always. really appreciate your insights this morning. and as we head into the weekend, i want to wish a very important person in my life, my mother, a happy birthday. she happens to share her birthday with the one and only joe scarborough. so, joe, happy birthday. enjoy your day. and mom, happy birthday to you, as well. thanks for all of you for getting up way too early with us on this friday morning. don't go anywhere. "morning joe" starts right now. >> this week in covid history. it's april 2020, british prime minister boris johnson is in the hospital. the city of angels has the cleanest air. and everyone is head over heels for gay polygamist tiger-owning felons. ow. soften a [ bleep ]. >> we are inching closer and closer to beating this virus. >> it seems like we're seeing light at the end of the tunnel. >> there is light at the end of the tunnel. >> things are going really well. light at the end of the tunnel. >> hot diggity dog, light at the

end of the -- >> what you're hearing about light at the end of the tunnel doesn't take away from the fact that tomorrow or the next day will get really bad. >> the minimum number was 100,000 lives. i think we'll be substantially under that number. >> less than 100,000 deaths. no problem. >> if we can stay substantial lip under the hundred, which was the original projection, i think we all did a very good job. >> yes. great work, team! this has been this week in covid history. >> yeah, well, you know what they say? hindsight is infuriating. >> my god. they were so bad. >> it's tragic because it's true. >> it's terrible. it's funny -- happy birthday, sweetie. happy birthday. >> light at the end of the tunnel -- and they were carrying the sign, less than 100,000. >> don't laugh, you guys. it's funny, but don't laugh. >> the stupidity -- light at the

end of the tunnel! absolutely ridiculous. >> willie, we have a birthday boy. >> i know! happy birthday, joe. >> happy birthday, joe. >> yeah, thank you so much. i appreciate it. i've been busy, willie. >> second round of the msters. you shot a 107 yesterday in the first round. how's it looking today. >> no. >> as you know -- >> is he all right? >> a 107 -- was it a 107? you know, the thing is, my coach and i were a little disappointed. i've got a new coach in the off year, john daly. he told me -- >> okay. all right. guys. >> he told me i lacked the discipline -- >> you definitely lack a lot of discipline. >> and like your coach, you like to smoke while you're teeing off. have one right in there. >> he does. >> i also -- not the most popular guy out there. i slowed things down as we were

going into amen corner on number 11. the red sox were looking really good, so i had my phone, i took it out, and i watched an inning or two of the red sox. by the way, the red sox won again -- >> the mets! >> the red sox, of course, willie won again. we talked about it a couple of days ago, what was it? midway, then it was the norman conquest. i've got to say, yesterday reminds me more of charlemagne seeing the burning cross in the sky. it was that big of a game. but the play that everybody's talking about, actually, the mets/marlins game, willie -- listen. no ump is perfect. i would hate to have that job. but we should have a replay. explain what happens here. it's a real shame. >> here we go. bases loaded, home opener, bases

load, that's michael con forta. this pitch is a strike, but he leans his elbow in, it just nicks his arm guard. still, the catcher catches it, by the way. they call hit by pitch, so the winning run comes in from third. they did go to the replay. they looked at it, but you can't review whether or not he leaned in, they're just looking at whether or not he actually was hit, not whether or not he leaned in to get hit. they looked at the replay, they say, yeah, the ball did hit his elbow, but come on. that's a wlam to win. and if you listen to the broadcast, keith hernandez, an amazing broadcasting team, they were all over their hometown mets. wow, they said, you can't do that. it's a win, but a cheap way to win. and they've got to be a way for replay to overturn that. >> if i'm not mistaken, the rule is, if it is a strike and somebody is hit and it's over the plate and they're not trying to get out of the way, you don't

reward them a base, certainly not at the end of the game. i have no idea how they made the call they made. all three of them. >> yeah. >> tum pyre even said he made a mistake. but he definitely leaned in. >> did he? okay. >> by the way, just really quickly. i know mika is concerned about this. we love the mets -- >> it's your birthday. i'll give you -- >> i'm just saying, don't fall asleep on the marlins. they're a good team. they have great young pitching and they've built this organization from the ground up. they're going to be good this year, mika, so don't worry. don't worry. the marlins are going to come back. >> okay. along with joe, willie, and me, we have nbc news and msnbc national affairs analyst host and executive producer of showtime's "the circus" and host of "the hell and high water" podcast from the recount, john heilemann. >> good background. >> also, elizabeth b. miller and pulitzer prize-winning columnist

and msnbc political analyst, eugene robinson joins us this morning. >> and of course, you know, willie, i'll never forgive gene robinson for the nasty biting column he wrote about me after i won the '87 masters. >> i don't think that even happened. >> it's because you cheated, joe. i had to -- when you kicked that ball out on 12, i'm sorry, i just couldn't -- i had to tell the truth. >> thus the headline, rosie ruiz, get your golf clubs. who remembers rosie, cheating in the new york marathon in, what, '78? >> is the whole morning going to be like this? let's get to the news. we're following new developments in the justice department investigation of republican congressman matt gaetz. nbc news has learned that joe greenberg, a former florida tax

official and associate of gaetz is expected to plead guilty in the criminal case that spawned the sex trafficking investigation into the congressman. "the new york times" points out that this could be an indication that greenberg is likely to cooperate as a key witness against gaetz. investigators are said to be examining their involvement with women who were recruited online for sex and given cash payments, as well as whether congressman gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old. gate, who has not been charged with any crime, has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. an attorney who represents joel greenberg spoke to reporters after a status hearing yesterday. listen to what he said when asked about matt gaetz. >> does matt gaetz have anything to worry about? >> does matt gaetz -- that is such a --

>> when it comes to what happened today in court? >> does he have anything to worry about? i'm sure matt gaetz is not feeling very comfortable today. >> yeah, you know, up until now, john heilemann, all we had had were stories from the newspaper. a lot of -- a lot of information, but nothing from the principles here. the people who actually knew what was going on. so we weren't even at an innocent until proven guilty stage. you know, we were just hearing second and third hand from some great reporting, but had not heard from any of the principles of the case. yesterday, really, well, first of all, you could tell, because he was working with the state, there was going to be a plea deal. you knew where this was going. but then for the tax collectors, attorney to come out, and say that, really does more than just strongly suggest that they're

cooperating with the state and as his attorney says, that the congressman has something to worry about. >> yeah, joe, first of all, happy birthday. and that's still a little befudding to me that you're at work at 6:00 a.m. on your birthday. >> he loves it. >> i guess the celebrations will start later today. and i do think, you know, it's a little bit like, the worst thing that you don't want to hear when you're ensnared in a potential sex trafficking case is the -- your friend, the indicted for sex trafficking friend of yours, his attorney coming out and saying that you have some things to be concerned about. i mean, i think it's maybe the worst possible thing you could hear in these circumstances. and as you're building a case like this, there are a lot -- as you just said a second ago, we heard a lot of reporting.

we haven't heard from any material witnesses, but we've skipped over material witnesses now and gone straight to the heart of the case. if there's anybody that we know about right now who has the -- who has the capacity to flip on matt gaetz in a devastating way, it is this guy, who is the indicted sex trafficker. so we are now in the room where it happened, so to speak. and getting the strongest imaginations possible that there is something to talk about and that the guy who knows is going to talk about it. there may be worse days ahead, but yesterday was probably pretty bad. >> let's bring in "the new york times" reporter who has been on this story right from the very beginning. michael schmidt, an msnbc national security analyst. mike, good morning. bring us up to speed here on joel greenberg and this plea deal. his attorney there making it pretty clear that joel greenberg may be flipping on his buddy,

matt gaetz, here. >> yeah. and you know, as you guys were pointing out, fritz sheller, the lawyer who made those statements is a longtime florida attorney. he represented the wife of the pulse nightclub shooter who was indicted on terrorism charges and actually went to trial against the government to fight them and won. and, you know, whatever folks, you know, on the left or the right think of, you know, a lawyer like that, he is not going to go out and say that and not know the message that he is sending. clearly, that is a message directly to the public and to the government and to matt gaetz about the direction of where this is headed. about, you know, what his client is willing to do. because, you have to remember, joel greenberg is someone that we, you know, certainly in the

national media and the national -- anyone following politics had no idea was up until about ten days ago. but joel greenberg faces an enormous amount of time in prison for a range of charges, including sex trafficking, that he has been indicted on. and the only way that he can bring that number down is to provide cooperation to the government. to help their investigation. to help them lead to other prosecutions. and obviously, gaetz is the biggest fish that we know of, certainly, in this investigation. and often, whatever -- these investigations can be very successful. they can get a lot of people to plead guilty. they can go to truly and win. but if the end, the government were to charge gaetz and lose that case, that is what the public will remember. so the government wants to have as many witnesses as possible as it moves forward here.

and what this lawyer is trying to do is position his client to benefit the most from cooperating. >> well, and michael, based on sources i spoke with yesterday in florida, there may be more than one person testifying against the congressman. the department of justice has notified several people that they are of interest in this case. so is it possible that you may have several parties that were involved in these events that the congressman and the tax collector went to, who are now, especially if they were responsible for transporting the 17-year-old or being a part of that and being there while the 17-year-old is being

transported, there are several other people who will wanting to be getting details from the feds as well, right? >> there are obviously lots of problems when you're investigated by the government. but one of them is that typically, if you're a high-profile person, a range of conduct that you've done gets examined. the government gets in, they start looking at your phone records. they start looking at your email messages. they start talking to people around you. and in the process of that, if you have -- if you've done things that are wrong, they start to pop up. as we lay out in our story today, there are different trips that gaetz may have taken that the government is looking at. did he try to take women with him to the bahamas? who was on those trips? it doesn't like greenberg was on those trips, but who was with him? and who were the people affiliated with him? and him being a young congressman in florida, there were, you know -- were there donors that wanted to go with

him? as we also talk about in the story today, there's an allegation the government has learned about ghost candidates in 2020 elections in florida. that has no -- you know, there's no known nexus between that and the sex trafficking, but that's a big issue down in florida, where in state races, there are questions about whether republicans tried to bring in third-party candidates to go on the ballot, to take votes away from democrats. so all of a sudden here, an investigation that started a year and a half ago about a local tax collector named joel greenberg, and whether he was stalking a political rival or, you know, he was taking money in his position as tax collector from seminole county is now this sprawling thing that could potentially spawn tentacles here and there and who knows where.

>> well, "the new york times" is reporting that a second senior aide to congressman gaetz has quit amid the federal investigation. three people familiar with the decision tell "the times" that devon murphy resigned as gaetz' legislative director last friday. so different messages coming from inside the gaetz office, elizabeth b. miller. what's the latest that you're hearing about this? >> well, the interest thing about the cooperation of joel greenberg, the tax collector, is that given the seriousness of the charges against him, he will have to produce a great deal of information to get those charges reduced, and that is, again, another worrying sign for matt gaetz, given that joel greenberg was in the room. he likely has access to receipts, to many documents that will be very useful. so, yes, matt gaetz should be very worried. as for the resignations of his

staff, that indicates to anybody on the outside that they do -- they no longer trust him. they are being asked to produce statements that perhaps are not true. it's a sign of people jumping ship pretty quickly and pretty early on in this investigation. it's not a good sign, obviously. >> absolutely not. now, michael schmidt, stick around. just ahead, we'll be talking with you about attorney general merrick garland's first month on the job. and how he's working to move the department beyond the trump years, the challenges there. but first, we're following more reports of gun violence that unfolded just as the president was announcing new action to address what he called what is an epidemic. in texas, one person was killed, five others injured after a gunman opened fire at a cabinet company in the city of brian. police say the suspect also shot a state trooper during the manhunt. the alleged gunman has since been arrested. and in south carolina, a former

nfl player is accused of shooting and killing a prominent doctor. the doctor's wife and their two grandchildren, just 5 and 9 years old. and another man who worked at their home. a sixth victim was injured. officials say 32-year-old philip adams who played for the 49ers and other teams then took his own life. willie? >> just horrifying stories. two children dead in south carolina. it was gun violence that topped the president's agenda yesterday. he directed the department of justice to reduce access to homeland or self-assembled guns that don't include serial numbers. so-called ghost guns. and to cut access to stabilizing braces, which effectively can turn a pistol into a more lethal rifle. president biden also called for a national red flag law to allow police or family members to petition a court to bar people who presented danger to themselves or others from accessing firearms.

the president urged congress to take action, said nothing he is proposing infringes on the second amendment. >> gun violence in this country is an epidemic. let me say it again. gun violence in this country is an epidemic. and it's an international embarrassment. every day in this country, 316 people are shot, every single day. 106 of them die. every day. our flag was still flying at half-staff for the victims of the horrific murder of eight primarily asian american people in georgia, when ten more lives were taken in a mass murder in colorado. you probably didn't hear, but between those two incidents, less than one week apart, there were more than 850 additional

shootings. 850 that took the lives of more than 250 people. and left 500 injured. this is an epidemic, for god's sake. and it has to stop. i know it's painful and frustrating that we haven't made the progress that we hoped for. but it took five years to get the brady bill passed and took even more years to work to pass the assault weapons ban. and it saved lives. no matter how long it takes, we're going to get these passed. we're not going to give up. >> you know, anytime in politics, the word "gun" comes up, you can expect both sides to divide quickly and start fighting each other, but there actually was some possibility of middle ground with what joe biden said yesterday. kevin williamson gave the president a bit of praise for

his actions, writing in the national review, quote, president joe biden has for his part offered a couple of unobjectionable, maybe even useful ideas on gun policy. it is encouraging to see some democrats and gun controllers taking halfway sensible stances. and there is room here for cooperation and compromise. and gene robinson, there really is, especially if you look at what the american people are saying. almost nine out of ten have consistently said, since newtown, we need universal background checks. we need enhanced battleground checks. you look at a poll that was just out last week, an overwhelming majority of americans supported the idea of gun checks, battleground checks at gun shows. background checks for private sales, even 60, 65% of americans

supported the banning of military-style weapons. now, of course, we're not going to get there, as far as a country. i'm talking about middle ground republicans and democrats. i don't think gooelt to that middle ground, but there are some of these other common sense rules and gun safety guidelines that i've heard republicans talking about. and maybe there's a possibility for some common ground here. >> well, we have to hope. and it's -- any progress that we make on gun control, sadly, will be incremental progress, despite those numbers you've just cited. despite the fact that the public in its great majority is ready for farther-reaching and perhaps ultimately more effective

measures. but our political system will not get us there except by little increments. so let's at least have an increment. let's at least take a step in the right direction, knowing, tragically, that we're not going -- it's not going to likely be a very big step toward reducing that awful toll, that awful toll of hundreds and thousands of lives. more than 30,000 lives a year that we lose to gun violence in this country. it is stunning, it is -- president biden called it an international embarrassment, which was kind of an odd way to phrase it, but true. it just simply doesn't -- people who have mental problems and people who are filled with rage and whatever in countries all around the world, in japan, or

whatever. they have no gun violence. they have no gun deaths, because they have -- they don't have the guns. i mean, we're awash in guns. more guns than people in this country. and we are -- we are willing to, i hope, make incremental progress, toward making that better. >> republican senator pat toomey, who is set to retire at the end of his term, released a statement saying in part, i appreciate president biden's expressed willingness to work with both republicans and democrats to achieve this goal, if done in a manner that respects the right of law-abiding citizens, i believe there is an opportunity to strengthen our background check system, so that we are better able to keep guns away from those who have no legal right to them. >> and elizabeth, it was pat toomey who teamed up with joe manchin after newtown, surprised kind of people, but those two

members of the senate from states that have a long history of strong support for gun ownership, moved aggressively after newtown, on universal background checks. and now pat toomey is talking about doing that again. i'm just wondering if there is going to be a way to reach some sort of compromise, at least some halfway measure, that could bring enough republicans in to make a difference. >> you know, i don't know. i'm maybe not as optimistic as all of the rest of you about that. the bill right now that passed in the house is sitting in the senate, it's going nowhere. possibly, yes. but do not forget that they were not able to pass the most modest battleground check bill after 20 children were gunned down in newtown. and given that they couldn't do it then, maybe there's a bit of a change. i mean, the ghost guns executive action is a step in the right

direction. they're an increasing problem, but they do not begin to address the entire problem in this country. it's not just battleground checks, it's obviously, as gene said, there's just more guns than people. and an assault weapons ban would be a very good start, but there's just not the political impetus there was when joe biden was pushing that through the senate, way back when. so that is what the -- the gun rights have moved, i think that both sides have dug in on this issue, especially republicans. and i think it's much harder now than it was a couple of decades ago, even ten years ago, to get something meaningful passed. the gun control advocates say that the name, what will really reduce unviolence in this country is having less guns. and we are many, many years away from some kind of a gun buyback program, like that worked in australia years ago that did reduce violence there. >> john heilemann, we've seen

and we've been talking about some shifts. and i'm starting to feel like some significant shifts on how americans feel toward their government. you look at these numbers for the covid relief bill, 75%, and a majority of republicans supporting a massive, massive bill, relief bill on covid. 75% of americans and a majority of republicans supporting a massive infrastructure bill. the type of bills that conservatives like myself. congress would have laid down in front of the tracks and said, never going to happen. that's not happening now. and you see the majority of republicans supporting it. i am wondering, too, about guns. you look at these poll numbers, the way that they are moving. you look at some conservative voices saying, hey, maybe we do meet in the middle here. i'm just starting to get the feeling and i'm curious what your read is, because you look

at this as much or more than anybody, i'm just wondering if we are starting to see a shift in the political environment where, what happened in 2009 and 2010, the sort of framing of american politics around the tea party revolution, which basically with donald trump revolution, whether that has burned out the way that i believe it has. and now, where we may find americans, republicans, do want compromise, even if people in congress haven't gotten that message yet. >> big question. and, look, the premise that the country right now in the context of the latter stages of covid, that there is an appetite for a larger government intervention on the economic side and the public health side than there's been in more than a generation, going all the way back probably

to the post world war ii era, i think that's right, joe, and i think that's part of what's driving both the overwhelming bipartisan support in the country, not washington, but in the country, for the covid relief measures, and for this infrastructure bill, that the administration is trying to push forward. so that's a big thing. a paradigm kind of shift, maybe. i know we've been talking about this for several weeks here. the roosevelt era to the reagan area. are we on the way to a new activist progressive era led in an unlikely way by joe biden. i think that's not impossible. but here's the problem with it when it comes to guns. guns have become largely a cultural issue and not so much an issue about economics or government intervention. obviously, there's a big government element to it from the conservative point of view. but the rallying around gun rights and sort of the incredibly dug in, reflexive views about, do not touch my guns, this is an issue of rights that many on the pro-gun side have, has, i think, become even

deeper and more entrenched. so on one hand, i am optimistic in the way you are when i see the collapse of the nra, the rise of the anti-gun activists. the fact that in the democratic party now, there is no debate about this memory. you have to be on the side of sensible gun safety measures in the democratic party. but on the republican side, there's an even greater dug-in-ness on this in the way that there are on a lot of these hot button cultural issues, in the way that mask wearing became politicized in the way that it did. and guns are like that now. and that cultural overlay means we're not going to see as easy a shift in some ways towards acceptance of gun safety legislation as we've seen to the embrace of big government. >> i'm sure you're right. willie, though -- i'm a gun owner. i own guns, plural.

the brbrzezinskis, don't even g me started with the brzezinskis. >> they're hunters. very different. >> a lot of guns. >> i've said this time and again, you've heard it a million times. all of the gun owners that i knew, that i grew up with in first baptist church in pensacola and i grew up in meridian, mississippi, and knew in tuscaloosa, alabama, and all across the south, gainesville, florida, none of these things that joe biden proposed yesterday will upset any of these people. none of them. none of them! universal background checks? all of my buddies i grew up with that hunt every fall say, yeah, we want background checks. >> take it. >> we want increased background checks. we don't want people in pensacola to be able to drive into a parking lot at 10:00 at night and open up their trunk

and sell guns to gangs. we don't want that happening. so, yeah, if you can take care of that and figure out how to not have illegal gun sales, we're all for that. i'm just wondering if all of the problems that the national nra had, and i always said it was three or four people, three or four really corrupt people out of the washington office that were warping the debate and not speaking for the millions and millions of law-abiding gun owners who were members of the nra, i'm wondering if that's one of the reasons we're not seeing quite the pushback now, because they made their money by being extremists. by getting the 15 to 20% of gun owners that believe everybody should have an ar-15. and then somehow making it a symbolic issue for the other 80% that were like, you know what,

identify got my shotgun, i've got my revolver, i can protect my house, i can go out hunting and protect my family, i'm good. i mean, i'm just wondering if we may be able to start having a rational conversation, because make no mistake of it, the overwhelming majority of republicans, the overwhelming majority of gun owners. and i've seen polls that show even the majority of nra members want expanded background checks. want expanded gun safety laws. because they are law-abiding citizens. >> yeah. and what you're saying is supported by the data. we showed polls earlier this week that show that vast majority of americans support background checks, limits on the size of magazines so you can't go in and empty 30 rounds at once before reloading with another 30 rounds. so that is there. but john's point is the right one, that this is something deeper-seeded, as you know well, as growing up in the south and

coming up as a republican, that this is about culture. and if you look at right-wing websites, if you look at fox news, if you look other places, the headline that they took out of the president's remarks yesterday was that he said that no amendment is absolute. so what did people hear? they heard, he's coming for the second amendment. and that fuels the argument that democrats are coming for your guns. he mischaracterized the rules about background checks at gun shows. they're seizing on that, as well. so, yes, you're right about some of the numbers and the support that the country gives to some of these measures. but generally the question of guns is fraught and continues to be. >> and by the way, you know who else said, no amendment is absolute, scalia in the heller decision. he said, no amendment is absolute. but you can have a handgun in your house to protect your family. you can have a shotgun.

the city of washington can't tell you that you can't. but beyond that states can regulate guns beyond that until we come back and speak on it again. and they haven't spoken on it in 13 years. time and time again, the supreme courts had chance to overturn law's like connecticut's. expansive gun control laws. and the supreme court has said time and time again, nope, we spoke on heller, we're good. >> right. and i agree with what you're saying about gun owners. this is one of the great conundrums that, you know, there's vast support among republicans and democrats for background checks. and yet, you tell me why it has never been able to go through congress, through the senate? you tell me why and i -- you know, i do think it is -- the people who care deeply about

guns are very, are very active, you know, they -- senators feel primary campaigns, they -- you know, i think there's just -- it's too politicized and i do think that it's going to face a very tough road in congress. but i do agree with you on that, that the vast majority of republicans would like background checks. >> yeah. still ahead on "morning joe," merrick garland has been attorney general for nearly one month. we'll talk about his goal of restoring the justice department's credibility after four years of donald trump. plus, former fda commissioner scott gottlieb will be our guest as coronavirus vaccinations ramp up across the u.s., but still lag around the world. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. watching "" we'll be right back.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ hey google, turn up the heat. ♪ ♪ ♪ when traders tell us how to make thinkorswim even better, we listen. like jack. he wanted a streamlined version he could access anywhere,

no download necessary. and kim. she wanted to execute a pre-set trade strategy in seconds. so we gave 'em thinkorswim web. because platforms this innovative, aren't just made for traders—they're made by them. thinkorswim trading. from td ameritrade. i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter.

before discovering nexium 24hr to treat herggling) frequent heartburn,urtle. marie could only imagine enjoying freshly squeezed orange juice. now no fruit is forbidden. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? see every delivery... every yikes... and even every awwwwwwww... wait, where was i? introducing self protection from xfinity. designed to put you in control. with real-time notifications and a week of uninterrupted recording. all powered by reliable, secure wifi from xfinity. gotta respect his determination.

it's easy and affordable to get started. get self protection for $10 a month.

the only way we can succeed and retain the trust of the american people is to adhere to the norms that have become part of the dna of every justice department employee. those norms require that like cases be treated alike. that there not be one rule for democrats and another for republicans. one rule for friends and another for foes. >> merrick garland was sworn in as attorney general nearly one month ago. what are we seeing so far from the justice department under his leadership? nshs national security analyst michael schmidt is back with us for that question, along with professor at harvard law,

co-founder of law fair, and a senior fellow at the hoover institution, jack goldsmith. he's also co-host of the new podcast with bob bauer and virginia heffernen entitled "after trump." >> hold on for a second. keep that screen up. give me the full screen. jack, i don't know who your graphics person is, but that is brilliant. i'm a white space guy. that's -- i mean, i'm a shallow guy, judge a book by its cover. i can't wait to listen to your podcast. i love your work so much. but tell us about the podcast first. >> so we wrote a book published last fall called "after trump" reconstructing the presidency. and it laid out in 440 pretty dense pages what we thought needed to be done to fix the

problems revealed in the trump administration after trump left office. this podcast, i can't take too much credit for it. it's really a lawfare production. i'm interviewed, but i didn't really do the hard work. this podcast is an effort to take those dense and complicated arguments and break them down and make it accessible to everyone. i listened to the first episode and it's remarkably riveting for a book about policy. >> let's apply that now the mar rick garland in his first month and what he wants to do after trump and after barr. and i have been through the years, mika and others would say, at times, an apologist for the institutions of this country. i think our government is remarkable, but about two years into the trump administration, i said my god, you get the wrong attorney general in and the wrong president in, and things go sideways very quickly.

how do we stop that from happening again? >> the best way to stop it from happening again is make sure the right people get in there. the question is, what do you do when people who don't respect the norms and laws are in there. there's a whole array of things to do. merrick garland has to figure that out. he hasn't really announced what he's going to do yet. but there are a series of things. and a lot of the norms and the dna norms that garland was talking about, they're actually just floating in the air. they're not actually written down. people aren't actually trained on them. a lot of those rules don't apply to the attorney general. there are a lot of steps that can be taken inside department to buck up those norms. which actually had more of an impact inside the department, i think, than people appreciate. i think he'll do that. there are some things congress can do, for example, by making it clear that the obstruction of justice statute applies to the president. this was a big problem for mueller. it's very important that there be clarity on that and how that

works. there are a lot of small steps. a lot of it's about taking these norms a and making sure they apply at the top. >> and is it time to revisit the 1973, 1974 directive from the justice department. i may have the decade wrong. that a sitting president can't be indicted. it still makes no sense to me, whether a democrat is president or whether a republican is president. >> i might disagree with you on that. it did come from the '70s and it was reaffirmed by the office of legal counsel in the late 1990s under the clinton administration. it's a very hard problem. i don't think the answer is obvious, but i think the best answer on balance is the president can't be indicted while in office. it can be argued both ways. i think it will be revisited. there's a lot of criticism of

those opinions and especially after the trump experience. so it may be revisited. we'll see. i think that -- >> i'm sorry, go ahead, we have a delay. finish your thought? >> i was just going to say, i think it's a hard issue, but i think those decisions are probably right. >> michael schmidt, we've heard time and again that merrick garland was shaped by the timothy mcveigh prosecution. but how much of his service in government now shaped by what he saw over the past four years. what he saw with bill barr, with donald trump, with donald trump repeatedly right to breach the line between the presidency and the doj. >> he's -- garland has interestingly embraced the legacy of attorney general levy, the attorney general that came in right after nixon left

office. when the justice department probably found itself in the most analogous situation to the one that it is in today, where it had been politicized, the public's confidence in its integrity had come into question. the clash between the institution, the presidency, and the rule of law had really just played out. and garland has embraced levy's legacy and even put his portrait in his office. he referenced him in a speech. he was the only previous attorney general that he referenced in his speech, when he first came in, just a month ago. and what the legacy is is one of, we are a justice department that is dedicated to just following the rule of law. this is not about politics. no one knew what levy's politics really were. when he was appointed, he had been the president of the university of chicago. he had spent his entire life at

the university of chicago, all but for a small part, being a federal prosecutor. and the paper -- some said he was a conservative, some said he was a liberal. and the thing that people said about him is that when he left, no one knew then whether he was a conservative or whether he was a liberal. he was able to restore the integrity of the institution as one driven by the law and driven by the facts, not one that is about helping allies or about protecting yourself. and i think you've seen that from garland, if anything, because you've seen so little of garland. at this point in the trump administration, the president was already in basically open warfare with his own attorney general, jeff sessions, because he had recused himself from the russia investigation, trump was trying to come up with ways to get rid of his fbi director, which they would do by may. you obviously, do not hear anything along those lines

playing out. that doesn't mean i'm sure there aren't some disagreements behind the scenes between the justice department the white house, but it's been handled in such a more normal way that is on a very basic level restoring the public image of the justice department as something that has at least an arm's length distance from the white house. >> mike, in so many ways, president trump viewed his attorney general, bill barr, as his poernl attorney. he called him, my attorney general. he needed him to defend him and oftentimes, attorney general barr did that. so is merrick garland, is this a conscience effort by him to put on display the independence of the justice department from the white house? >> yes, yes, totally, of course. now, look, the difficult thing for garland or the thing that hasn't played out yet is he hasn't had to make those difficult public decisions yet. he hasn't had to be confronted by decisions about whether to

indict trump allies or whether to open investigations that could really blow back on the justice department politically. it's been pretty quiet so far. and the difficult decisions are ahead. but i think the sense that you get cutting out of the justice department is that they need to have this period of time to sort of get the legs of the department underneath it and give it a chance to not be in the news every day, as an obsession of the president. the president drove enormous -- you know, president trump drove an enormous amount of this by simply talking about the justice department as much as he did. and the perception of politics in the law is as bad as politics in the law, because it leaves you with the question, what is really going on here. so when you had someone in trump who talked and talked and talked about the justice department and

talked about his attorney and took such public moves, like removing his fbi director, the public said, anytime the justice department did something that looked favorable to trump, they said, well, why are they doing that? what's really going on here. so it's as much as as it is working internally to make sure the justice department is driven by the law and facts, it's making sure that the public posture of law enforcement is one that is just not being talked about in politics. >> jack, elizabeth b. miller is with us and has a question for you. elizabeth? >> hey, jack, you referenced the department of justice guidance about, you can't indict the president. i'm curious, what is your view of the best argument as for why we cannot indict a sitting president? i'm curious what you think -- because you seem to be of two minds about it. an issue that for a lot of americans, as joe said, seems

absurd, that you should not indict the president. >> i understand it seems absurd, because person in this country should be above the law. the difficulties are -- and i don't think it's an easy question. there are policy questions whether it's good for the country to have -- to have a situation where the president is being indicted and criminally prosecuted. and there's an argument that that's too disruptive of the office. the best arguments are that the constitutionally prescribed method for dealing with situation is impeachment, something that may not be working very well. but also, the core idea is that ultimately, article ii makes the president the chief prosecutor. and that's something that can't be taken away, because article ii gives it to him. so the process of trying to prosecute and indict a president runs smack into the fact that the president ultimately controls those. he could fire any effort, stop any effort to do so. so those are some of the arguments. the arguments on the other side

is that the institution is not clear on this point. and that no person is above the law. i do think that opinion will be revisited, but those are the arguments. >> sorry. we can talk about this later. how do you get around article ii, then? you ignore it? >> you can't get around article ii, unless you amend the constitution. you might be able to say that the president is subject to indictment. the justice department tans on this -- this is clearly a position question of how the justice department determines the constitution? when the attorney general or independent counsel tries to go after the president, the president has authority to fire everyone that gets in the way. at some point, that becomes politically unpalatable, as we learned in watergate. what's palatable today is different than the case in watergate. but you can't get around article ii. it's there and unless you're going to amend the constitution,

it is -- the president is going to have extraordinary control over firing people in the justice department, starting with the attorney general, and over the conduct of prosecutions. >> for those watching at home, as opposed to people that go to drive-in theaters in the morning to see us, a lot of times you will hear me jump in and then somebody will start talking again. it's because we have a delay. this is the sort of thing with covid. so i'm always trying to anticipate. if somebody draws a breath, or if somebody is really intelligent like elizabeth or jack and they actually don't just talk nonstop like this, i'll jump in. and then, uh, uh, uh, uh. so that's my excuse for now. post-pandemic when i'm on the set, i have no such excuse. just letting everybody know that. now, though, this is the part of our show that we like doing the most. >> it's fun. >> willie, we've been doing this

since '47, right after the war. the kids love it. >> right after the boys came home. >> right after the boys came home. and willie, you have your stories, i have mine, but we love to play, "find that rooster." where is it?! >> it's not my pierre. >> somebody was talking and we heard a rooster in the background. and our contestant now to find that rooster is young john heilemann. he comes from los angeles. >> there's no rooster there. >> his hobbies are -- >> joe, don't digress. kick down the door and lapd will pull him up. john heilemann, if you're going to look at everybody on the screen, can you guess where the rooster is coming from? because we heard it in the background. >> i heard it. >> well, funnily enough, joe, i don't have return. i'm not actually looking at a screen. anytime i ever hear a rooster, i always assume that it's one of

the roosters that mika is torturing somewhere on a farm. if it's not in mika's house, i don't know where the rooster would be. >> willie geist, take a look, who has that rooster? >> well, it ain't me. i would have said mika. >> mm-hmm. >> i don't really see any candidates. i guess, jack, because we haven't heard him as often as our other guests. >> it's not jack! >> and the correct answer is! michael schmidt. >> whoo! >> michael, you need to tell the roosters to pipe down. >> let me tell you, i had a rooster named graham and it didn't end well for him. >> if you look at michael, let's get the michael shot. little known, if you haven't been to the lincoln memorial since the covid, they are actually raising roosters in the lincoln memorial right now. it's very exciting. with that, john -- >> can i go? can i go now? >> you've got to stay.

we want to hear the rooster again. john heilemann, you have a question for our farmer mike. >> yes, please, mike, if you could keep the rooster quiet while you try -- >> there it went! >> -- i was intrigued while you were talking about garland the last time, just a couple of minutes ago. and you know, it's obviously true that it's been quiet over there. and he's been able to stick to his knitting and try to begin the process, the large daunting task of rebuilding credibility and internal moral at the department. but you raised the prospect and i think a lot of people were interested in, because there is a lot of political -- there was, especially at the tail end of the trump term, there was a lot of political pressure, a lot of discussion about what the justice department should do about donald trump. what role it should take. were there investigations that it should undertake in the post-presidency. were there things -- prosecutions that it should be

interested in? what should it do relative to some of the other legal entanglements that trump had around the country? so as you look at -- as you look at the docket, the virtual docket, like, where do you think this is going to land squarely in garland's lap first, where he's going to find himself having to be confronted or being confronted with a politically sensitive, politically charged set of decisions and determinations to make with respect to what to do about the former president? >> so, i think the first thing or one of the first things that he's going to have to confront is this ongoing investigation into giuliani that's been going on for at least a year now. and it's coming out of the southern district of new york. others had been indicted in the investigation many, many months, more than a year before now. and garland will have to figure out what to do with that case. where -- you know, whether the

justice department should move forward with it. and you know, whether to indict giuliani. indicting giuliani would obviously send an enormous message to the former president and it would be obviously politically toxic and set off a whole host of things. and obviously, giuliani, who has shown a willingness to take on anyone in any fashion and say anything in the process, and that would bring the justice department into that kind of fight. on the other hand, there's the hunter biden investigation, the tax investigation into hunter biden. and something will have to be done about that. and the problem sometimes with these high-profile investigations into people that are politically connected is that even if the justice department decides not to charge them, it feels a need to say something publicly. to say, look, this person is not going to be charged. obviously, we know a lot about that from the hillary clinton

email investigation. but in the case of giuliani, if they decide not to bring charges or hunter biden, that would be a news-making event, in which the justice department would have to say something. and i think that a lot of people have looked back at the comey email situation and been very critical of how he handled that. but you would get back into the situation where the justice department would have to explain, well, this is why we're not indicting this trump ally. or this is why we're not indicting this biden ally. and there'll be in that situation of having to explain that to the public. in the case of comey, he leaned into laying that out and some people didn't like that. but i don't think people will like it either if the justice department just puts out a one-line thing that says, we've decided not to charge this biden biden and people will simple ly accept that on the face of that? well, why didn't you charge them? and we'll be back in the same situation we were in in july of

2016 when the public was wrestling with the hillary clinton investigation. >> thank you very much for your reporting and the rooster. and jack goldsmith, thank you, as well. the new podcast is called "after trump." >> a must listen. >> john heilemann, and elizabeth b. miller, thank you both very much for being on the show this morning. it is now just past the top of the hour on this friday, april 9th. the u.s. has now reached the goal of fully vaccinating nearly 20% of its entire population. this means around 66 million americans have been inoculated with the pfizer, moderna or johnson & johnson vaccine. these figures from the cdc makes the u.s. the fourth-most vaccinated country by population behind israel, chile, and bahrain. many countries, however, do not even expect to reach 20%

inoculation. and joining us now is former fda commissioner, dr. scott gottlieb. he's a member of the pfizer board and why don't we start right there, dr. gottlieb. what do you make of the world progress on the vaccine and how much does that play into us being able to put covid behind us in the united states of america? >> there's no question that it's a challenge getting vaccine into low and middle-income countries, in particular. i think as we get into the later half of this year, there's going to be much more supply available to put into different markets. i think the problem and the challenges are still going to be the logistics. some of these vaccines need very complex culturing in storage and delivering them, especially in low-income countries that don't have the health care infrastructure can be a challenge. covax is working on that, the u.s. government, the biden administration has given a lot of money to support that. the companies that donated a vaccine to covax, including a company i'm on the board of, pfizer.

so some of it's being addressed. something on the order of what we did under pepfar, massive resource to making vaccine is available. in terms of what it means for us, i don't think you'll truly solve the challenge of covid for the united states until you solve the challenge of covid for the entire world or most of the world. particularly when you talk about our neighbors like mexico. we need to be doing much more with respect to our close neighbors and neighbors like mexico. as long as they have outbreaks, we'll continue to have spread here in the united states. >> hey, doctor, so we are baseball fans here and i couldn't help looking at replays last night from houston and seeing packed crowds. then looking a lot of other ballparks and seeing, you know, maybe 2, 3, 4,000 people there. obviously, medical professionals have been recommending social

distancing stay in place. but the numbers aren't matching up neatly. we're not having explosion of infections in covid and we're not seeing falling numbers in some of the northeast states. how should americans look at this? how should they look at the different regions of the countries addressing covid differently and what's the best path forward? >> look, i think there's an improving picture overall nationally, with now 112 million people with at least one dose of the vaccine, probably about 130 million americans who have had the infection. we have a lot of immunity in the population and that's going to be a pretty effective backstop against renewed epidemic spread. that said, there are parts of the country that are very hot right now, particularly when you look around the great lakes region, new york, new jersey, where they are seeing localized outbreaks. a lot of that spread right now is in children. i think it's partly a as a result of the fact that we have reopened schools. i'm not saying that's the wrong

decision, but we need to recognize as we reopen schools and reexpose social networks that have been largely sheltered from the virus to the risk of spread, we're seeing spread in those groups. the biggest terms of new growth in michigan is in children under the age of 19, the same thing in massachusetts. we need to recognize there are parts of the country right now that are very hot and are having outbreaks and are not going to be easily quelled. i think we need to try to get vaccine into those markets. we should be doing more in michigan to get more vaccine into metro detroit, which is the epicenter of their epidemic right now. but as the situation improves overall around the country, there's still parts of the country that are lagging. particularly in the north and the northeast. i think at least partly, what's probably contributing to that is that they're not benefiting from the seasonal effect. if you look at what's happening in the south right now, to your point about texas and even in florida, for that matter, where there's a lot of the activity and mobility is way up, you're not seeing big outbreaks. that's probably because they've been able to move a lot of activity outdoors, whereas in

the north and northeast, they're not seeing the benefit of that seasonal effect. but there will be some parts of the country that are going to lag and some parts of the country that might need to tap the brakes a little bit. >> dr. gottlieb, it's willie geist. it's good to see you this morning. we've heard from dr. walensky and dr. fauci, this balancing act. we've made incredible strides in getting the vaccine distributed and getting it out to the people who need it, faster than had been scheduled. but also, let's not jump ahead. we're not out of the woods just yet. you said the other day that a fourth wave is not likely. so what gives you that confidence when we're hearing a little bit more reservation, a little bit more hesitation from the people at the top of those organizations? >> look, what gives me that confidence is that we're not seeing evidence that there's reinfections taking place on any widespread basis. people who are either vaccinated or who have had the infection do appear to have immunity that's durable and they're not getting

reinfected, at least not becoming symptomatic. at this point, we probably would be detecting it if it was happening on a widespread basis. with 110 million people partially vaccinated, 130 million people who have been infected, at least, when you start to add the numbers, you have a percentage of the population where at least 60% has some form of protected immunity. maybe more than that. you're not quite at herd immunity, but at levels where this isn't going to transfer as readily. i think the next two to three weeks will be challenging and that we're probably likely to see a plateauing in cases. we might see a continued uptick in parts of the country that are still experiencing epidemics like michigan, like massachusetts, like new york. but for the rest of the country, i think it's going to be a continued overall improving pictures and hard to reimpose restrictions on the population. right now, people who are worried about covid want to go out, because they've been vaccinated. and people who aren't vaccinated want to go out because they were never worried about covid. as you get into the end of april, may, when the vaccine is widely available, everyone who wants to be vaccinated and who

wants to protect themselves will have that opportunity. you'll have a lot of people who feel that they are at lower risk and they are at lower risk. right now, if you look at the case fatality rate around the country and it's hard to measure, because deaths are always a lagging indicator. the deaths you're seeing today were the result of infections that happened more than a month ago. even if you look at the crude case fatality rate, about 0.4%, if you assume that we're diagnosing one in three infections. if you assume we're diagnoses one in four infections, which may be the case, the infection mortality rate is probably around 0.2%. that means the overall vulnerability of the population has been substantially reduced by a fact that medical care has now improved and the most vulnerable americans are now protected. >> there was some politicaling news for parents and kids last week, as you know, that pfizer and biontech announced this study of a vaccine for children, that 12 to 15-year-olds found it 100% effective among kids. can you update on the progress

on that? and what would that mean for, let's say, opening schools completely come fall? >> so the company said that they're going to file for an authorization, at some point this month. the fda will put that through a careful review process. and in the advisory committee that advises the cdc, acip will make a recommendation, that would be my guess, on how it should be used in children. i think we'll be in a situation where the vaccine should be available before the fall school year, so parents can make a decision about putting it in kids above the age of 12. and i think the way we'll probably think about in in a societal standpoint is whether or not you put it in certain social settings. you think of compartments, geographic compartments of spread, with respect to children, you start thinking of first high school. do we put it in a high school-aged population, then a middle school-aged population. i don't think you're likely to see school districts mandate the vaccine, but you're probably likely to see strong

recommendations, starting with the high school-aged population. as you know, the pfizer is already authorized down to age 16, so it already gets into a high school-aged population. if you start putting it in 14 to 15-year-olds, you basically cover the entire high school-aged population. i think that's probably where we're going to start. >> all right. former fda commissioner, dr. scott gottlieb, we thank you so much for being with us, as always. and now breaking news from the uk. the royal family has issued a statement moments ago reading, it is with deep sorrow that her majesty, the queen, has announced the death of her beloved husband, his royal highness, the prince philip, duke of edinburgh. his royal highness passed away peacefully this morning at windsor castle. the statement continues, the royal family joined with people around the world in mourning his loss. further announcements will be made in due course. prince philip was 99 years old. and gene robinson, he was the

longest serving consort of any member of the royalty, 65 years, he supported queen elizabeth. buckingham palace saying he should be remembered for his support of the environment, science, technology -- or will be saying that. and the queen said on their 50th anniversary, i think it was in 1997, that philip is my strength and stay. he tried to modernize the monarchy and did in many ways, when he was the husband of the young queen. also known, gene, though, for telling brusque and crass jokes and sometimes even racially insensitive comments made. auz often controversial.

always, though, by her side, and tried to modernize the monarchy 50 years ago, 60 years ago. >> right. and he's -- his main job was supporting the queen. that was his job, really, his only job, supporting the queen, supporting the monarchy. the continued existence and status and place of the monarchy in british life and british society and that's what he did. and you have to, i think you have to say, he did that well. he had an extraordinary life, born, i believe, in greece. he was kind of a stateless royal, as a young man, as the royals got booted out of greece

and he was without a name, really, and was kind of adopted by lord mountbatten in britain and that became his surname. and he was the great love, obviously, of queen elizabeth's life. but an important figure whose job was to be in the background and was not, you know, the times when he made news were mostly, unfortunate, because he was saying something crass or he was saying something kind of racist. this was years ago. he -- his job really was to be more quiet, but to support the institution of monarchy.

also to raise the prince of wales, the next, the next monarch, prince charles, is still the monarch in waiting. and to sort of form him into a future king. and you have to judge how well he did that job. and he was interested in the environment. he had other interests as the royals do, but, you know, his main job was a little bit, i think, as he called elizabeth, was that she was his job. >> wow. >> jeffrey goldberg is with us, the atlantic's jeffrey goldberg. and by that much, jeffrey, the duke of edinburgh did, for the most part, judging by the

queen's own words, did his job very well. i remember a maureen dowd column on first spouses in the white house and maureen, i think, was saying that pat nixon was mocked because somebody had said that she made peanut butter jelly sandwiches for president nixon and that helped him get through the day. maureen said, well, you know what, if that helps the person leading the country, then, you know, make more sandwiches. in this case, you look at just the remarkable sweep of time that queen elizabeth ii and the duke of edinburgh were not only married but symbolic leaders of this country, it is absolutely

stunning. >> yeah. it's interesting. we're going to have, as journalist, in the coming hours, we'll have a difficult time separating out what we think we know about him from "the crown" versus what the reality might be, although i think the broad strokes of shows like "the crown" are true. your point is very apt, especially now, right after this megan/harry controversy. i think what you're saying in so many words is that this is a man who did his duty for literally more than half a century, right? he just plowed through duty. and as gene pointed out, his job was to stay in the background and play a support role. and i'm fascinated by the idea that people today look at that as a kind of archaic behavior and one could even see members of his own family looking at that kind of role and saying,

not for me. which, of course, is a threat to the continuation of the monarchy. and this is just another, this sad event, this passing, is just another sign that the british monarchy, the english monarchy is moving into just an extraordinary period of transition. weapon don't know what's going to happen, but this is a really interesting moment to see if this institution is going to stay. you shouldn't bet against it. it's been around for quite a while, but it's a really highly symbolic moment. >> and joe, since jeffrey mentioned "the crown," there's that vivid moment in one of the first two episodes of the entire series where elizabeth and philip are on tour in kenya, because king george is in poor health. they come back from a night at the treetops lodge and it's actually prince philip himself who tells elizabeth that her father has died and that she is now the queen of england. that was in february of 1952.

obviously, their lives changing forever in that moment. but it was that man right there, philip, who informed elizabeth that she was the next queen of england. >> and the man who stood by her side through the years, through the precipitous decline of great britain, through the '50s and '60s and '70s, still staying by her side, as britain began to have an economic revival and began moving up, as far as being an economic power and a strategic power on the globe, but then being buffeted by one family scandal after another. but he's the perfect example. and unfortunately, unfortunately, so many of our views are shaped by movies like "the queen" or tv series like

"the crown." but there is that telling moment where queen elizabeth repeatedly has to tell those around her that the most important job for them is when everybody wants members of the royal family to take a position, to do nothing, to say nothing, to sit back and not show approval to one side or the other, for fear of being pulled into political battles, but to represent the ideal of the british people. and we've seen recently with meghan and harry, just how difficult many people find that job to be. and i must say, at least, mika, my impression from everything i've read about the family and everything that i've seen about the family, i suppose it's nice

being called queen or being called prince, but it looks like an absolutely miserable job. and that is the one thing that "the crown," my takeaway from "the crown," at the end every season, i think, my job, i can't think of a worse position to be in, a worse fish bowl to be in. >> the most misunderstood position in life that anybody could have. >> but kept his head down, did his duty, and supported his queen. >> we will be following this day throughout the day on msnbc, his royal highness, prince philip, duke of edinburgh, dead at the age of 99. now to yesterday's developments in the trial of former minneapolis police officer derek chauvin charged with the murder of george floyd. jurors heard from dr. martin tobin, an expert in critical care and the science of breathing, gave his view on george floyd's cause of death. >> mr. floyd died from a low

level of oxygen. and this caused damage to his brain that we see and it also caused a pea arrhythmia that caused his heart to stop. the main forces that are going to lead to the shallow breath are going to be that he's turned prone on the street, that he has the handcuffs in place, combined with the street, and then that he has a knee on his neck and then that he has a knee on his back and on his side. the way they're pushing down on his handcuffs combined with the street, his left side, and it's particularly the left side we see that -- it's like the left side is in a vice. it's totally being pushed in, squeezed in from each side. he's totally dependent on getting air into the right side. so he's using his fingers and his knuckles against the street

to try and crank up the right side of his chest. this is his only way to try to get air to get into the right lung. a healthy person subjected to what mr. floyd was subjected to would have died as a result of what he was subjected to. >> prosecutors then called the forensic toxicologist who analyzed george floyd's blood and found both fentanyl and methamphetamines, but testified the levels of both drugs were lower than those in a sample of driving under the influences cases. he was followed by a forensic doctor from louisville, whose testimony reinforced the prosecution's argument that drugs did not play a part in the tragic death. though he acknowledged on cross-examination that he is not a pathologist. the prosecution continues its case later this morning. joining us now, host of

msnbc's politics nation and president of the national action network, reverend al sharpton. >> rev, you've been following the trial closely. and more importantly for you as a minister, you've been talking to george floyd's family, getting together every night with them. saying a prayer. can you just -- tell us how the family is doing and how they're viewing the trial so far. >> it's a very strong family. this impacts them much differently than anyone, because they're looking at their brother, their uncle, their cousin, their father, over and over again, narrate his death, every time they see this videotape. and then to see the autopsies and to see people talk about how he died is a nightmare to them. but they're very strong, a very religious family. i was there with them tuesday, i

was there the week before, but then i talk every day to philonus. he puts me on the speaker phone and we pray with the whole family and they become very close-knit to go through this together and all they want to see is with all the pain that they're suffering and the pain that george went through, that it leads towards some real change and some real justice. that's what they're holding on for. >> and how do you believe the trial is going so far? what are you hearing from -- i know you went out to minneapolis, but what are you hearing from those in the courtroom and those close to the floyd family. >> so far, the feeling had been that the prosecution under the attorney general of minnesota has been very effective. the questions that many of us that have been in the broader

civil rights community that have been supportive of them is that we have never seen -- certainly, in the years i've been involved, i've never seen this many law enforcement people come and testify against a fellow law enforcement person. it's unprecedented that the chief of police for a city would testify against one of the policemen and then others. the whole question of the blue wall of silence was crashed in minneapolis. now, that does not mean nah there will be a conviction, but it certainly means if you have this kind of videotape, policemen testifying, saying that what he did was certainly wrong and certainly against what he's trained and certainly against the manual, and then you have experts, like we had dr. tobin yesterday come in and say, no, if there was drugs in his system, if fentanyl was in his system, the doctors say, he would have went into a coma and

he didn't go into a coma, he died. this had nothing to do with him dying. if we can't get some justice here, i don't know what it takes. that's the perception we have. but having said that. the defense have not come on. we're still expecting the medical examiner to testify today andwell see when the prosecution rests their case and the defense comes on. i don't know what they can bring on, but we will have to see. and i'm cautiously optimistic, but i've been disappointed so many times, that i'm more cautious than most. >> rev, you're right, the testimony from former officer chauvin's own supervisors, from the police chief there, that this was a blatant violation of policy. from his use of force expert, who said, that's not what we teach, that is not our policy, how we did that. that he should have gotten his knee off mr. floyd's neck when it was clear that he was no longer resisting. we've heard that for two weeks now. but as you say, it only takes

one juror, if the defense can plant that seed of doubt in one juror, you can get an acquittal or a hung jury. what are you expecting to hear now from the defense? that he had drugs in his system, but all these witnesses say, that is not why he died that day. what do you expect to hear from the defense? >> i think that the interesting thing about this, willie, is that, first the defense said that the defendant, chauvin, former officer chauvin, was intimidated or frightened by the crowd, the hostile crowd. well, when we saw the videotapes over and over again, there was no hostile crowd. there were people pleading for him to leave george floyd alone. then they changed to drugs. now they changed to other things. so we've had different manifestations of their defense. by the time they put on a defense, who knows.

the problem they have is that if they're going to use that the crowd is what distracted him from what he was doing to floyd, who is going to establish that? are they going to put chauvin on the stand? and i am really beginning to wonder whether they are backing themselves into a corner where you cannot introduce evidence unless you put chauvin on the stand, because no one can give a state of mind but him. but i think they've been desperate trying to discredit or break up the prosecution witnesses. and when you have as bad a hand as they've been dealt, they appear desperate. and i don't see how you go against the videotape and against experts and against if partners, supervisors, and chief of police of your own city. the defense attorney's in a very, very bad position. >> yeah i don't see how you can do that, either, with law enforcement officers, every one of them getting up there saying

that this was a violation of the rules. all of those that trained him, the only way you could is you just simply are going to refuse to convict a police officer that put his knee on george floyd's neck for nine minutes. so eugene robinson, jeffrey goldberg has a question for you. jeffrey? >> yeah, gene, i'm curious, based on something that reverend sharpton said, and the combination of watching the video and seeing -- yesterday seemed like a pivotal day in the sense that you have a series of experts basically saying, look, this is the reason he died. it wasn't drugs in the system, it wasn't this, it wasn't that, he was choked to death. his air was cut off. so my question is, i'm trying to imagine a defense scenario that's plausible, but i'm curious to hear your opinion as

to whether you think this trial is essentially over or if there are if the defense has anything plausible to offer at this point. >> it's never over until it's over, jonathan. and it's over when the jury comes back with a verdict or without a verdict. and so i'm like the rev, i've been disappointed and surprised so many times that i think it's unwise to take anything for granted. that said, this is an overwhelming case. and i thought the testimony yesterday by dr. tobin, he was -- he was like the -- you know, the witness you would design in central casting. he was so effective with his illustrations and having the jurors touch their own necks to

feel the anatomical features that he was talking about, and there were reports inside the courtroom that the jurors did get it. and getting the jury on his side and involved in the story he was telling. i thought that was -- i had never seen anything like that in a courtroom before. i thought it was incredibly effective. you add to that the fact that, yes, we saw the police chief of minneapolis come in and say, this was unacceptable. we saw other minneapolis officers come in and say this was completely out of line with what he had been trained to do, what he was supposed to do, what the policy is, what the law says. i mean, it is an overwhelming case. that said, the defense doesn't have to prove anything, right? the defense just has to instill

reasonable doubt and so. the defense team will continue to throw stuff at the wall, because that's what defense lawyers do. that's their job and try to get seizure the jurors to doubt their eyes and ears and what they're seeing in those 9 minutes and 29 seconds. and i think that's a very tall order for the defense, but like i said, it's never over until it's over. >> and right now, it seems like the defense is reduced to talking about drugs, when medical experts have suggested drugs had nothing to do with his death. and also talking about the mob that were around the police officers when, in fact, it's all on video. there was no mob around there and it seems to me what the defense can never get around is

the fact that he was on his stomach, the officer had his knee on george floyd's neck, and george floyd's hands were handcuffed behind his back. i just don't see how the defense gets around that. >> look, it's the most extraordinary videotape of a crime in progress that many of us have ever seen, right? that's not just the lens. it's -- it's abundantly clear what happened. dr. tobin -- that's why i think yesterday was such a pivotal moment. if you're listening and you're fair-minded, you're going to have a hard time believing the defense when it comes up, talking about the impact of drugs in his system. dr. tobin was central casting witness, as gene said. and so i don't know. this mob question is an interesting one, too.

there was no mob, put that aside. but the premise of that argument was flawed in the following sense. a police officer in a scene like that is in charge. you're not supposed to be, as police officer, swayed by a crowd or distracted by this or distracted by that. you're in charge of taking control of the situation in an assertive but humane way. this went on for so long, he's crushing this man to death over a period of nine minutes. that argument doesn't hold any water. you're the responsible party. you're the representative of the state on that scene. you're not supposed to be weighed or distracted or lose your attention or whatever it is. there's -- it doesn't make a lot of sense. it doesn't hold a lot of water. >> we have a lot more still ahead, including former republican house speaker john boehner weighing in on the

clinton impeachment. more than two decades after president clinton was impeached, boehner now says he regrets it. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. it you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. find your rhythm. your happy place. find your breaking point. then break it. every emergen-c gives you a potent blend of nutrients so you can emerge your best with emergen-c. not everybody wants the same thing. that's why i go with liberty mutual

— they customize my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. 'cause i do things a bit differently. wet teddy bears! wet teddy bears here! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ [sfx: thunder rumbles] [sfx: rainstorm] ♪♪ comfort in the extreme. ♪♪ the lincoln family of luxury suvs.

when it comes to autism, finding the right words can be tough. finding understanding doesn't have to be. we can create a kinder, more inclusive world for the millions of people on the autism spectrum. go to autismspeaks.org. my plaque psoriasis... ...the itching ...the burning. the stinging. my skin was no longer mine. my psoriatic arthritis, made my joints stiff, swollen... painful. emerge tremfyant™ with tremfya®, adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...can uncover clearer skin and improve symptoms at 16 weeks. tremfya® is also approved for adults with active psoriatic arthritis. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya® may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them.

tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. tremfya®. emerge tremfyant™ janssen can help you explore cost support options.

well, guys, here's some good news. the cdc expects all students will be back in school full-time by september. parents are like, that's great, because we were dropping them off in september whether they were open or not. so figure it out. >> jimmy fallon last night. reverend al sharpton and "the atlantic"'s jeffrey goldberg still with us. joining us now, republican strategy and msnbc political analyst, susan del percio, former senior adviser for the house oversight and government reform committee. kurt par della, a former columnist for the "l.a. times." donny deutsch is also with us. i want to start with the piece

in the atlantic and the split between corporations. in an argument entitled woke capital doesn't exist, adam sewer writes this. quote, what vexes republicans is the sight of corporations responding to market incentives by making public displays of support for egalitarianism and nondiscrimination, which is not the same as corporations actually supporting those things. putting out statements supporting black lives matter or adorning their logos with pride colors is very easy for big corporations, but such gestures do not signal a commitment to fare wages, safe working conditions, or a willingness to pay their share in taxes, let alone racial egalitarianism in all but the most academic sense. they are merely brand management. woke capital does not actually exist, only capital, and its interests remain the same as they have always been. donny, this all comes up around the all-star game moving out of atlanta. pressure puppet put on companies

like delta and coca-cola. so what's your sense of where corporations are right now? did they get it right in the case of georgia and how active should they be in these political debates where mitch mcconnell has said they ought to stay out of them? >> corporations have no choice at this rate. frankly, if they had their way, they would be agnostic. they have one god that they answer to at the end of the day, and that's the shareholders and that's the profit. i don't mean to sound cold and callus, but that's what they are. having said that, the right business for them now is to be on the right side of these arguments. they can no longer stay on the sidelines, particularly young consumers demand that of companies now. in all research, you see to talk about corporate conscience. now, when you think about that, most companies, if you look at their marketing plans, the audience they're going after, they're not going after old

geezers like me. marketing plans are 18 to 39-year-olds, those are key demographics. obviously, for those young audiences, we know where they stand on most of these issues. so companies will make the right business decisions. when it comes to things like voter rights, racial equality, apple pie, america, pure democracy issues, they're going to stand behind the issues. so this is price of entry for companies now. you are no longer a, you know, going out on a limb. you're actually going out on a limb, staying behind, and not voicing your opinion at this point. >> and jeffrey, it's a great point adam made about, you know, there's not woke capital, there's just capital. delta's going to do what's best for their bottom line as is major league baseball as is coca-cola. if they get it wrong, their board will get rid of them. but it's just like dr. seuss's

family. the state didn't come in and tell dr. seuss' family what to do. they probably looked at the books and said, over the next 20, 30 books, we probably want to pull back. just like disney and song of the south. facebook, which, of course conservatives also seem like josh hawley want to go in and censor, a private company, facebook is a bit of a different matter, because there are anti-trust issues that need to be sorted out with facebook and amazon and twitter. but with these other companies, they're really, at the end of the day, they're not trying to be woke. they're just looking at their bottom line, if they get it right and sell more cokes, then good for them. and if they don't, you know, their ceo gets fired. >> right. well, you know, it's -- i would like to believe, maybe i'm just feeling optimistic this morning. i would like to believe that there are ceos, chief marketing

officers, and so on who are looking at voting rights issues and saying, it actually isn't that controversial. and it is the right thing to do to say, we think more people should have access to voting, not less. maybe there is a kind of impulse there that says, this is actually ridiculous. this shouldn't be -- the point is, it shouldn't be quite as controversial as an issue as it is. all that said, they also know where their bread is buttered. and you know the counties that went for biden in america account for 79% of the economic activity in america. and, you know, you're exactly right. the mainly the young people are on the side of the expansion of voting right skpts so on. and so it's good business but i don't know why this morning i'm feeling that optimistic, but i

want to think that people in the "c" suites are making decisions on this, at least partially because they think it's ridiculous that this is even an issue. >> well, jeffrey, obviously, you're only feeling optimistic fwor reasons. one, it's my birthday, and two, your naturally sunny disposition. >> that's what i'm known for. >> exactly. what's your nickname around here? sunny. reverend al, i'm not quite as optimistic as jeffrey is. i think the ceos are looking at their bottom line and the decisions that they make may enrage a lot of conservative politicians or republican politicians, but you look at how younger americans have been

disaffected from trumpism and the republican party. you look how the democratic brand, identification continues to grow. certainly with the younger voters, as well. and suddenly you're looking at that key demographic, as donny said, 18 to 49, and a lot of those people, the majority of those people are going to be more progressive post-trump. and they are more progressive post trump, whether you're talking about voting rights or whether you're talking about human rights, whether you're talking about civil rights. it's just -- that's just an economic reality. >> no, it's an economic reality, but i think what is happening now, we saw last year, after the george floyd tape had come out, the black lives matter movement, those of us involved getting a lot of steam, corporations giving big money. this one announcing we're doing this, we're doing this with

black lives matter now, voting, major league baseball. what we are looking at now in the civil rights community, national action networks is having this national convention this week is, well, let's see if you're practicing what you're throwing money at? let's look at the corporate suite. how diverse is that? let's look at who you're doing business with. are you looking at contractors or are black asset managers managing your pension funds? now that they have stepped out there, rather than throw money at causes and say to their stockholders, we're on the right side of the issues, do you practice what you preach? and i think that's where we're going to find out that a lot of latte liberals who have these broken hearts for the homeless sit up there with $10 latte coffee drinks and don't want to change how they do business themselves. >> the battle over voting access that has broiled georgia is now headed to texas.

a texas house committee advanced an elections bill that would impose criminal penalties for errors during the election process. for example, this bill would make it a felony for local election officials to distribute an application to vote by mail to a voter who didn't request one. the measure, known as house bill ii, is one of dozens of restrictions being considered by texas lawmakers this session. the bill says it ames to reduce the likelihood of voter fraud in elections, despite no evidence of widespread voter fraud in texas or elsewhere, for that matter. texas republican governor greg abbott made election integrity a priority for the legislature. kurt bardella, your thoughts? >> well, i think we need to step outside here from 50,000 foot level to understand something that in the next couple of decades, this country is going to become a minority and majority country.

minorities in this country will be 50% plus one for the first time in our nation's history. and so anti-democratic forces along with the republican party are coming together to try to do everything that they can to rig the game before it's played, because they know that as they are currently instituted, a party that's against minority rights, a party that advances policies of countries, that the way that demographics in this country are going, they can't win elections unless they get to choose who their voters are. unless they make it as hard and difficult as possible for people to participate in the democratic process. this is a country that should be encouraging people to vote. doing everything they can to make it as easy and as accessible as possible for people in this country to participate in our elections process. and yet one party is hell bent now on doing everything they can to restrict and limit access to ballots. and it just speaks volumes about the priorities of the republican party. it speaks volumes about what their agenda is going to be, that they are doubling down on

this failed and losing agenda that has cost them the white house, the house of representatives, the united states senate, that rather than recalibrate, rather than wake up to the 21st century, they're instead trying to do everything they can to cater only to very small, shrinking white forces in this country and it's a losing proposition because now, as we were just talking about corporate america isn't able to sit on the sidelines. the spigot that fuels the republican party, corporate donors is now being called out every single day. if you cut a check to someone who voted for the insurrection or someone who didn't acknowledge the insurrection, you're going to get called out for it. it's going the become a nightmare. they're going to have a problem sustaining this. >> we look at what's going on right now in georgia. and can't say this is something new for the republican party. the republican party has always

believed that they do better in off year elections when the turnout is down because the electorate is always -- or has been in the past older, wider, and more conservative. so this is really nothing that is radically new. republicans have always believed that the less people that have gotten out and voted, the better their chances are to win elections. this just comes after we saw a president, a republican president try to steal an election and refuse to carry through with the peaceful transfer of power. >> yeah. and what's so funny, though, joe, is you know this. for decades, republicans have been using absentee ballots as a way to win elections. and now you see these states trying to restrict absentee ballot access. which is just bizarre. especially in a state like texas where, when you get out of the

suburbs, you're seeing more conservative voters who may not be able to go to a polling place as easy. they rely on those absentee ballots. and if the workers are going to be hesitant to send them out, that's just crazy. but the republicans have lost any influence on the policies of this country. they're not discussing ideas. they can't win elections on ideas because they're not -- they don't have any right now. so they have no choice but to restrict who is showing up. and another thing, if you look at what you see about off year elections, pay attention to georgia's special elections. people are awake now and they are going to show up to vote. what may end up happening to republicans is that they find ways of keeping their own voters home. >> yeah, well, which is really what happened in georgia. it was the republican message. it was donald trump's message,

donnie deutsch, that actually depressed republican voters turn out in the georgia runoff elections. they shot themselves politically in the foot because they kept talking about rigged elections, kept talking about how the elections weren't fair expended up hurting themselves. and here you have 50, 60, 70% of republicans in some polls saying they don't believe the results of the last election were on the up-and-up. so they are teaching their own party members that going out and voting is a worthless exercise. >> what is so amazing, joe, and, joe, you and i talked about this a couple of weeks ago. the republican party has become the party of -- they are a no on every issue where the country wants yes, whether it is the covid relief bill, whether it is infrastructure, whether it is voting rights, whether it is

more racial equality, whether it's ginn reform. it is just like you're like what are they -- in these meetings where they're looking at polls and they're going through research, do they just know they're wrong, we don't care, we're going to continue to talk about dr. seuss? so, you know, they've lost their way and, you know, i'm not saying anything new or fresh here. it's just astounding to watch this party self-destruct. but one question back to you, joe, because it's important, because people ask me all the time about you and mika, there's curiosity because you guys are larger than life. what happens on your birthday tonight? does the dreamland ribs come in, is there pin the tail on the donkey? mika, i want to know what goes on in the birthday household today. i'm trying to picture it. is it a big party? is it just you, joe, in a tuscaloosa sweatshirt? take us inside the birthday. >> you and willie know the answer to this question. i can answer that question by

asking both you of a question. how many times did you ever see me go out into any event in new york city or washington or any party or any cocktail party -- >> in the past decade. >> or any event in the past decade. >> once. >> well, yeah, it's very -- yeah, we're very low key. >> can i have a derby pie. >> oh, look at that. >> yes. >> now that's a cake. >> cute. >> that's an artist's rendering of a cake because i told mika, no cake. no presents. >> derby pie. >> i want a derby pie. >> i'm going to make it for you this morning. >> my parents. we always watch the derby and watch the kentucky derby. and i told my kids what i tell them at christmas, no presents, just write me a note and that's all i want. so --

>> got your answer. it's really boring. >> kind of really boring and low key. >> joe, there was something revealing in donnie's question when he was thinking about what he would be doing on his birthday. he snuck in pin the tail on the donkey. i don't want to know more about donnie's birthdays, but i did hear that, donnie. and let's talk off line. >> please don't tell us. yeah. no, i don't want to -- please. donnie deutsch, please stop talking. jeffrey goldberg, thank you. susan del percio, reverend al sharpton, thank you all very, very much. coming up, the former florida tax official whose case led to the sex trafficking investigation into congressman matt gaetz now expected to plead guilty. is the congressman's one-time ally about to flip on him? plus, more on the breaking news from london. the queen's husband, print phillip, has died this morning at the age of 99. "morning joe" is coming right back. f 99

"morning joe" is coming right back e usaa insurance for veterans like martin. when a hailstorm hit, he needed his insurance to get it done right, right away. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa ♪♪ tex-mex. tex-mex. ♪♪ termites. go back up! hang on! i am hanging on. don't mess up your deck with tex-mex. terminix. hi. the only way to nix it is to terminix it.

hooh. that spin class was brutal. well you can try the buick's massaging seat. hi. oohh yeah, that's nice. can i use apple carplay to put some music on? sure, it's wireless. pick something we all like. ok. hold on. what's your buick's wi-fi password? buickenvision2021. oh, you should pick something stronger. that's really predictable. that's a really tight spot. don't worry. i used to hate parallel parking. (all together) me too. hey. you really outdid yourself. yes, we did. the all-new buick envision. an suv built around you... all of you. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein.

this week in covid history, it's april 2020, prime minister boris johnson is in the hospital. the city of angels has the cleanest air and everyone is head over heels for gay pa list mist felons. in other words, everything is [ bleep ]. luckily, things are starting to look up. >> we are inching closer and closer to beating this item. >> there is light at the end of the tunnel. >> things are going really well. again, light at the end of the tunnel. >> hot dignity dog. light at the end of the -- >> what you're hearing about light at the end of the tunnel doesn't take away from the fact that tomorrow or the next day is going to look really bad. >> all right, how bad is it going to get? >> the minimum number was 100,000 lives. and i think we'll be substantially under that number. >> less than 100,000 deaths, no

problem. >> if we can stay substantially under the hundred, which was the original projection, i think we all did a very good job. >> yes. great work, team. this has been this week in covid history. >> yeah. well, you know what they say. hindsight is infuriating. >> along with joe, willie and me, we have nbc news and msnbc national affairs analyst host and executive producer of showtime opens "the circus" and john heilemann. >> good background. >> little animals. "new york times" washington bureau chief elizabeth b. miller and pulitzer prime winner and msnbc political analyst eugene robinson joins us this morning. let's get right to the news. we're following new developments in the justice department investigation of republican congressman matt gaetz. nbc news has learned that joel greenberg, a former florida tax

official and associate of gaetz is expected to plead guilty in the criminal case that spawned the sex trafficking investigation into the congressman. the "new york times" points out that this could be an indication that greenberg is likely to cooperate as a key witness against gaetz. investigators are set to be examining their involvement with women who were recruited online for sex and given cash payments as well as whether congressman gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old. gaetz, who has not been charged with any crime, has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. an attorney who represents joel greenberg spoke to reporters after a status hearing yesterday. listen to what he said when asked about matt gaetz. >> does matt gaetz have anything to worry about? >> does matt gaetz -- that is

such a -- >> when it comes to what happened today in court. >> does he have anything to worry about. i'm sure mete gaetz is not feeling very comfortable today. >> yeah, you know, up until now, john heilemann, all we had had were stories from the newspaper. a lot of information, but nothing from the principals here, the people who actually knew what was going on. so we weren't even at an innocent until proven guilty stage. yeah, we were just hearing second and thirdhand from some great reporting. but had not heard from any of the principals of the case. yesterday, really -- well, first of all, you could tell because he was working with the state, there was going to be a plea deal. you knew where this was going. but then for the tax collector's attorney to come out and say that really does more than just

strongly suggest that they're cooperating with the state and, as his attorney says, that the congressman has something to worry about. >> i do think, you know, it's a little bit like this, the worst thing that you don't want to hear when you're ensnared in a potential sex trafficking case is the -- your friend, the indicted for sex trafficking friend of yours, their attorney coming out and saying that you have some things to be concerned about. i mean, i think it's maybe the worst possible thing you could hear in these circumstances. and it's -- you know, as you're building a case like this, as you're building a case like this, there are a lot -- as you said a second ago, we heard a lot of reporting. we haven't heard from any material witnesses. but we've skipped over material witnesses and gone straight to the heart of the case. if there's anybody we know about right now who has the capacity to flip on matt gaetz in a devastating way, it is this guy,

the sex trafficker. so we are now in the room where it happened, so to speak, and getting the strongest emanations possible that, in fact, there is something to talk about and that the guy who has the thing to talk about is going to talk about it and i can't imagine but that yesterday was the worst, maybe the worst day in matt gaetz's life. i would have thought. there may be worse days ahead, but yesterday was probably pretty bad. >> let's bring in the "new york times" reporter who has been with this story right from the very beginning, michael schmidt. mike, bring us up to speed here on joel greenberg. his attorney making it pretty clear that joel greenberg may be flipping on his buddy, matt gaetz here. >> yeah. as you guys were pointing out, fritz sheller is a long time florida attorney. he represented the wife of the pulse nightclub shooter who was

indicted and went to trial against the government to fight them and won. and, you know, whatever folks, you know, on the left or the right think of, you know, a lawyer, a lawyer like that, he is not going to go out and say that and not know the message that he is sending. clearly, that is a message directly to the public and to the government and to matt gaetz about the direction of where this is headed, about, you know, what his client is willing to do, because you have to remember, joel greenberg is someone that we, certainly in the national media and anyone following politics had no idea was up until about 10 days ago. but joel greenberg faces an enormous amount of time in prison for a range of charges, including sex trafficking, that he has been indicted on. and the only way that he can

bring that number down is to provide cooperation to the government, to help their investigation, to help them lead to other prosecutions. and, obviously, gaetz is the biggest fish that we know of, certainly, in this investigation. and often whatever, you know, these investigations can be very successful, they can get a lot of people to plead guilty, they can go to trial and win. but if in the end the government were to, let's say, charge gaetz and lose that case, that is what the public will remember. so the government wants to have as many witnesses as possible as it moves forward here. and what this lawyer is trying to do is position his client to benefit the most from cooperating. >> well, and, michael, based on sources i spoke with yesterday in florida, there may be more

than one person testifying against the congressman. the department of justice has notified several people that they are of interest in this case. so is it possible you may have several parties that were involved in these events that the congressman and the tax collector went to who are now, especially if they were responsible for transporting the 17-year-old or being a part of that and being there while the 17-year-old is being transported, there are several other people who are going to be wanting to get details from the feds, as well, right? >> there are obviously lots of problems when you're investigated by the government. but one of them is that typically if you're a high profile person, a range of conduct that you've done gets

examined. the government gets in, they start looking at your phone records. they start looking at your email messages. they start talking to people around you. and in the process of that, if you have -- if you've done things that are wrong, they start to pop up. so as we lay out in our story today, there are different trips that gaetz may have taken that the government is looking at. did he try and take women with him to the bahamas? who was on those trips? it doesn't look like greenberg was on those trips, but who was with him and who are the people affiliated with him and him being a young congressman in florida, were there donors that wanted to go with him? as we talk about in this story today, there's an allegation the government has learned about about a ghost candidate in 2020 elections in florida. that has no, you know -- there's no known nexus between that and the sex trafficking. but that is a big issue down in

florida where, in state races, there are questions about whether republicans tried to bring in third party candidates to go on the ballot to take votes away from democrats. so all of a sudden here, an investigation that started a year and a half ago about a local tax collector named joel greenberg and whether, you know, he was stalk ago political rival or, you know, he was taking money in his position as tax collector from seminole county is now this sprawling thing that can potentially form tentacles here and there and who knows where. still ahead, president biden tackles gun safety reform. a pair of shootings leave two communities devastated. the latest on this critical issue next. the latest on this critical issue next it's ubrelvy. for anytime, anywhere migraine strikes, without worrying if it's too late, or where i am.

one dose can quickly stop my migraine in its tracks within two hours. unlike older medicines, ubrelvy is a pill that directly blocks cgrp protein, believed to be a cause of migraine. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. most common side effects were nausea and tiredness. ask about ubrelvy. the anytime, anywhere migraine medicine. i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter. ♪ ♪i've got the brains you've got the looks♪ ♪let's make lots of money♪ ♪you've got the brawn♪

♪i've got the brains♪ ♪let's make lots of♪ ♪uh uh uh♪ ♪oohhh there's a lot of opportunities♪ with allstate, drivers who switched saved over $700. saving is easy when you're in good hands. allstate click or call to switch today. what's the #1 retinol brand allstate used most by dermatologists? tah-dah, it's neutrogena® with derm-proven retinol, rapid wrinkle repair® smooths the look of fine lines in 1-week, deep wrinkles in 4. so you can kiss wrinkles, and other wrinkle creams goodbye. rapid wrinkle repair® pair with our most concentrated retinol ever for 2x the power. neutrogena® hooh. that spin class was brutal. well you can try the buick's massaging seat. oohh yeah, that's nice. can i use apple carplay to put some music on? sure, it's wireless.

pick something we all like. ok. hold on. what's your buick's wi-fi password? buickenvision2021. oh, you should pick something stronger. that's really predictable. that's a really tight spot. don't worry. i used to hate parallel parking. (all together) me too. hey. you really outdid yourself. yes, we did. the all-new buick envision. an suv built around you... all of you. facing leaks takes strength. so here's to the strong, who trust in our performance and comfortable long-lasting protection. because your strength is supported by ours. depend. the only thing stronger than us, is you.

following reports of gun

violence that unfolded just as the president was announcing what he called an epidemic. a gunman opened fire at a cabinet company in the city of bryant. and in south carolina a former nfl player is accused of shooting and killing a prominent doctor. , the doctor's wife and their two grandchildren. willie. >> just horrifying stories. the top of the president's agenda yesterday reducing access

to home made of self-assembled gun that's don't include serial numbers. red flag laws allow police or family members to petition a court to prevent someone to have access to firearms. >> this is an international embarrassment. every day in this country, 316 people are shot every single day. 106 of them die every day. our flag was still flying at half-staff for the victims of the horrific murder of eight

primarily asian-american people in georgia. when ten more lives were taken in a mass murder in colorado. you probably didn't hear it, but between those two incidents, less than one week apart, there were more than 850 additional shootings. 850. that took the lives of more than 250 people. and left 500, 500 injured. this is an epidemic, for god's sake. and it has to stop. i know it's painful and frustrating that we haven't made the progress that we had hoped for. but it took five years to get brady bill passed and it took even more years to work to pass the assault weapons banned and it saved lives. no matter how long it takes, we're going to get these passed. we're not going to give up.

>> you know, anytime in politics, the word gun comes up, you can expect both sides to divide quickly and start fighting each other. but there actually was some possibility of middle ground with what joe biden said yesterday. kevin williamson gave the president a bit of praise for his actions, writing the national review, quote, president joe biden has, for his part, offered a couple of unobjectionable, maybe even useful ideas on gun policy. it is encouraging to see some democrats and gun controllers taking halfway sensible stances. and there is room here for cooperation and compromise. gene robinson, there really is, especially if you look at what the american people are saying. almost nine out of ten have consistently said, since

newtown, we need universal background checks. enhanced background checks. look at a poll that was just out last week, an overwhelming majority of americans support the idea of gun checks at gun shows, background checks by themselves. 65% of americans supported the banning of military-style weapons. now, of course, we're not going to get there. but there's some of these other common sense rules. maybe there's a possibility for some common ground here. >> well, we have to hope. and, you know, any progress that we make on gun control, sadly,

will be incremental progress, despite those numbers you cited, despite the fact that the public, in its great majority, is ready for farther reaching and perhaps ultimately more effective measures. but our political system is not going to get us there, except by little increments. so let's at least have an increment. let's at least take a step in the right direction, knowing, tragically, that we're not going to -- it's not going to likely be a very big step toward reducing that awful toll of 110,000 lives, more than 30,000 lives a year that we lose to gun violence in this country.

it is stunning. president biden called it an international embarrassment, which is kind of an odd way to phrase it, but true, it simply doesn't happen. people who have mental problems and people who are filled with rage and whatever in countries all around the world, in japan or whatever, they have no gun violence. they have no gun deaths because they have -- they don't have the guns. we're awash in guns in this country and we, i hope, are going to make progress in making that better. up next, representative pat toomey has a new statement out on the president's effort to

reign in the violence. we'll talk about that, next. reign in the violence. we'll talk about that, next. oh! don't burn down the duplex. terminix.

it doesn't happen often. everyday people taking on the corporate special interests. and winning. but now, the for the people act stands on the brink of becoming law. ensuring accurate elections. iron-clad ethics rules to crack down on political self-dealing. a ban on dark money. and finally reducing corporate money in our politics.

to restore our faith in government. because it's time. for the people to win. not everybody wants the same thing. because it's time. that's why i go with liberty mutual — they customize my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. 'cause i do things a little differently. hey, i'll take one, please! wait, this isn't a hot-dog stand? no, can't you see the sign? wet. teddy. bears. get ya' wet teddy bears! one-hundred percent wet, guaranteed! or the next one is on me! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

whether congress acts or not, i'm going to use all the resources at my disposal to keep the american people safe from gun violence. but there's much more that congress can do to help that effort. and they can do it right now. they've offered plenty of thoughts and prayers, members of congress. but they've passed not a single new federal law to reduce gun violence. enough prayers, time for some action. >> republican senator pat toomey, set to retire at the end of this term released a statement saying in part, i president trump biden's expressed willingness to work with both republicans and democrats to achieve this goal in done in a manner that respects the right of law-abiding citizens, i believe there is an opportunity to strengthen our background check system so that we are better able to keep guns away from those who have no legal right to

them. >> and elizabeth, it was pat toomey who teamed one joe manchon after newtown, surprised quite a few people, but those two members of the senate from states that have a long history of strong support for gun ownership moved aggressively after newtown on universal background checks. now pat toomey is talking about doing that again. i'm just wondering if there is going to be a way to reach some sort of compromise, some -- at least some halfway measure that can briveng enough republicans in to make a difference. >> you know, i don't know, i'm not as optimistic about the rest of that. possibly, yes, that do not forget.

given they couldn't do it then, the executive action is a step in the right direction. it's just work on some people. that's very good start. but it's not the political impetus there was when joe biden was pushing that through the senate way back when. the gun control advocates, what will reduce gun violence in this country is to have less guns. we are many, many years away from some kind of a gun buyback

process. >> you look at these numbers the majority of republicans supporting massive bill, relief bill on covid. 75% of americans and a majority of republicans supporting a massive infrastructure bill. the type of bills that conservatives like myself in congress would have laid down in front of the tracks and said never going to happen. that's not happening now. and you see the majority of republicans supporting it. i am wondering about guns, you look at these poll numbers, look at some conservative voices

saying, hey, maybe we meet in the middle here. i'm just starting to get the feeling, and i'm curious what your read is because you look at this as much or more than anybody else. i'm just wondering if we are starting to see a shift in the political environment where what happened in 2010 and 2010 the framing of american politics around the tea part revolution, whether that has burned e burned out the way i believe it has and now we may find americans, republicans do want compromise, even if people in congress haven't gotten that message yet. >> the premise that the country right now and the latter stage stages of covid, that there is a larger appetite of government intervention on the economic

side and on the public health side than there has been in more than a generation going all the way back probably to the post world war ii era, i think that's right and i think that's part of what is driving both the overwhelming bipartisan support in the country for the covid relief measures and for the infrastructure bill that the administration is trying to push forward. so that is a big thing, a paradigm shift maybe, the roosevelt era to the reagan era, are we on the verge of a new activist progressive era led by joe biden. but here is the problem with it when it comes to guns. guns have become a cultural issue and not so much an issue about economics or government intervention. obviously there is a big element to it, but the rallying around gun rights and sort of the incredibly dug inry flex it

views about do not touch my guns, this is an issue of rights that many on the pro gun side has i think become deeper entrenched. so on the one hand, i am optimistic in the way you are when i see the collapse of the nra, the rise of the anti-gun activists, the fact that in the democratic party now there is no debate about this, you have to be on the side of the sensible gun safety, but on the republican side, there is even greater dug inness on this in the way that there is on a lot of these hot button cultural issues. and i point you to that mask wearing became politicized the way they did. and i think that cultural overlay means that we're not going to see as i think as easy a shift in some ways towards acceptance of gun safety legislation as we've seen to the embrace of big government. coming up, nbc's richard engle has long reported on

insurrections and political turmoil around the world. but this time it's right here at home. his fascinating new look at the capital riots, straight ahead on "morning joe." on "morning joe." nicorette knows, quitting smoking is freaking hard. you get advice like: try hypnosis... or... quit cold turkey. kidding me?! instead, start small. with nicorette. which can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette

how am i doing? some say this is my greatest challenge ever. governments in record debt; inflation rising and currencies falling. but i've seen centuries of rises and falls. i had a love affair with tulips once. lived through the crash of '29 and early dot-com hype. watched mortgages play the villain beside a true greek tragedy. and now here i am, with one companion that's been with me for millennia; hedging the risks you choose and those that choose you. the physical seam of a digital world, traded with a touch. my strongest ally and my closest asset.

the gold standard, so to speak ;) people call my future uncertain. but there's one thing i am sure of... we made usaa insurance for busy veterans like kate. so when her car got hit, she didn't waste any time. she filed a claim on her usaa app and said, “that was easy.” usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa. [sfx: thunder rumbles] [sfx: rainstorm] ♪♪ comfort in the extreme. ♪♪ the lincoln family of luxury suvs.

it's a thirteen-hour flight, that's not a weekend trip. ♪♪ fifteen minutes until we board. oh yeah, we gotta take off. you downloaded the td ameritrade mobile app so you can quickly check the markets? yeah, actually i'm taking one last look at my dashboard before we board. excellent. and you have thinkorswim mobile- -so i can finish analyzing the risk on this position. you two are all set. have a great flight. thanks. we'll see ya.

ah, they're getting so smart. choose the app that fits your investing style. ♪♪ welcome back to "morning joe." in a moment, we'll have the bbc's katty kay and richard engle outside buckingham palace for the latest on the passing of the queen's husband, prince philip. but first, a check on business before the bell. dom, what are you looking at? >> florida governor ron desantis wants to get cruise ships up and running outside of florida's port asap. they will file a lawsuit against the centers for disease prevention. he wants the cdc to let cruise

line operators resume sailing in a moment. he accidents believe the federal government has the right to shut down an entire industry for a year. the auto industry continue to go struggle, but not because of a lack of demand. it's the opposite. people want to buy cars, but people like general motors and ford can't make enough of them. there's a global shortage of computer chips that is requiring ford and gm to shut down plants. that could be anywhere from a week to several weeks and that stoppage and planned activity is going to have a big impact on results at gm and ford. those companies think it could be anywhere from a $1 billion to $2 billion hit to their financial results this year. and nike has settled a lawsuit against a brooklyn company that made those satan shoes in connection with rapper lil nas x.

nike sued over trade infringement last week. they sold out at more than 1 -- $1,000 a pair. nike said there would be full refound to get those shoes out of market. it's not my cup of tea, but maybe those shoes are a big deal for some people. >> all right, dominic chu, not mine, either. thank you so much. now back to the breaking news from the uk, the royal family issued a statement last hour that reads, quote, it is with deep sorrow that her majesty, the queen, has announced the death of her beloved husband, his rile highness, the prince philip duke of edinburgh. prince philip passed away peacefully this morning at windsor castle at the age of 99. joining us now is correspondent richard engle and on the phone

washington anchor for bbc's world news america. caddie, let's start with you. prince philip was many things. he married the future queen of england in 1947. over seven decades of public service well into his 90s. give us your thoughts this morning. >> he was somebody who was never going to be king because that's not what you became when you married a queen under the british system. but he was more than a husband. he was a consort, he was a part of her public service to the british public. and they had this incredibly long marriage. it started out he was somebody who would have been a brilliant naval officer. he graduated top of his class from the royal naval college. and he had been somebody who hoped that would be part of --

years -- for her husband died and -- queen. >> i think we've -- we've lost caddie. we'll try to get back. >> fix her audio. >> richard, following up on what caddie was saying, obviously, the duke of edinburgh wanted to be more active in many ways and it was just not opportunities available to him as far as a long lasting naval career. but he did sit by and serve by queen elizabeth's side for 65, 70 years. >> so he was very active even into his later years. it was only two years ago that they took away his driver's license in an episode that was very revealing about his

personality. he was in a relatively minor car accident. his car flipped over. they had to pull him out of the sun roof. the car was on its side, another personal in a different vehicle had a broken wrist. but he was very active until not -- until recently. he accompanied the queen. he would be part of royal duties. he was certainly a fixture of the monarchy. but, yes, he did have to take a bat seat. he did not pursue his naval career. he was royal himself. he renounced his ties to the greek royal family when he became such an important member of the british royal family. and that was his role, to be the royal consort, the first man, so to speak, for the last several decades. and now here at buckingham palace, they have lowered the flag to half-staff. and the next step will be the funeral. obviously, it won't be what you would normally expect in times of a royal passing, certainly of

a royal figure of this level because of covid. even though this country is starting to open up. they don't want to -- it's not expected that they're going to have a massive state funeral with people lining the streets and the body laying in state. it will be much more of a private royal affair. >> richard, how did prince philip view his own role? it was 70 years nearly, it was back in 1952 when queen elizabeth ascended to the throne as a young woman and he became effectively her right hand, a consort to the queen. how did he view his role in the monarchy and his job every day? >> in public as number two, no one who would challenge the queen. but within the household, a leader, someone who would try to rein in the discipline, rein the

royals, to keep the family modern. it was his idea or his initiative to open the family up to the media many decades ago and this is now a family that is struggling with the media and has been struggling recently. this royal family is in transition. the duke has just passed away at 99. the queen herself is 94. so there could be another transition coming. passing on the -- the monarchy to prince charles. but there are big problems with the younger generation, as everyone has been reporting. prince harry moved to california. there was this famous interview with meghan markle and prince harry on oprah winfrey. and that interview, at least among large sections of society here did not go down well, in part because it showed the divisions within the family as prince philip was not well and people thought this day was coming. he had recently been in hospital

for an entire month. so some people thought it was in poor taste and poor timing to have such a public feud within the family as it is going through this generational shift. >> caddie, there was the dust up a month ago with harry and maegan markle. but for those of us that have been around a few years, same as it ever was, we all remember the 1980s, the 19s 90s and the battles, the very public battles between diana and the royal family then. but it is remarkable, is it not, that the queen and the duke of edinburgh have been steadfast defenders of the monarchy now and have been adored by much of

the public now for as long as they have. a remarkable sweep of history. >> and a remarkable marriage. like any very long marriage, i'm sure, had its ups and downs, but they were together for that long. and i'm wondering what prince philip would have thought about the younger generation as richard put it so diplomatically, the younger generations ups and downs. because, remember, he was somebody whose family lost their throne. he was smuggled out of greece in an orange crate as a baby born on the island of korfu. and i think it was central to prince philip to think about monarchy and protect monarchy. it was something he realized was critical in a sense in his role alongside queen elizabeth and the british monarchy had gone through its own abdication not

that long beforehand. and he did a lot while he was her husband to try to make the british royal family adapt in order to survive. he was the one who -- as richard referred to, he brought in the television cameras for their wedding for when she became queen. he set up informal lunches so the queen could meet different members of her subjects from different backgrounds. he apparently, when he heard that there was an extra kitchen just for the royal family, he shut it down. he stopped the footmen from powdering their hair, which loved positively archaic at the time. so he did all of these things to modernize the british royal family. and he didn't do it because he thought they were good things to do, he did it with a clear conscious and awareness of his own background, having nearly lost his position in a role family, his family having lost their position as the greek

royal family because of a coup. and he wanted the british royal family to adapt and be healthy royals for their subjects. >> fascinating. the bbc's katty kay, thank you so much. and richard, let's turn now to the special you have this sunday. very important, taking a closer look at the insurrection at the capitol on january 6th. it's a joint investigation with nbc news and its volunteers in which you comb through hours of video and dig through the backgrounds of insurrection leaders. and in this clip, you speak with a capitol police officer who was on the front line about the personal attacks he experienced from rioters. take a look. >> what about the fact that you are a black officer and there were guys in there wearing camp t-shirts, was being a black

officer there a different experience for you? was that a big factor for you? >> it was a time. i was still holding the hallway and these people are standing there yelling. so i started talking to them and we started talking about why they're there and joe biden didn't win the election and it's stolen and i started talking about me voting, i voted for joe biden. does my vote not count? and wurn person said, you hear that? this "n" word voted for joe biden. the people that were with them joined in and said this "n" word, fu, fu, voted for joe biden. boo. >> whoouk it means about the state of america, where we are

today? how do you -- you've had a little bit of time now to process it. >>. >> we have a long way to go. we have a long way to go. >> in this hour, a long way to go. we got a long way to go. >> so in this hour we identified two key individuals the officer was just describing, describing what it was like from the police perspective. and then also look at a few key moments, there were certain critical turning point moments at the beginning when the rider peeled back the fence and they weren't stopped and able to approach the western steps.

the scaffolding turned out to be a major factor. going through thousands of hours of tv footage and rioters on the cell phones videos and taking selfies, we were able to identify digital moments. so that's what we're putting together this sunday. >> amazing. nbc's richard engel, thank you very much. the new episode of "on assignment with richard engel" airs this sunday at 10:00 p.m. eastern time. before we go to break, i want to highlight an important piece on knowyourvolume.com. it is focused on addressing major hiring disparities for black women in government jobs. this afternoon i'll be in the clubhouse. we'll be right back. we'll be ri.

hey, dad! hey, son! 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.

i think the sketchy website i bought this turtle from stole all of my info. ooh, have you looked on the bright side? discover never holds you responsible for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter. what's the #1 retinol brand (giggling) used most by dermatologists?e. tah-dah, it's neutrogena® with derm-proven retinol, rapid wrinkle repair® smooths the look of fine lines in 1-week, deep wrinkles in 4. so you can kiss wrinkles, and other wrinkle creams goodbye. rapid wrinkle repair® pair with our most concentrated retinol ever for 2x the power. neutrogena® news an core brooke baldwin

is starting a new chapter in her life. that starts with her new book out titled "huddled: how women unlock their collective power," where she talks to inspiring women if all walks of life. brooke, welcome to the show. congratulations on the book. i love the concept. >> thank you, good morning. >> good morning, good morning. i love the concept because in my "know your value" community i talk a lot about how women are seeing strength in numbers and really wanting to have that huddle as opposed to maybe 20, 30 years ago when i was starting my career. >> yes. >> i think it's less that way. tell us about your book. >> first of all, it is truly an honor to be on with you, mika. and you're someone who walks the walk, miss "know your value."

woman to woman, thank you for that. this book has been a journey several years in the making. i think the two pivotal days for me when it all sort of clicked and i realized i needed to do more was when i was covering the trump 2017 inauguration and cnn had me assigned, i was in the presidential motorcade, like balancing on the back of this flatbed truck, newly elected president trump winding down constitution avenue going to the white house for the first time. listen, i will be real with you, it was only recent to that day where we learned president trump liked to grab women. as a woman and journalist i was standing there troubled. i didn't know what it would look like. then the next day i'm on the women's march on the clock for cnn. surrounded by half a million women. i had never seen or been part of such a giant huddle. i knew i needed to document it. i knew women were showing up for one another in ways i had never

noticed in my 20-year career. and i thought where hi my own sisterhood and sister and me to show up and protest for whatever the cause may be. and i didn't. i did not have a huddle. i knew then i needed to activate, one, and inspire other women to do the same. >> let's talk about major intersection in life. you spent most of your life being a reporter, being a journalist, working at cnn was a dream. now the future is unknown for brooke baldwin. how will you use your huddle to take you into the future and how are you feeling in these final moments, and i have been there, being at a place you considered home. i considered cbs home. i would do the news with my

daughter heidi under the desk. i never imagined myself anywhere else. unlike your situation, i was actually fired on my butt and had to watch out in like shock. you were sort of preparing for your departure. what are the mental steps you're going through and what is the huddle going to do to help you get by on your own? >> i'm sitting here with you now with my journalism career packed up in four boxes. that was something. i'm terrified but excited about jumping into the unknown. i was wrote in the epilogue in the book i was writing, i had a feeling changes were on the horizon. i didn't know how it would happen or when, but this is like my back foot off the high-dive. like i see you all if you're in the pandemic and you lost a job, for me, this is me leaving, but there is power -- there is power

in the huddle because i have certainly leaned on women in my life through this journey and not just writing the book but walking away from this dream job. i already told my closest girlfriends, i will need to find you at some point this summer because all i know is showing up at an office every morning for 21 years and i will not be doing that and by the end of the summer i will be emotional and please let me lean on you and let me show up vulnerably and help prop me up and give me strength and belief. i'm cheering on every other woman who i have heard from who find themselves, who find herself in similar shoes. you know, mika, look at where you landed! you did all right. at the end of the day, you're such an inspiration that way. i see you and i'm on a journey. >> let's go back together. after your final day, your

huddle continues and can you assume "know your value" is part of that huddle, we would love to have you immediately join us in some way, shape or form. >> yes. >> and continue talking about this these issues with our community as you're going through the process. i think it would be really fun and enlightening and impactful and empowering to kind of like join women on your journey to this like whiteboard you're facing. >> are you asking me to huddle, you're asking to huddle with me? >> i am! >> i'm so in, sister. is this awkward? >> no! >> i don't care. this is exactly what i'm talking about, i'm not afraid to hold the book about it. in, done! >> the book is "huddle: how women unlock their collective power" and we're going to do it together with brooke baldwin. thank you very much, brooke. it's great to have you on.

we look forward to hearing much more from you. and that's it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage right now. ♪♪ hi, there, i'm stephanie ruhle. this morning we have breaking news out of london, where prince philip died at age 99. queen elizabeth announced the death environment her husband saying he passed away peacefully at windsor castle. let's go live to nbc's kelly cobiella on the ground. what do we know so far? >> this is a country still in lockdown because of the pandemic so large crowd gatherings are not really permitted but people are gathering here, lying flowers at the gates of buckingham palace and remembering this man who's been part of this country's life really over seven