republican party royal by his iron grip? plus republicans send a clear message to liz cheney that her days in leadership are numbered simply due to her criticisms of trump's lies. what's next as it becomes clearer and clearer which side is winning the fight for the soul of the gop? and later the alarm being sounded on capitol hill over those mysterious directed energy attacks on americans. plus, did facebook do stuff? senator mark warner on both those issues as well as the sonic attacks he now assess there is a weapon responsible for those attacks. he joins me later this hour. welcome to wednesday. it is "meet the press daily."

we begin with the fallout and the consequences of the decision this morning from facebook's oversight board. temporarily upholding the social media's ban on former president trump. the ban is going to have to be revisited within six months as the board criticized what it called a vague and standardless approach to facebook's efforts to address posts from trump that were deemed dangerous and that legitimized violence. and mark zuckerberg hoping this oversight board would clean his hands. the oversight board had another thing to say. here's what the oversight board's administrative director told my colleague hallie jackson. >> the board has found that the suspension of former president trump was necessary to keep people safe. that the actions of the former president encouraged and legitimized violence and constituted what the board has termed a severe violation of the facebook rules. and the board has also said obviously that an indefinite expense is contrary to what

should be clear and consistent and trans parent rules. >> the former president responded to facebook's move to uphold the ban vowing payback and revenge. his allies have been echoing those sentiments. with or without facebook, former president trump's influence in the party has only seemed to grow stronger even though his support among actual republican voters has gotten weaker according to reason polling. even though his influence in social media has cratered by some measures. republicans seem to be calculating that they just can't survive in this republican party without donald trump's support. and nowhere are the consequences of his influence being felt more in washington than in the brewing shake-up in house republican leadership. the number three house republican liz cheney has now lost the support of her colleagues due to her criticism of the party's embrace of the big lie following his incitement

at the capitol. it was that riot which got him banned from facebook in the first place. here is where we are and here's where the republican party is. joining me now, msnbc senior correspondent hallie jackson. she covered the white house through the republican years. and with me, the former communications director of the nrcc, and from platformer, understanding the legal decisions of faking, and brandy, of course, is nbc news's senior reporter focusing on the platforms and politics. let's start with the initial fallout of the president himself. the former president himself. what is interesting here, and i've heard multiple versions of this, which is that facebook might have been influenced by the fact that the trump operation made it clear, they can't function without facebook. that they desperately needed facebook. and almost did that scare the

oversight board. >> i had that, the conversation that i had with the director of the oversight board about how this decision came into play. they insist that this decision was made solely from the facts at hand. the two posts made in the aftermath immediately of the december january 6th riot. they didn't take into effect the things the former president said on the coronavirus or looting or other pieces of information that he put out there on facebook. his past behavior did play into some of the discussion from a minority of the board members. but they looked specific will you at what happened in the aftermath of january 6th. okay. that initial ban was appropriate. they found that piece of it was right. because donald trump was saying things that were not safe, essentially. fanning the flame of these dangerous conspiracy theories. the ultimate decision is that facebook was, didn't have enough standards in place for this. when you look at, was this a

political component into this? i asked mr. thomas hughes, the guy we spoke with. does he think facebook is partisan? is facebook a part sap organization acting in a partisan way? the answer was to go back to what the board's decision was. they were not at all happy with facebook. i had some conversations before the decision came out with someone familiar with the former president's thinking on. this they were not super optimistic this ban would be reversed anyway. this was not a total shock to them. >> their political operation as we've come to learn was much more counted on facebook more so than any other thing both for money, for organization and message movement. can he be a viable candidate for office without facebook? in the minds of trump -- >> if he lose that's platform. >> yeah. >> i'm totally with you. people think of trump and social

media and they think twitter, right? twitter was what he used to talk to people and to make news. but facebook as you know is where the organization happened and where importantly the money happen document people in and around the president's orbit think he could be a viable candidate? obviously they will say yes if he was on a spaceship in outer space. there is no doubt among those loyalists of trump that they will back him up 100%. but you look at the organization that for example, brad parscale has been involved in this new blog out on the trump website nowful somebody instrumental in the digital operation of this previously and facebook was a huge component of that. so it is hard to see it. could donald trump do what they've been saying for months, make his own social media platform? i'm told those talks are happening. that there will potentially be a rollout by the fourth of july of whatever it will be. but that's something, to get to

even close to the level of facebook will take not just incredible technological and logistical prowess but years and time build. so i think that's a very open question. >> all you have to do is look at the problems parler is having and they're so much ahead of anything that the former president could put together. let me move over to you, brandy, and what this, the awkward decision that the oversight board made. hey, sorry, facebook. you were trying to avoid this decision. you were trying to avoid the tougher investigation to do which is are your algorithms to blame for this? you don't get to just isolate trump. do i wonder, are we underplaying the board's sort of dressing down of facebook's executive leadership? >> i mean, the board is toothless in a lot of ways. they get a lot of criticism for

being paid for by facebook and not having the ability to -- facebook isn't bound by the suggestions they made. just by formal decision. i think it is really important to look at this board and really pay attention to the points they're making. they're pretty, i don't know, harsh. they didn't mince words. them that facebook doesn't have policies around crises, or novel, sort of potentially harmful situations that don't immediately fall into distinct policies. it is what critics have said for a long time. that they're vague, confusing, arbitrary, capricious and handed out unevenly. so it is up to facebook. facebook doesn't have to do anything. but they might be tasked with sort of creating new policies for world leaders and the novel situations. you know. will they be trans apparently about their role in the capitol

attack and enforcement going forward like the board has asked for? maybe. this inches us closer. at the same time, there's not a compelling reason. they are not bound by the suggestions and facebook has really consistently shown itself to be against transparency and be reactionary instead of proactively designing the platform to keep users safe. >> how selective it was ban on trump versus, say, brazil, dutiart, how has facebook handled misinformation from other world leaders? >> so they have acted to remove information. >> finish your thoughts and then i'll get to brandy. >> yes, they have removed pages from other world leaders. the board point out they need a

stronger global policy and they need to take into account they need a team of global moderators that is informed on those subjects and not focus on the united states. >> i guess, brandy, what i was getting at, does donald trump have a case that he's being singled out by facebook in. >> i think that would be a very hard case to make and i think that's reflected in the board's easy, quick decision that he has obviously violated facebook's policies. i think you could hold up a number of donald trump's posts against facebook policy and against the every enjoy all mission, it says safety, voice, other things that it claims to hold dear, that many. his posts, they directly violate the spirit of what facebook says they stand for. i just want to say, i think this blog thing is sort of hilarious where trump has been relegated

to this blog. i just did an analysis that very few people are he had roog the blog. so deplatforming works. trump is going to feel the pain from this and we'll hear a lot of screaming if conservative that's this isn't fair. >> yeah. well, we shall see. casey, let me ask you this. is this decision at all put facebook in a position where trump could sue them and be successful? what would be the grounds of the suit? >> we have section 230 of the communications decency act says platforms, corporations, are allowed to make these sort of speech decisions for the same reason a shopping mall can tell you that you can't be in there with a mega phone talking about politics. recently we saw supreme court justice clarence thomas argue this is a right and that facebook has become a quasi public space and should be held to a higher standard. i wouldn't be surprised in the

next few years if we did see an effort from a trump-like figure to bring a suit on those grounds. >> well, what you just that, referring to justice thomas, is this any example in history where a private company became so ubiquitous that they suddenly got, that consumers, users of it got constitutional protections from the private company? >> so not on the internet. but in real life, yes. in the '30s and '40s, there was some sort of company town that issued speech restrictions and the supreme court weigh in the and found because it was effectively a public space, that the corporation needed to be held to a higher standard. we haven't seen that kind of jurisprudence in this country for almost 100 years. for it to come back would be a major reversal on the part of the supreme court. >> so let me get to the political fallout. of course, why you're here.

and it sort of goes to this. i want to show this picture of ted cruz. isn't this the dream scenario where conservatives can complain about the ban but they get to put -- it's ted cruz who get to put the words in donald trump's mouth, not donald trump putting the words in ted cruz' mouth. >> certainly trump is playing one hijacked behind his back. beyond the data like she does but before the blog, unless you were on the press list, you were not getting these tweets in the former of press release before. it all felt very 2004 which is obviously totally contrary to what he's done the last decade. but i think now the debate going forward among conservatives will be over tactics. so obviously you mentioned creating their own social media platform. that's pretty extreme. if you wrap the facebook decision in with a lot of the conservative outcry over fortune

500 companies delving into legislation in the states, you're going to see a part on conservatives trying to replicate the noise and the echo chamber and the risk and make corporations very nervous. that will be the message going forward for conservatives. >> you know, i want to put up something. this is facebook's top ten best performing links in the last 24 hours. i know the facts may not matter when it comes to grievance. let me put the list up. ben shapiro in the first slide, ben shapiro in the second slide, ben shapiro in the third slide, sean hannity, fox news, and the rachel maddow show. nine of the top ten. it's not as if facebook punishes conservatives. it looks just the opposite. >> and look, trump was unique where to hallie's point before.

trump got his message out on twitter. he can certainly inact with voters there. to your point, monetization. he raised oodles of money in 2019 and 2020. shapiro isn't necessarily doing that. organization. that's how republicans still do it. so with the facebook ban, to your point, far more organizationally he's playing with one hand behind his back. less message wise. >> hey, brandy, is that top ten les i just verbally outlined the reason why facebook does not want to do what the oversight board asked them to do, to delve into their own algorithms to see how much the system itself has fed misinformation and created this monster? >> facebook is probably doing that work right now. they certainly understand who is using their platforms.

they certainly know how their features, for example, the group features, pushing people into more polarizing content. and it just so happens that polarizing content on the right is far more successful on facebook than anything from the left. so yeah. if they got rid of all of that, would you see a pretty empty platform. >> you know, casey, this is the, frankly, what happens in a lot of media businesses. the right thing to do and the best thing for the business, don't necessarily align. >> yeah. and facebook's user base is much more conservative than facebook employees and that creates a lot of tension within the company. and i think historically they have latched themselves to this strain of neutrality that has tried to create for people like the former president at the same time when a literal insurrection

being cheered on by the president, the company took action. but as the board noted, they didn't go far enough. hopefully ball is back in their court to take affirmative action and make clear that you can incite violence in this way. >> with tackling the messaging challenge that i think the republicans now face going forward, because it will be awfully tempting, certainly trump world wants to make this a grievance. there's a lot of animation on the right about going after social media companies and corporation. and yet, none of that confronts joe biden's agenda. >> i think there has been more and more you've seen over the last several months where some of the conservative side are fanning the flames of, what you could call culture wars, right?

i don't know that this falls into the culture war category. it is certainly a grievance related to something not at the forefront of the biden agenda. this is a big one. and there is the point, think of, a little bit, think what we've seen over the last four and a half years before joe biden took office. people being asked about things donald trump would put on the internet. tweets. members of congress, republicans, especially, coming on cable news and having to face an account for whatever donald trump was tweeting. that goes away and to your point on the ted cruz photo, now they get the benefit of saying, look, i'm still buds with former president trump but i don't have to be held accountable for the things he is now saying. he's saying them in his press statement blogs and not a big social media site. so i don't think it will go away any time soon.

i think for the trump on or about, thor bit. think the challenge for them is how do you get that message out without something like facebook or twitter? >> you know, the best way to smoke them out on this is to say he's definitely not running for president because then he'll come out and say, oh, yes, i am. don't let the media tell you that i'm not. matt, this messaging challenge. come september of 2022. do you think joe biden will be talking about donald trump he had a agenda or donald trump's grievances? i think the base of the party would rather talk about the grievances than how much money is being spent. >> how about donald trump talking about hillary clinton over his presidency. i think there was a criticism among some in the party in the early part of the biden term we were too busy talking about the election, and that's why i think the covid bill didn't get

messaged on the republican side as well as many people thought. and both sides, whomever i talked to, the more we relitigate 2020, the more joe biden wins. there is a house to take back in 2022. we can't keep talking about this. >> and that is the challenge. i'm guessing donald trump is the one having the most trouble not talking about it. what an all-star panel to get us started on a very important development. thank you all. coming up, we'll talk more about this with the cheryl of the senate intelligence committee. we'll get his take on the facebook ban and the challenge to facebook executives and where the u.s. government will try to hold facebook as accountable as the oversight board wants to. and then i would like to ask about this weapon that he and mark rubio say is behind the attacks on u.s. personnel in

halve, in havana. no bushes, no cheneys, no romneys. we'll go to liz cheney's home state. z cheney's home state. 00 feet. instead of burning our past for power, we can harness the energy of the tiny electron. we can create new ways to connect. rethinking how we communicate to be more inclusive than ever. with app, cloud and anywhere workspace solutions, vmware helps companies navigate change. faster. vmware. welcome change. ♪ (ac/dc: back in black) ♪ ♪ ♪ the bowls are back. applebee's irresist-a-bowls all just $8.99. mommy, i won a medal. that's amazing! ♪ your radiance comes alive ♪ i got in!

♪ i don't need the rain ♪ celebrate all the moms in your life with sparkling gifts from pandora jewelry. this is how you become the best! [music: “you're the best” by joe esposito] [music: “you're the best” by joe esposito] [triumphantly yells] [ding] don't get mad. get e*trade and take charge of your finances today. introducing colliders. ♪ if you love it, spoon it. ♪ your favorite candy flavors twisted, ♪ chopped or layered into cool,

creamy desserts that are made to spoon. new colliders desserts. find them near the refrigerated pudding. municipal bonds don't usually get the media coverage find them near the stock market does. in fact, most people don't find them all that exciting. but, if you're looking for the potential for consistent income that's federally tax-free, now is an excellent time to consider municipal bonds from hennion & walsh. if you have at least 10,000 dollars to invest, call and talk with one of our bond specialists at 1-800-217-3217. we'll send you our exclusive bond guide, free. with details about how bonds can be an important part of your portfolio. hennion & walsh has specialized in fixed income and growth solutions for 30 years, and offers high-quality municipal bonds from across the country. they provide the potential for regular income...are federally tax-free... and have historically low risk. call today to request your free bond guide.

1-800-217-3217. that's 1-800-217-3217 welcome back. while facebook's open oversight board upheld the ban on donald trump, the social media company has been facing pressure from congress for years to stop the spread of disinformation on its platform. my next guest has been among facebook's most vocal critics on capitol hill. senator mark warner, chair of the senate intelligence committee. i got so much for you, senator warner. i hope you have an hour or two for me. i want to start with, look, i know, i think i know where you stand on what would you like to see facebook do. what can you do in your role to force facebook's executives to do what the oversight board has

told them they have to do? you need to look at your own algorithms, your own systems, and you need to have a very easy to understand what gets you banned policy. how do you get facebook's executives to listen to its own oversight board? >> so far, chuck, congress can't do anything. we've done squat over the last five years. we've seen these platforms ma , manipulated by the russians. i think the advisory board who kicked it back to the leadership did the right thing. what you say on facebook has consequences. if you have whoever, particularly if it is the president of the united states, saying drink bleach to get rid of covid, that has real world consequences. if you have the president of the united states or donald trump saying, come to the capitol and overturn an illegal election, that has consequences on january 6th. in the aftermath of january 6th,

if you have donald trump continuing to promote the big lie, that has consequences. congress, and this is not facebook's fault. this is congress's fault. we have seen this behavior from characters for now, five plus years, and we've done nothing. we've not even put in place a basic privacy platform. we've not said, okay, if you're tired of facebook and you want to move to a new platform data portability. and we've not taken on the really important issue, it gives facebook, google, twitter, a get out of jail free card on whatever happens on your platform. >> you know, we have a consumer watch dog that will tell us when, say, a baby carrier doesn't work the way it is advertised. who is protecting consumers from

facebook's misinformation? and isn't that, is there a role here? if so, where is that role? is that a consumer, more of a consumer agency? who should be essentially warning the country that going on facebook is more likely going to give you misinformation? >> well, particularly, chug, when 65% of americans get some or all their news from facebook and google, shouldn't there be some rules of the road? you've got a first amendment right to say stupid things. but that first amendment right doesn't mean it gets to be amplified 5 billion times without any rules of the road. and we can debate whether it is ftc, fcc, the consumer protection bureau, some new entity. unless congress puts some rules of the road in place. to give facebook credit, facebook daily advertises in a

lot of areas and they talk about internet reform and regulation. what has happened is we in the congress have frankly not done our job and then we bemoan the fact, we don't have date a portability set of rules, we don't even have a requirement still in campaign advertising that if the russians place a political ad, that it ought to be expelled, and we've done nothing in terms of content regulation or oversight. i think you have a first amendment right. i have a section 230 bill that says it shouldn't preclude you from personal harassment, violating civil rights laws, increasing the burmese military to kill rohingya in miramar. there ought to be some rule of the road. >> basically, democrats are worried about misinformation, republicans are worried about social media censorship. is there enough overlamb there that you can get these reforms

that might work? or is that tension too great for the two sides to work together? >> actually, chuck, i think this is an area where there is broad ability to get bipartisan reform. there are section 230 bills that have republican support, john thune has a very interesting approach. i'm working some republicans, with amy klobuchar, all the legislation that is already out there on data portability or the ability of trying to preclude some of the manipulative practices where you can do nothing but agree on many sites, called bipartisan there, this is an area that i hope reasonable folks can continue to sit down. it is an embarrassment that we are five or six years into this and we have not set any rules of the road. and i say that as somebody, the first part of that responsibility, i've been urging these reforms and have not been

able to get them across the finish line. >> i want to move to another issue that hand gotten a lot of attention because it is just, well, frankly, it has been so bizarre and there hasn't been a lot of facts by it. i was intrigued by a statement, a joint statement that you and marco rubio put out. and it has to do with the attacks on u.s. embassy personnel in cuba and other spots. here's what you write. as the chairman and vice chairman of the senate select committee jegs, we welcome renewed focus on these attacks. our committee will continue to work with him and the rest of the intelligence community to better understand technology behind the weapon responsibility for these attacks. stop right there. this is the first time i've seen this, to say with definitive certainty that this was a weapon that did this. what is this weapon? >> well, this is an area where we are bumping against

classified information and i'm going to work with the intel community and i give director burns great credit for putting this back as a primary focus. look. it's been five years since we've seen these incidents. we have a responsibility in three areas. one, to take care of the folks' intel community, d.o.d., state department, that has been affected in many cases with serious brain injuries. they need to be taken care of. second, we need to do formal attribution about what country created these. and then three, as we said, these are attacks. we need to know what kind of technology or weapon they used. it is frankly embarrassing that we're five years in and we don't have more answers, and the number of individuals being affected is going up. so marco and i, we'll get to the bottom of this.

we'll bring the same kind of bipartisan approach the senate intel committee brings. we have director burns who is willing to take this on. the good news is we have an administration, and i'm not saying who did this by any means, we've not made that formal attribution, but we have an administration finally willing to call out russia when it does bad things. >> i was just going to say, are you pretty confident, is the intel community confident that this was a nation state behind this? >> i'll let the intelligence community come to a formal attribution. but the number of individuals affected, the variety of locations, the seriousness, and let's assume for a moment it is a weapon, this weapon, which can affect people over a long term basis, can spread terror if you are on an assignment.

we put our intel people, our state department people. they serve our nation all over the world. if they are afraid for themselves or their families, that they can becomeville of some directed energy, and i'm not going to fully characterize the tool yet until we get that formal definition. >> i was going to say -- >> the cost to the community -- >> you're being a bit vague on weapon document we know it is a weapon? that part we've confirmed? that's what you wrote in your statement. and then you sort of backed off there. we know a weapon was used or we're still trying to crack that part of the code? >> we know many people who serve in the american government have been dramatically affected. we need to give formal attribution in terms of what entity or nation state took these actions. and we know that something that

creates this much harm, i'm not going to get into the smantices of whether it would be a weapon or not. marco and i will call it a weapon and until it is proven otherwise, we'll continue to figure it out. we finally have an intelligence community that will say this is a real problem. we have to be willing to seek out its source. if it is a nation state, call them out. >> well, look, i understand your concern with classified information and you have to understand my frustration that we overclassify too many things. anyway, senator mark warner -- >> you're right. we overclassify way too much. you need to stay on us because we owe you and the american people an answer on this. >> all right. we'll be trying figure out more about this, about these attacks. senator warner, chair of the intelligence committee. thank you for coming on and sharing your views with us. up next, breaking news on a federal judge's new ruling on

evictions that could impact millions of americans right now on whether or not they will continue to have a roof over their head. ve a roof over their head we look up to our heroes. idolizing them. mimicking their every move. and if she counts on the advanced hydration of pedialyte when it matters most... ...so do we. hydrate like our heroes. ♪ the light. ♪ it comes from within. it drives you. and it guides you. to shine your brightest. ♪ as you charge ahead. illuminating the way forward. a light maker. recognizing that the impact you make comes from the energy you create. introducing the all-electric lyriq. lighting the way. ♪

this past year has felt like a long, long norwegian winter. but eventually, with spring comes rebirth. everything begins anew. and many of us realize a fundamental human need to connect with other like-minded people. welcome back to the world. viking. exploring the world in comfort... once again. (vo) conventional thinking doesn't disrupt the status quo. which is why t-mobile for business uses unconventional thinking to help your business realize new possibilities. only one 5g partner offers unmatched network, support,

and value-without any trade offs. did you know prilosec otc can stop frequent heartburn before it begins? prilosec otc uses a unique delayed-release formula that works to turn down acid production, blocking heartburn at the source. with just one pill a day, you get 24-hour heartburn protection. take the prilosec otc two-week challenge. and see the difference for yourself. prilosec otc, 1 pill a day,

24 hours, zero heartburn. if you printed out directions to get here today, you're in the right place. my seminars are a great tool to help young homeowners who are turning into their parents. now, remember, they're not programs. they're tv shows. you woke up early. no one cares. yes. so, i was using something called homequote explorer from progressive to easily compare home insurance rates. was i hashtagging? progressive can't help you from becoming your parents, but we can help you compare rates on home insurance with homequote explorer. guess what. the waiter doesn't need to know your name. we got some breaking news. a federal judge has overturned a national ban on evictions that was put in place during the pandemic. it could put millions of americans at risk of losing their place to live. let's get the latest. our justice correspondent pete

williams is with us. so pete, this was a federal judge that put this down. what does this mean? there will be a stay? walk us through the order. >> sure. so remember the history here. after congress passes the cares act, there is a moratorium on closures federally supported. then there was a second action by the cdc extending it to all rental properties. the congress allowed that to renew. then congress authority expired. so the cdc authority that is in effect now is based solely on the cdc's own interpretation of its legal authority under public health law and the judge said today, sorry, you don't have the authority to do this. the cdc said it was necessary to help prevent the spread of disease, to let governors better enforce stay at home orders, to keep people at home instead of gathering with others. but the judge said the law does not give the cdc to do this on

its own. the government said if you're going to rule against us, limit your ruling only to the people who sued us here. a group of realtors and realtor associations. the judge said sorry, i'm bound by precedent that said when i rule that something like the is invalid, it has to be nationwide. that's the background. who does it affect? anyone who does not live in the 18 states that have their own state moratoriums. this is simply about the federal authority. nothing to do with the state authority. there are 18 states plus the district of columbia and they include some big states, california, new york, connecticut, illinois. it doesn't affect people in those states. now you asked about a stay. i just talked to somebody at justice. they say that they're considering their next steps. that would be something they could do is to seek to have this judge's order stayed, to stop the legal effect while they consider an appeal. if i had to strictly guess, i

would guess that's something they would do given all the equities you just talked about. how many people this affects. >> was this simply a ruling on the cdc' authority? and so meaning, okay. if this was an executive order by the president or a law passed by congress, this would be another story? >> well, the law passed by congress, that is clearly the legal authority. the judge said that was 120-day initial thing right at the beginning of the cares act. the judge said no question about that. the problem he said was that after the congressional authority lapsed, the cdc tried to do this on its own and broaden it out. the judge said they don't have authority under the law to do that. >> well, let's see if perhaps the senate and the house would have to act fast. that's asking a lot but you never know. >> pete, thank you. up next, a big reopening announcement and a big move for pfizer to get more young folks

vaccinated. idolizing them. mimicking their every move. and if she counts on the advanced hydration of pedialyte when it matters most... ...so do we. hydrate like our heroes. - [announcer] meet the ninja foodi air fry oven. make family-sized meals fast. and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things no other oven can, like flip away. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away.

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 the only medication of its kind 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.

welcome back. here are the coronavirus facts you need to know today. canada just approved the use of the pfizer vaccine for children 12 to 15. in the u.s., it is expected to come as early as next week though maybe even sooner. pfizer says it plans to request emergency authorization for kids under 12 beginning in september, and then for children under 2 beginning in november. this as the pace of vaccinations in this country continues to decline. yesterday the u.s. administered under 1 million shots. that's the lowest one-day total since february. the white house is now shifting the distribution of vaccines to focus on places of higher demand and setting the goal of vaccinating 70% of american adults with at least

one shot by the fourth of july. and in a hugely symbolic step toward normalcy, andrew cuomo said broadway shows will with fully packed houses beginning on september 14th. cuomo said tickets will go on sale starting tomorrow. broadway has been closed for more than a year due to the pandemic. up next the effort to kick liz cheney out of leadership and how all that is playing on the state that elected her. the state that elected her

limu emu... and doug. so then i said to him, you oughta customize your car insurance with liberty mutual, so you only pay for what you need. oh um, doug can we talk about something other than work, it's the weekend. yeah, yeah. [ squawk ] hot dog or... chicken? [ squawk ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

wealth is breaking ground on your biggest project yet. worth is giving the people who build it a solid foundation. wealth is shutting down the office for mike's retirement party. worth is giving the employee who spent half his life with you, the party of a lifetime. wealth is watching your business grow. worth is watching your employees grow with it. principal. for all it's worth.

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. this is how you become the best! [music: “you're the best” by joe esposito] [music: “you're the best” by joe esposito] [triumphantly yells] [ding] don't get mad. get e*trade and take charge of your finances today.

welcome back. it now seems like a foregone conclusion that liz cheney will lose her spot leader and could it me now from liz cheney's state of wyoming is nick reynolds. he's the policy and politics reporter for whilefile.com. i've also got lee -- leigh ann caldwell with us from capitol hill. it looked like 24 hours ago liz cheney was willing to fight for her leadership post. is it -- considering that everyone appears to be on board with her losing her leadership? >> i don't know if her stance

has changed. she's not fighting in the sense that she's not making calls trying to cajole her members into supporting her, but she is fighting in the sense that she is not backing down from her position. her spokesman said earlier today that this is not just about a leadership race, and insinuating that this is about the future of the republican party. so, you know, the question is, you know, it seems increasingly clear that representative elise stefanik is going to be her replacement. i was just talking to a member who wanted to remain anonymous who is a moderate from a swing district and who backed cheney a couple months ago, said the problem now is us moderates, we have to -- there's the trump base in the primary that supports trump, then in the general election we have the electorate who doesn't support trump at all, so we have to deal with that.

that's why we don't want to talk about the last election anymore, that's why we don't want to talk about january 6. so the question now for cheney is what is she going to do? is she going to be a back bench house member, or what are her next moves? >> well, let's find out in wyoming. nick, can you answer that question, and what do wyoming republicans want? i have one sort of theory here that says, boy, if she's not in leadership, does it take the glare off of her and actually make the primary slightly easier? but i'm just curious. give us the lay of the land on the ground there. >> yeah, that's kind of a challenging facet of all of this. first off, wyoming is trump's -- probably his best-performing state anywhere in the country. most that i've seen from his four years here show that wyoming would usually be at the top or trading places with alabama when we're talking about his biggest supporting states.

that number is supported by what we saw at the polls. in 2016 while the nation saw a depressed turnout, wyoming actually set voting records and that high mark was shattered four years later. that's also the interesting dynamic that we're looking at in republican politics here. while trump is a huge part of that, voters here really do love trump. there are also some really practical considerations for voting republican that you don't really see in a lot of other states. energy is a huge factor here. actually, the biggest headline in the last couple months has been more on federal gas leases on federal land as opposed to the cheney thing. that's also kind of a bit of a political side show here. but it really is a major position here in the state's politics, especially now that we have probably the most credible challenge to an incumbent we've seen in a really long time. >> it's interesting, nick, when you look at the washington

leadership, the washington representatives that wyoming has sent, they're certainly conservative, but they all have that pragmatic streak, right, whether it's an alan simpson or a dick cheney back in the day or liz cheney, john barasso, cynthia loomis. there is this tension that you've got to bring stuff back to the state. so i guess i'm curious. how would you divide the party up as voters? is it half and half, is it the warriors versus the pragmatist? >> there are a number of different risks that have taken place in the state and counties' infrastructure. right now the city leadership is very pro trump. actually, the state chairman recently got an endorsement in his re-election both by president trump, which shows that there is a little bit of interest here, and that's kind of been a dividing line here as

well. but when we're talking about what republicans stand for, you're absolutely right, they have to be pragmatic. if you look at senator john barasso, he's a very important part of the senate republican machinery, but there was also the luger center who looked at the ratings of different politicians' ability to work across the aisle. senator barasso scored 47th on that network as part of that conference. mitt romney, who a couple weeks ago got booed by his state party by being republican in name only, actually scored about a dozen places lower than that. similar story with representative cheney. according to the same metric, she was rated as the 17th least bipartisan number in congress along with a dozen house republicans and three members of the squad. >> you know, leigh ann, that sort of gets at -- i mean, liz cheney for elise stefanik, it

doesn't fit idealogically, but i don't know if there's an idealogy anymore inside the republican party, in fairness. >> reporter: the evolution of elise stefanik since she was elected six years ago has been pretty remarkable. she was considered a moderate from upstate new york. she comes from the romney/paul ryan chain of the party, but during the first impeachment is when it became extremely noticeable that she has found the path that is best for her politically. the shift during that first impeachment when she was a member on the intelligence committee was just so apparent, it left many of us talking constantly about who is this elise stefanik? where did she come from considering where she was just a few weeks prior? it's obviously served her well,

chuck. >> well, the question i have is, if she gets into leadership, does it end up convincing new york lawmakers to actually save her seat? because she can see her district disappear along with tom reid who seems to be the most likely district to be gone, but that will be another fascinating subplot of that. >> nick reynolds on the ground in wyoming, check out his work. leigh ann caldwell, msnbc news on capitol hill. thank you both. that does it for us this hour. come back tomorrow to "mtp daily." there is a new podcast in your feed now. go get it. go get it. power, we can harness the energy of the tiny electron. we can create new ways to connect. rethinking how we communicate to be more inclusive than ever. with app, cloud and anywhere workspace solutions, vmware helps companies navigate change.

faster. vmware. welcome change. ♪♪ (phone rings) hello? hi mommy, i won a medal. that's amazing! ♪ going back to the place we love ♪ i got in! ♪ with endless summer nights ♪ he's walking! ♪ comes alive ♪ ♪ i don't need the rain ♪ ♪ when the sky is blue ♪ celebrate all the moms in your life with sparkling gifts from pandora jewelry. antibacterial or moisturizing body wash? definitely moisturizer! antibacterial can i have both? new dove care & protect body wash eliminates 99% of bacteria

and moisturizes for hours two for one! can i keep it? new dove care & protect, zero compromise! did you know that your toughest cleaning problems can i keep it? can be caused by hard water metals? they lock in residues like a glue, on your hard surfaces and fabrics. try 9 elements. its vinegar powered deep clean dissolves hard water buildup and releases trapped residues and odors like detoxifying your clothes. made with never more than 9 ingredients. 9 elements - more than a clean, a cleanse.

good afternoon. i'm katy tur. we are waiting for president biden to speak at any moment from the white house on the path forward as we emerge from the pandemic. and new help for restaurants. and when i say any moment, i d