror, i felt certain that the facts would get worse as days went on.

and that that would give some republicans pause about being so sure about how they would vote. but i was wrong again. i mean, it shows that there is no bottom with the republican party, and you are never safe making a prediction that they might be something less than fact immune. but the facts that have come out are this. "the new york times" reported that there are extremist ties between half a dozen republican members and right-wing militias, groups that we have been warned about. there are conspiracy charges being filed against the proud boys and other white supremacist groups. there's instance after instance of republicans appearing with those members and i just want you to take on, as only you do, how that corruption infects the whole process. you've now got jurors who were part of the incitement. they should be on trial too. >> yeah, i mean, look, it's all out in the open now, nicole. one of the interesting things about the gersen piece that you

cited in the lede is that he tries to draw this hard distinction between the barry goldwater tendency and the reagan tendency and this fascist tendency that he names and he said, if you try to equate this, it's utter nonsense, and no one's trying to equate, i think. i think part of the argument is what does it mean to play fast and loose with these tendencies in american history? what does it mean as a political party to use -- to appeal to white resentment and white grievance as a strategy to mobilize voters during election cycles? what does it mean to play with that fire? what happens when that fire expands, when it begins to consume the party? and what happens when it actually, shall we say, dove tails with an aspect of american history. remember, there's a yale lawyer who wrote a wonderful book, an interesting book entitled "hitler's american model." and he talks about the nuremberg laws of 1935, not the genocide,

and he said that hitler looked to the united states, america first, looked at our anti-miscegenation laws, our immigration laws, our second class citizen laws, looked at the ways in which we dealt with racial classification and used it as a model. so there's always that element. so, what does it mean when we play with that fire? when we play with that fire, nicole, it almost inevitably means we're going to get burned, and that's what happened. >> yeah, i mean, people have said there's a reason even members of the, you know, far right of the republican party haven't played footsie with racists, and i think that's what adam kinzinger is trying to make clear in his statements today. ben rhodes, i want to show you something that congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez -- i want to show you something from the live stream. i played some of this in the last hour but aoc is so compelling and she talks in a way that politicians don't really speak very often in american politics, especially figures like her. she's one of the most prominent

democrats in this country. watch and we'll talk about it on the other side. >> this is not about a difference of political opinion. this is about just, like, basic humanity, and that's what these people don't get. because they have shown that, you know, we knew -- we knew that violence was -- we knew that violence was expected on the 6th. we knew that that violence was predicated on someone telling the lie, the big lie about our elections. we knew all of this in advance. we knew that violence was planned for the 6th. we knew that that violence depended on the lie, on someone upholding the lie that our elections were fraudulent.

lies that republican secretaries of state said were a lie, republicans had said it was a lie, republican governors had said it was a lie, you know, et cetera. so, we knew in advance that violence was planned. we knew that that violence needed someone to tell the lie. >> you know, her point there, that we knew, is borne out in every person that you talk to who was there, congressman himes told his staff to stay away. linda -- congresswoman sanchez told her husband where her will was. other members have told me on the air that they wore sneakers so they could run away from someone if they had to. i mean, where are we if they knew there would be violence, they knew it came from the lie, and republicans have already decided that they won't convict trump? >> we have a lot further to go as a country, nicole. you and i have talked on the show how many times about the risk of violence in those weeks after the election? and not just that.

think of all the dehumanization of alexandria ocasio-cortez over the last couple of years. not just from trump but from a lot of republicans. and think of the impact that had on that mob. no wonder she feared for her life. these are human beings. and the speed with which a lot of republicans in congress want to treat like an insurrection against the capitol, god forbid, the wrong person opened the door and aoc was there, do we have any doubt they would have committed acts of violence against someone like her? of course they would have. and the speed with which they were kind of falling back into the normal rhetoric of, let's move on, as if we're discussing a government shutdown or some typical washington debate, and not a violent insurrection that killed five people and could have killed a lot more. it's completely and utterly outrageous. and where is the empathy from her republican colleagues for the fear that she felt? where is the concern about the fact that some of the same republicans in the house caucus

might have known about some of this in advance? i mean, this is -- this should be a reckoning for this country. and the fact that the republican party can't even bring themselves to agree that the president of the united states bringing that kind of violence on members of congress is worthy of impeachment, it's completely unacceptable. and i think we cannot allow it to become normalized in american politics as just, like, another process story where some people argue we should move on and some people argue we should impeach him. no. if you are an american, and if you have any sense of empathy and somebody like alexandria ocasio-cortez who has put up with threats and dehumanization online, we should be able to disagree without doing that to each other and we're not going to be able to move forward as a country and do things together until we realize that. >> ben and eddie are both staying around for obvious reasons. when we come back, we heard something today from the white house that we haven't heard for the last four years, a critical statement about russia. that story's next. l statement about russia that story's next.

do we really need a sign to live, laugh, and love? -yes. -the answer is no. i can help new homeowners not become their parents. -kee-on-oh... -nope. -co-ee-noah. -no. -joaquin. -no. it just takes practice. give it a shot. [ grunts, exhales deeply ] -did you hear that? -yeah. it's a constant battle. we're gonna open a pdf. who's next? progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto with us. no fussin', no cussin', and no --

when you bundle home and auto with us. the lasting cologne scent of old spice dynasty helps get you off your couch. and into the driver's seat.

we are deeply concerned by russian authorities' efforts, decision, i should say, to sentence opposition figure alexey navalny, like every russian citizen, mr. navalny is entitled to the rights provided in the russian constitution and russia has international obligations to respect equality before the law and the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. we reiterate our call for the

russian government to immediately, unconditionally, release mr. navalny as well as the hundreds of other russian citizens wrongfully detained in recent weeks for exercising their rights. >> the white house is voicing its concern over the sentencing of alexey navalny, vladimir putin's highest-profile critic, to more than two years in prison, standing up for democratic ideals and denouncing russia when it violates them is the kind of thing we expect to hear from our leaders in washington but not something we heard during the previous four years. we're back with ben and eddie. you've spent time with alexey navalny. just flesh out what we understand about his case, his situation, and whether or not the biden white house's hand is weakened by four years of subservience of the american president to vladimir putin. >> well, yeah, i spoke to alexey navalny a few months ago at some length. i'm sanctioned by russia so not traveling to russia but over

facetime and something he said that sticks in my ear today is he said, you know, of course i feel fear when the cell door closes behind me and i realize that they could do anything to me. he's a human being. but he knew the risks he was taking and he thought they were worth taking, because what he has been for two decades is an anti-corruption evangelist. he has shown the brightest possible spotlight on the corruption of vladimir putin, stealing from the russian people and repressing them, so he and his cronies can get rich. and that touched a nerve. it touched a nerve with vladimir putin, and it touched a nerve with the russian people. and what joe biden can do, of course, america's standing to lecture other countries has been diminished but this idea of exposing corruption is something that the biden administration can take forward. alexey navalny had a video that he published about a billion dollar palace that vladimir putin had built for himself. that is only the tip of the

iceberg of the corruption that vladimir putin is involved in. joe biden, now that alexey navalny's in prison and his administration and our allies can shine a spotlight on that corruption. that's what vice president doesn't want to happen and that's what i think we can do and now that we have an administration that stands for something again, i hope that we see it. >> can you fill in some of the parts of the story that may not be getting as much attention here as they should? why did he go back? because you make a good point. every human being -- and he has a family. his family's also been targeted by putin. why did he go back and what was the crime and was it manufactured that he was sentenced for today? >> well, he's a fearless individual, right? but what he told me, too, is that he didn't want to just be an exile. he didn't even want to be a lonely dissident. he has an organization in russia with dozens of offices. he has a movement in that country that he feels an obligation to. and he feels like he has built a movement and built a message over the course of two decades

about the corruption of the putin regime. and i think he felt like he was obligated to those people and to the cause that he leads to go back to russia, knowing what would happen to him. in terms of the charges, they're completely absurd. they say he violated the terms of his probation. all of his previous detentions were trumped up charges. they tried to charge alexey navalny with corruption because that's what these regimes always do. they project on to other people. what the biden administration is pointing to and saying they're violating the russian constitution is that the russian constitution, on paper, allows for the right of peaceful protest. obviously, in practice, it does not. but i think you see the biden administration trying to say, hey, they're violating their own laws. they're violating international law. and frankly, alexey navalny is getting more powerful. you know, he's got vladimir putin in a way back into a corner because if he puts him in prison, he proves alexey navalny's point, that putin is corrupt and he represses his own people. if he releases him, he has a platform. navalny has reached that kind of

tipping point for an opposition leader where everything vladimir putin does only proves navalny's point and only makes him and his movement stronger. >> eddie, just quickly, i'm so struck by the ongoing collateral damage of trump's years in office, his subservience, calling putin a strong leader, sucking up to him at every turn, making him more powerful and while there may not be any link between trump's presidency and what happened today in russia, you have to believe that putin feels emboldened and feels that america has a much weaker standing to condemn his conduct. >> oh, absolutely. you know, going back to our discussion with jacob and yamiche about family separation, what are you doing with your children? have you found their parents yet, america? going back to the fact that we have a congress, a senate that is basically not holding a president accountable who has incited an insurrection. how are you going to instruct us

on how to maintain our democracy when you are turning a blind eye to someone, the very president of your -- former president of the united states who threatened to overthrow, in some ways, to incite an insurrection. so, i think, you know, part of what ben said is absolutely right, nicole. we need to make the claim, but it has to be followed up with, i think, concrete action, shining the light, but it's always happening. it's happening, at least in this instance, against the backdrop of our diminished standing in the world. it's almost as if our voice has lost, in some ways, its depth, precisely because of the contradictions evidenced in our practice over the last four years. >> it's remarkable, and you hear reporting from foreign capitals, from our open correspondents and others, that foreign leaders are waiting and watching, that if there's any chance that trump's president again in four years, if the senate doesn't vote to convict him, that's a distinct possibility, there could be a

snap back to those policies. ben rhodes, eddie glaude, thank you so much for spending time with us today. when we return, three hopeful signs that health experts say could boost doses of coronavirus vaccines at a time when they are needed the most. that story next. that story next.

if you're on medicare, or retiring soon, making sure you have the right medicare coverage is important. so call unitedhealthcare and take advantage of a wide choice of plans including an aarp medicare advantage plan from unitedhealthcare.

it can combine your hospital and doctor coverage with prescription drug coverage, and more, all for a low monthly premium or in some areas, no plan premium at all. take advantage of $0 copays on all primary care doctor visits, all virtual visits, and preventive dental care. plus $0 copays on hundreds of prescriptions. and with renew active, enjoy a free gym membership. so call unitedhealthcare and take advantage of the variety of plans we offer, including ppo plans that let you see any doctor who accepts medicare, without a referral. if you're on medicare or retiring soon, call unitedhealthcare or go online today. there were some promising developments today in the effort to ramp up vaccine production and distribution here in the u.s. the biden administration will start delivering a limited number of vaccines to pharmacies

starting with one million doses next week to 6,500 stores across the country. it's a huge nod to states who turn to pharmacies for help administering vaccines when the trump administration left them to figure out distribution on their own. some news that might help reach the biden administration's vaccination goals in the long run, pfizer is moving up its delivery of 200 million doses from july to the end of may. and a new study suggests that people who have had covid may only need one dose of the vaccine because of their remarkably high antibodies after the first shot. that's about 26.5 million americans to put it in perspective. let's bring into our conversation msnbc medical contributor, infectious disease physician and medical director at boston medical center. this is becoming the story of 2021 on covid against the backdrop of tragic numbers of lives lost, science is delivering some reasons for us

to remain hopeful. >> that's right, nicole. and this study makes sense immunologically because when you get an infection, what your body is doing is creating antibodies to all parts of the virus be and what the vaccine does is it helps you build antibodies to the very effective part of the virus that helps you defeat it so when you get a vaccine after natural infection, you're likely to have your body react to that part of the protein that the vaccine is trying to get you to build immunity against. so these couple of studies now that have shown that people who have had -- people who have had sars cov 2 infection or covid-19 in the past could have a stronger antibody response. they do sort of give me heart. i do think, though, that it's unlikely in the near term that the fda may change its guidance, for two reasons.tudies were small. two, i think it's hard to actually confirm in many cases people have had the infection before or not. and the vaccine trials, of course, were built with some people who had the infestfection

before and so the composite number we see already includes that in the population. >> president biden said that by the end of the summer, he hoped to have 300 million americans vaccinated. do you see the announcements of more supply and more production and supply being pushed out through the pharmacies as a sign that that could slide back, that we could reach that goal sooner? >> boy, i really hope so. i mean, and there are a couple other things, aside from what you mentioned in the headlines, there's moderna also announced that, you know, one of the restricting factors in getting more doses out for them is that they've been putting ten doses but if they could put up to 15 doses in each of their vials, the packaging and the capping is what's taking some of the effort. they might be able to get more doses out. so i don't know how many more they potentially have, you know, in the factory but that could increase the number of doses they're presenting to the fda. that's one part. the reason it's necessary, i just feel, nicole, like there's more data even today from uk that shows that the variant, the

b.1.1.7 that's prevalent there in some of those samples has now gotten the mutation that the two more deadly variants have, which makes them evade immune therapies and potentially decrease the efficacy of vaccine and all it says is that these t once they get the conditional mutations makes it easier to get subsequent mutations. it's like a race. on the left what we have to do is increase the number of vaccinations, more doses, more vaccinators, more sites. on the right we have to deriece the transmission. everything we can do to decrease indoor capacity, no travel, the rapid tests and that's how we get to the other side of this. by the way, february and march i think are potentially the post periods because i think this is when we have the most vulnerable amount of people who are not vaccinated. hopefully as more people get vaccinated, that hospital mortality will come down. >> quickly, do you think that

these vaccines they're giving out now will be totally different from the ones they give out a year from now in terms of what you're saying based on the mutations? >> i think so we will need those, as you said. don't hold me to this, but it's likely we might potentially be doing annual or biannual boosters of these vaccines. from what we know in just vaccine science, over time, as you build immunity, at least if you end up getting the infection again, even if the it becomes less and less effective, hopefully it is lower. like with the flu where you might end up getting the disease, it's less severe. the majority of us are not immune to it yet. >> dr. bedelia, thank you for spending time with us and helping us make sense of all. this when we return, as we do every day, we will remember lives well lived. so when a hailstorm hit,

usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. ♪ usaa ♪ some companies still have hr stuck between employees and their data. we're made for. entering data. changing data. more and more sensitive, personal data. and it doesn't just drag hr down. it drags the entire business down -- with inefficiency, errors and waste. it's ridiculous. so ridiculous. with paycom, employees enter and manage their own data in a single, easy to use software. visit paycom.com, and schedule your demo today. (ringing) - hey kaleb, what's up? how you doing? - hey, i'm good, guess what, i just had my 13th surgery.

- really? i just had my 17th surgery. - well, you beat me. - well, i am a little bit older than you. - yeah it's true. how are you doing? - i'm doing good. i'm encouraged by seeing how people are coming together to help each other during times like these. - kind of like how shriners hospitals for children is there for us. imagine if i couldn't get my surgery. who knows what would have happened. - same for me. i know my shriners hospitals family will continue to take care kids like us who need them most all because of caring people like you. - like me? - no, the people watching us right now at home. - oh, those people. hi people. - kaleb and i know not everyone can help right now, but for those of you who can, we hope you'll this special number on your screen right now. - you'll be making sure our amazing doctors and nurses can keep helping kids like us, who need them now and in the days to come.

- your gift will make a huge difference for kids like us. - ooh, ooh, show them them the thank you gift. - okay, okay, hold on a second. with your gift of $19 a month we'll send you this adorable, love to the rescue blanket as a thank you and a reminder of the kids you're helping with your monthly support. - so what are you waiting for? you can use your phone and call, or go to loveshriners.org to give and join with thousands of other generous people who change lives with their gifts every day. - i think that's about it buddy, good job. - my pleasure captain. please call now. if operators are busy with all the other caring people, please wait patiently, or you can go to loveshriners.org to give right away. - [alec] big or small, your gift helps us all. - [both] thank you. (giggling) we need to reduce plastic waste in the environment. that's why at america's beverage companies, our bottles are made to be re-made. not all plastic is the same.

we're carefully designing our bottles to be one hundred percent recyclable, including the caps. they're collected and separated from other plastics, so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles. that completes the circle, and reduces plastic waste. please help us get every bottle back. i'm delighted that the effort we set up for such a small sum has turned into this enormous sum of money and the cause is so good from that point of view. i'm delighted we got so much money for such a good cause. >> profound charm and a world class heart. they called him captain tom, the british world war ii veteran who earned global distinction for a pledge he made last year, 100

laps around his garden before his 100th birthday to raise money for the uk's national health service amid the pandemic. the goal, one thousand pounds sterling, about $1200. the fundraiser caught fire, and captain tom, an inspiration, earned some $41 million in the end. his charitable campaign also earned him a knighthood from the queen itself at windsor castle. even after he became captain sir thomas moore, he never let go of his trademark phrase, that we should, quote, always remember. tomorrow will be a good day. over the weekend he was admitted to the hospital and he tested positive for covid-19. this morning we learned captain sir thomas moore passed peacefully in the loving company of his family at the age of 100. his namesake foundation said it perfectly. a beacon of light every single day. thank you, sir tom.

because of you, tomorrow will be a good day for so many more. we will be right back. things will pick up by q3. yeah...uh... doug? sorry about that. umm... what...its...um... you alright? [sigh] [ding] never settle with power e*trade. it has powerful, easy-to-use tools to help you find opportunities, 24/7 support when you need answers plus some of the lowest options and futures contract prices around. don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today.

when we started carvana, they told us that selling cars 100% online wouldn't work. but we went to work. building an experience that lets you shop over 17,000 cars from home. creating a coast to coast network to deliver your car as soon as tomorrow. recruiting an army of customer advocates to make your experience incredible. and putting you in control of the whole thing with powerful technology. that's why we've become the nation's fastest growing retailer.

because our customers love it. see for yourself, at carvana.com. it's moving day. and while her friends are doing the heavy lifting, jess is busy moving her xfinity internet and tv services. it only takes about a minute. wait, a minute? but what have you been doing for the last two hours? delegating? oh, good one. move your xfinity services without breaking a sweat. now that's simple, easy, awesome. xfinity makes moving easy. go online to transfer your services in about a minute. get started today.

thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we're grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. hi, ari. >> hi. >> nicolle. thank you so much. welcome to "the beat." we're reporting on several developments tonight. president biden issuing new orders on immigration. house democrats filing their first brief in this looming senate impeachment trial making the case trump betrayed the u.s. impeachment veteran adam schiff joins us shortly. and by the end of this hour, i can tell you jon bon jovi makes his "the beat" debut. we'll get into that. so we have a lot tonight. we begin with breaking news out of the white house. president biden using his executive power for three new big orders on immigration, showing he'll do what he can alone while