that is our broadcast for this wednesday night. our thanks for being here with us. on behalf of all of our colleagues at the networks of nbc news, good night. >> thank you for joining us this hour, in 1845, at frederick douglas the great american abolitionist published the first of what would become three autobiographical accounts of his life. first one was called narrative of the life of frederick douglass. an american slave. frederick douglass is of course one of the greatest americans of all-time. his autobiography about life as a slave and his struggle to become free, in addition to everything else that he did in his life, those written works are some of the most

influential written american accounts of anything on any subject. a narrative of the life which is the most lively read of the three of his three autobiographical accounts, but also in the subsequent autobiography zeroed as well, including the next one, my bondage and my freedom, one of the most harrowing things that frederick douglass describes about his own life is a yearlong period when the man who owned him as a slave decided that young frederick douglass was incorrigible. douglas is owner decided that frederick douglass needed in effect to detained. to be broken. and so he shipped frederick douglass off to a man that is literally known as a slave breaker. the slave breaker was named edward kobe, c o v a why,.

c o v e y. >> he said, i have now lived with him, for nine months. and he had given me and number of severe weapons without any -- without my character or conduct. now he was resolve to put me out, as he said, quote to be broken. there was, in the base side... a man named edward c o v e y who enjoyed the extra created reputation of being a first rate hand at breaking a young ... breaking. he then goes on in chapter after chapter after chapter in this autobiography, look at this the experiences of covey, driven back to covey. you know... covey it's manner of proceeding to whip. chapter after chapter after chapter he describes this experience in the way that edward covey tortured him. and beat him nearly to death and worked him nearly to death all to try to destroy frederick

douglass is spirit, to try to destroy his mind. to turn him into a docile slave who would work without question, whereupon he would then be returned to his owner. and because frederick douglass is so capable and so brilliant his own recount thing in his autobiographies about what happened to him in that period of his life, what happened when a slave owners sent him to edward covey and what happened to him at at covey's hands. and what happened we stayed for a year, at that farm and was tasked with breaking him because frederick douglass is such a luminous important and brilliant and inspiring incredible figure unparalleled figure in american history and because of what we know that he is capable of because we know what his mind was capable of and what he did for his country in his life, when he recounts what happened at the hands of edward covey, it is the most dispiriting and desolate,

miserable thing that douglass writes about. he said, i shall never be able to narrate the mental experience through which it was my lost to pass during my stay at covey's. i was completely wrecked, changed, and bewildered -- goaded almost to madness at one time, and at another reconciling myself to my wretched condition... bodily as well as mentally... he overwork, and the brutal chastisement of which i was a victim, combined with that ever gnawing and soul devouring thought -- i am a slave -- a slave for life -- a slave with no rational ground to hope for freedom -- it rendered me a living embodiment of mental and physical wretchedness. that was frederick douglass is account of his own life in that lowest period in his own life. and that written accounts did more than any other to galvanize the american

abolitionist movement to bring an end to slavery and of course it was not fiction. it really happened and it really happened just as frederick douglass said it did. and edward covey was a real person who really did operate a slave breaking operation at his farm to which frederick douglass was sent. and if you go back to that initial description douglas describes the farm as being on the base side and what he meant by that was that the farm was on the far side of chesapeake bay, the far side of chesapeake bay from the mainland of maryland where douglas was being sent there. and edward covey's farm of the slave breaking operation where he tortured frederick douglass and countless others was this house. and the surrounding farmland on the eastern shore of maryland on a town canal called st. michael's where the farm and the house of the farm itself had a name in a fitting name at that, it was called mount missouri. about 15 years ago now, a

literature professor wrote a very thoughtful piece in the baltimore sun newspaper suggesting a new future for mountain is airy, suggesting that the united states of america should consider buying amount misery to make it a commemorative site. he argued, would not the most fitting outcome for mountain is really as a monumental museum where in a key moment from the country's past confined its rightful place in the public memory? the old edward covey house deserves our understanding and preservation. the fight between slave and slave breaker that took place there, is emblematic of two of the elemental teams of american history, the horrors of legally sanctioned racial violence, and also the nobility of the struggle against unjust authority. and then, here is the kicker from that piece. the professor says quote, preserving mount misery as a public site of contemplation, where the meetings of democracy and despotism are given a human

face... also would help keep st. michael's from being merely a resort for the wealthy. a resort for the wealthy? check this out. the occasion for that call, the well argued piece in the sun, that land should be purchased as a monument to the epic violence committed there against slaves in great numbers, but specifically against against one of the greatest americans of all-time. the key role that the torture in that house played in turning on our american conscience to eventually overthrow slavery, the occasion for that call to preserve mount misery as a monument to the hill that happened there, the reason the baltimore sun published that just less than 15 years ago now, was this revelation that was published in the new york times exactly 15 years ago today. on june 30th 2006, it is titled,

weekends with the president's men. it's kind of a kick-y sidebar piece. in the new york times that was published in the summer of 2006. and that piece revealed that that sights on the eastern shore of maryland, mount misery, that house, that farm, had actually been recently pursued just and it is now being lived in as a private home. can you imagine? right. the house is first of all still cold mount misery today. that is still the name by which it is known. who would want him to live in a place called that misery? but then you get to the reason that it is called mount misery, right? it is the home, the actual home, the same building that is standing there since 1804. frederick douglass was tortured there in 1833, 1834. it is the same actual physical place in which the great frederick douglass was tortured and beaten and worked nearly to death every day for a year.

whether or not you think that place should be purchased by this country and made into a memorial for the worst, most violent evils of slavery, and their role in turning on americans conscious is to end slavery, and right, that is a substantive an interesting proposal. whether or not you're into that idea, would you want to live there yourself? would you like to wake up there in the morning play their breakfast, who would do that? -- that article published was published published and controversial at that time. because in writing that beast, it revealed the exact home address of a senior government official, that in fact had made mount misery his private home. his name was donald rumsfeld. and he was at the time, in the summer of 2006, struggling to the end of his disastrous tenure as secretary of defense of the georgia we bush administration. he lived at the time at mount

missouri. he bought the place in 2003, as he was leading the nation into the invasion of iraq. that was where he went to get away from washington while running to disastrous wars. he like to have the shook helicopter drop them off at the slave breakers home where fredericton glass was nearly tortured to death. as you can see pictured here. donald rumsfeld died today at the age of 88. he had a singular career and that he make a zillion's of dollars in business running companies that invented neutral sweet, and early h g tv. he served four terms in congress which is not frequently remembered about. him especially given his later overt and pronounced disdain for congress. he served in a variety of roles in the nixon administration report becoming president. gerald ford's white house chief of staff, and then ford's defense secretary. george w. bush brought him back

to the pentagon in 2001 to be secretary of defense again, he is the only person to have served to non consecutive terms as secretary of defense. on september 11th, 2001, he was in his office at the pentagon is one of the hijacked plane slammed into the building. to his credit, rumsfeld helped personally in the immediate aftermath of the fire. he helped rescue people. he stayed on side of the pentagon that day, all day while cheney got rushed to the bunker in for some reason they just flew the president around in the air for a long time as if they weren't quite sure where to put him. rumsfeld state at the pentagon. sure in the aftermath of 9/11, it was donald ones films who planned for the invasion of ghana stan, but then not for what to do in afghanistan after the invasion -- less than two years later it was donald rumsfeld who planned for the american invasion of iraq. but then, not for what to do in iraq after the initial invasion. as chaos and civil war

overwhelmed iraq in the wake of the u.s. invasion there, donald rumsfeld famously insisted that americans should see all of that as good news, really. because freedom is untidy. >> freedom is untidy, and frankly, people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes, do bad things. stuff happens. >> stuff happens. stuff happens! donald rumsfeld died today again at the age of 88, he was responsible for the planning of the american invasions, and the subsequent wars in iraq and afghanistan. we are only just now getting out of afghanistan. that's today. when it came to the systematic torture of prisoners, and u.s. custody, facilities like those in iraq, rumsfeld in his memoirs blamed that on what he called, a small group of's prison guards who ran amok. the historical record however, shows that rumsfeld was sending

memos in realtime about the actual plan, the actual orders for torture like that to occur. as a matter of u.s. policy, and on purpose, directed down the chain of command. on the margins of one of them, it's below that prisoners in u.s. custody should be tortured by, among other things, forcing them to stand for hours at a time. rumsfeld hand wrote in the margin, i stand for 8 to 10 hours a day, why is standing limited to four hours? by which he meant, why are they forcing these prisoners to stand for even longer, this does not seem harsh enough. there is also the memorable mormon in his tenure and he was discovered that more than 1000 condolence letters, that were sent to the families of u.s. servicemen and servicewomen killed in iraq, donald rumsfeld did not feel that he was necessary to sign his name. he instead used what is called an auto pen, basically a machine that rubberstamp his name to sign all of the supposedly heartfelt

condolences letters to the families of american service members killed in action in iraq. as a roadside bomb started killing american service members by the dozen, and then by the hundreds, and then ultimately by the thousands, secretary rumsfeld was asked why u.s. forces did not have up to date body armor, and why there wasn't more of a rush to get them to them. he replied famously that you go to war with the army you have, not the one you might want, or wish to have. implying not only that we did not have the army that we wanted, also implying that the timing of that war somehow was in our choice. it wasn't somehow his choice. and the choice of the other senior officials in the administration who made that decision to invade iraqi based on a false premise. made-up supposedly threatening things about iraq that were not true, that they insisted the american people were true. right? telling the american people that iraq had terrible weapons, that directed not actually.

have telling the american people that iraq was in cahoots with al-qaeda, when iraq was not in cahoots with al-qaeda. telling the american people that iraq was poised to invade us... or attack us? or come after the u.s. in some devastating way that was imminent? none of that was true. of the false pretext for that. no one. >> no terrorist air poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world and the regime of says amsterdam who seem in. iraq we have what we consider to be a credible evidence that al-qaeda leaders have sought contacts in iraq who could help them acquire weapons of mass description. >> do you have hard evidence that they are in iraq? >> oh, there is no question al-qaeda have moved through and

some have stayed. >> and that's not just in an assumption? we know? that >> i know that. >> if if someone is waiting for a so-called smoking gun, it is certain that we will have waited too long. >> what do you make of the statement made by the iraqi government yesterday, that iraq has no weapons of mass destruction? and it's not developing any? >> they're lying. next. it is not knowable if force will be used. but if it is to be used, it could last six days, six weeks. i doubt six months. >> i doubt six months. who's telling you that a war in iraq might last six months? who sing it will go that long? i'm donald run fourth felt, take it from. we try. sixties don rumsfeld was also a master at unusually specific

lies. about the most consequential things. that led to that war that ultimately cost hundreds of thousands of lives. he told abc news, for example, after the invasion, when he was asked how come no weapons of mass destruction that you guaranteed were there, how can they haven't been found? he insisted to abc news that not only were they weapons of mass destruction that were going to be found, but he knew where they were. he said quote, we know where they are. they're in the area around tikrit and baghdad, and east, west south and north, somewhat. donald rumsfeld die today at the age of 80. he did not die at his home at mount misery. which was the sleeve breaking site of the life changing and world changing torture of frederick douglass. the police that he bought as a weekend retreat while serving as defense secretary. he died and said at new mexico at a ranch he had their.

and donald rumsfeld's death comes on a day with about five weeks worth of the news in it, otherwise. we're covering a lot of different breaking news story tonight. tonight, the washington post was first to report, nbc news has now confirmed, that a grand jury of manhattan has filed criminal indictments today against the company a former president donald trump, and its longtime chief i financial officer allen weisselberg. the post and nbc are both citing two people familiar with the indictments. this means the indictments have been handed down by the grand jury. they are at this point sealed. and bc reported earlier today that the indictments are expected to be unsealed. we're upon will find exactly what the charges are. and we're upon the defendants are expected to be in court to face those charges. now, there is not an expectation that former

president trump himself is going to be hit with criminal charges tomorrow. although that currently remains a possibility for potential superseding indictment coming after this one. i'm not sure i totally understand the legal world common wisdom that they're very well maybe a superseding indictment beyond the one that comes tomorrow. but we're going to chase that a little bit tonight and try to get some perspective on why that seems to be the prevailing wisdom about how that this case against the president's company is likely to unfold. we'll have much more ahead on that tonight. like i said, it is a remarkable news day today. today, also brought the shocking news that the conviction of bill cosby was overturned by pennsylvania's supreme court. cosby served more than two years in prison after was convicted of three counts of aggravated indecent assault in 2018. he will never serve another day of the 3 to 10 year sentence he had initially been given after the court overturned that conviction today. they overturned it on the

grounds that their previous pennsylvania prosecutor, who happens to be the shambolic, bizarre, trump impeachment lawyer, bruce castor -- bruce castor, when he was serving as a prosecutor in pennsylvania, apparently gave bill cosby and unwritten, an official, though apparently binding assurance that he wouldn't be prosecuted. and on the basis of that, the supreme court today, overturned his ultimate prosecution and deemed that he cannot be tried on those charges against. a bizarre turn in one of the highest profile prosecutions of metoo era today. and bill cosby is tonight, out of prison and at his home in suburban philadelphia. and that arrived just in this world win of news. everything else going on, don't forget that tomorrow is the last day of the term for the united states supreme court this year. and that means two very important things. first, there's two really big cases left to be decided. what about dark money, undisclosed money in politics.

and another, that frankly could put the final nail in the coffin of the already gutted voting rights act. based on an arizona voting case. both of those decisions are expected from the supreme court tomorrow. election reform and voting rights advocates bracing for what's expected to not be great news on either of those fronts. but we shall see. the court has been full of surprises this year. so this substance of tomorrow being the last day matters. but tomorrow also matters because it is the last of the term. o matter becausand if justice stephen brr or any of the other 80 something year old justices on the court are going to retire from the court, past president would suggest that tomorrow could be the day which we will get that announcement. in the vast majority of modern supreme court retirements, they are announce to either take effect at the end of the supreme court term. or they are announced at the

close of a supreme court term. so, if you are planning on this been the summer in which we get a supreme court vacancy unassigned if i overheard put on the court, we will likely, tomorrow is the day we will most likely learn that news. it all happens at once. joining us now is my friend -- he's a pulitzer prize-winning journalist. and author of many telethon and award-winning books about u.s. administrations. three of his books all feature donald rumsfeld as a -- the central, if not starring character. i know nobody else who knows more about donald rumsfeld than ron suskind. ron, it's really nice free to be here tonight. thank you for joining. it's >> good to be here. >> so, i did not give any sort of holistic look at defense secretary rumsfeld's legacy. i turn to you for that. i think i'm still quite red

eyed [laughs] in every sense of the word, about his legacy with the iraq war. how do you think we should look at his legacy today on his death? >> well you know, rumsfeld crosses iraq. he starts with nixon and ford, during the bipolar world with the soviets and the u.s.. and he reaches all the way to the around that follows it with regret states and terrorists. so he bridges this modern period. you can see and rumsfeld's life how the united states dealt with its place in the world in the earlier period, when the world in a way was neither. two countries of awesome power crossing swords, to the world in which really, i think significant disasters under rumsfeld's guidance are really at the center of his legacy. mind you, under rumsfeld, you have two very, very long wars that in a way fulfilled the

golds intended. and you have what was called enhanced interrogation techniques, we now call them torture. those are now under the name of the united states. in some ways, you see now the struggle we have with truth in public institutions and our public life. you can trace quite a bit of it back to going to war under false pretenses. that's an enormous historic crime. i mean, even dictators hesitate to flirt with that, when young men and women will be dying on some foreign battlefield. but that is what happened here, and rumsfeld was at the center of that. >> rumsfeld also personally was at the center of that in a way that resonates for me in terms of what you just said there. going back today are looking through old tapes and public pronouncements from secretary rumsfeld, i was struck by how many of the things that he said

were factually untrue. not only knowing now to be factually untrue, but he was confronted at the time with evidence that things he said were factually untrue. not only did he never recant his statements or repent for having told significant and consequential untruth to the american people. he never, as far as i know, and i put this to you, expressed any sort of regret for having told the american people a pack of lies. to justify that war, nor for the consequences of those relies, or the war itself. was he ever regretful? was he ever reflective? >> not one iota. that's interesting. he had many opportunities late in his life. everyone pressed him. said please, just, even if you're not faulting yourself, say it was the wrong decision with terrible consequences. in a variety of ways he, wouldn't do it. it was interesting what you said before, rachel, about that period. that period after 9/11, right at the tail of the iraq invasion. runs fellows really the most

forceful, most in a way, electric personality. commanding the new cycles. speaking with great clarity, pointed miss. that was his way. during that administration he really did sell that war to the american people. and he did it very effectively. during the time in which he's doing that, there was evidence inside that administration, which i found it and other people did as well, saying there were not weapons of mass destruction that anyone was able to find, and would likely be fined double in iraq. that was known before the invasion. rumsfeld and others were warned. but it was full steam ahead. in a we, this is a last generation of leaders and policymakers who believed in the exercise of u.s. power to reshape the world. that was something we saw in

the post world war ii period. i think what they should wear the limits of u.s. power. and a huber stick notion of what the united states could do in the ways that it thought it could reshape the world. that is the legacy of that time. rumsfeld was a key actor. >> journalist and author ron suskind. who has done more than perhaps anyone to illuminate the truth behind that very difficult period in american history. the price of loyalty, 1% doctrine, way of the world, all seminal texts about that dark period and some of the driving characters in. it ron, thank you for joining us tonight. thank you for being here, sir. >> great to be here, rachel. >> all right. coming up next, we have had come from tonight now by nbc news as well as the washington post, that a grand jury has indicted the trump organization and it cfo. we've got more on that ahead. stay with us.

we were alone when my husband had the heart attack. he's the most important thing in my life. i'm so lucky to get him back. your heart isn't just yours. protect it with bayer aspirin. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.

omega-3 from fish oil is an important nutrient for heart health. qunol's ultra purified omega-3, is sourced only from wild caught ocean fish, not farm raised and comes in an easy to swallow mini pill. the brand i trust is qunol. the boss is back baby! the difference in try and triumph...

is just a little umph! upsees, i need upsees. i'm sure this isn't something money can't solve? what the fudge? oh my gosh, oh my gosh, oh my gosh! >> former president trump's

personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, had his license to practice law suspended in new york this summer. 35 years ago this summer, his other personal lawyer, roy cohen, was disbarred from the practice of law altogether. but there was another one in between those two. it has been almost three years now since trump's personal lawyer, michael cohen also lost his license to practice law. when he played guilty to multiple felonies in a scheme by which illegal contributions were made to trump's 2016 presidential campaign, those contributions came in the form of hundreds of thousands of dollars that were paid out to two women to stop those women from speaking publicly about them allegedly having affairs with the president. those payments were designed to have those women before the campaign. the payments were there for designed to benefit his presidential campaign. they were illegal payments. they were in fact federal felonies.

michael cohen remains the only person who went to prison for that scheme even though he did not benefit from those payments, donald trump did. that said federal prosecutors quite famously said in court documents, michael cohen actually testified in open court that he committed those felonies in coordination with and at the direction of individual one. it was donald trump. it was of course the person who was also the beneficiary of the actions describing those felony counts. and that raised all sorts of quite outstanding questions, as to why prosecutors in the southern district of new york would describe that kind of blame to an individual who directed the commission of those felonies in who actually benefited from the commission of this felonies, but then includes the case without ever bringing charges against that individual. it is one thing to think that the individual one, president trump, was saved from indictment himself there because he was president at the time in the justice department will indict a sitting president. but he is no longer president.

nevertheless, that case was closed. in addition to the individual one though. and it was described by prosecutors. executive won a top executive who disguised the reimbursements to cohen for those hush money payments, disguise them as a legal expenses on the trump organization's books. executive one is the trip organizations chief financial officer allen weisselberg, prosecutors described his key role in covering up the commission of that finally by falsifying the books of that new york business. the reason weisselberg it was apparently -- the reason weisselberg was not charged in that hush money scheme was that he apparently got immunity in exchange for his testimony. but again, the testimony in that case was only used to look at michael cohen, and the individual one and executive one. these questions still linger

about why it was closed out. and why michael cohen is still the only person who ever faced the music for those felonies. even though federal prosecutors identified other people having played bigger, more important roles in those felonies than he did. but that was it. apparently in terms of any legal case. maybe someday we will figure it would happened. but tonight, washington post was forced to report, that a grand jury in manhattan has filed criminal indictments against the trump organization, and it's cfo, allen weisselberg, and those indictments will be unsealed tomorrow. these are not -- these are state charges under newark. law the post is reporting that mr. weisselberg is expected to surrender tomorrow morning at the manhattan district attorney 's office and he's expected to be arraigned later in the day before a state judged in a new york courtroom. the trump organization will also be arranged -- it is hard to arraign and entity.

at least it is hard to imagine that. but the entity will be represented in court by one of its attorneys. an entity familiar with the matter telling nbc news tonight that the indictments are expected to be unsealed at around 2 pm eastern time tomorrow? because the indictments are sealed until then, we don't know exactly what the charges would be. there's been lots of reporting that the charges are expected to focus on tax related alleged felonies. the trump organization's lawyers have been working overtime for days. telling the media that the charges were small potatoes, and politically motivated, they can't believe the prosecutors would even bother to charge says piddly little grams because everybody does this kind of stuff. and of course, you'd expect offense lawyers to say exactly that. the truth is, we still just won't know what the charges are until they are unsettled tomorrow afternoon. what we do know is that the state prosecutor that has been working on this along with the new york attorney generals offices that has been working on this -- it's been three years that they

have been working on this case. and the question of whether former president donald trump personally, himself, ever faces charges in this case, that remains open. it's an open question. the trump organization's lawyer, ron fish eddie has said that what he has heard from prosecutors is that donald trump himself will not be charged in tomorrow's indictment but that does not mean that he might not be charged in a subsequent indictment, or as they call it in legal terms, a superseding indictment. now, people who watch these things tell us that that is not unusual. it is not routine, but it is not at all unusual for an initial indictment of a company like this, or individuals associated with a company like this based on weisselberg, it is not unusual for an initial indictment to be followed by subsequent superseding indictments with additional charges, either more charges against the original defendants, or potentially, more charges against additional defendants. my question is, why did they do

it that way? and as we're looking for the first potential legal accountability for former president trump, in this case coecte to reportedly, alleged attacks felonies committed and his business. this prospect of his potential individual criminal liability remains open because of this expectation that there might be further indictments. what is the basis for that expectation? for those of us that aren't lawyers, should we understand that as a reasonable expectation happen in this case? is that wishful thinking that hoping donald trump will get indicted someday? how should we understand this in proper context? i have answers for you, hold that thought.

♪ all by yourself.♪ - oh. - what? rain. cancel and stay? done. go with us and get millions of felixble booking options. expedia. it matters who you travel with. when it comes to laundry, expedia. everyone thinks their way is the right way. i wash on delicate. i just stuff everything in. you have to wash on cold, because it saves energy. the secret is, tide pods work no matter how you wash. so, everyone is right. >> last month, the washington it's got to be tide.

post was first to report that a special grand jury was meeting on a very intense schedule meaning like three days a week to consider evidence against the company of former president donald trump. well, tonight, the washington

post was first to report that grand jury has now produced indictments. criminal charges have been filed agnst the trump organization and it's a long chief financial officer, an executive name allen weisselberg. charges were filed today by the grand jury, they will be unsealed tomorrow afternoon. meaning that we won't know the exact nature of the charges until they are unsealed. that reporting has now been confirmed by nbc news and by several other news organizations, but whatever charges we do see tomorrow, we keep being told that may not be the end of the story. this is what i have questions about, basically every news organization that reported i.c.e. has sort of put forth this prospect in their own way. as an example, i'll tell you this is how the wall street journal put it today, quote, the charges expected tomorrow, thursday, could be the first in a series of charges in the future, particularly if prosecutors able to gain cooperation from mr. weisselberg in order to bolster their broader investigation.

so, i am not a lawyer, i have questions, if that is true why is that true? why would prosecutors approach that way? why are people to know these things telling the public that it is a reasonable expectation that there might be additional indictments beyond the one that we were told is coming tomorrow? why, even theoretically, or why as a matter of course, would prosecutors wait at more charges later against either the individuals, and entities that will be charged tomorrow, or indeed against other people involved here? joining us now is danya perry, she previously served as assistant to the southern district of new york, and attorney general for the state of new york, we should mention that the state case that apparently is going to produce these indictments tomorrow, is apparently a joint operation between the manhattan da, and the attorney generals office. miss perry, listening to see you, thank you for being here tonight. >> thank you rachel, glad to be here. >> am i asking a dumb question about this superseding -- potential superseding

indictment advice that we keep getting along with the reporting about tomorrow's expected news? >> you are asking more illegal question and look, there may be inside information that people are actually aware that there are additional charges coming but as someone who has prosecuted both federally and in the state system as you know, my observation is that it's almost certainly correct. i think there are a number of different flags for that. the first is vance has made it clear that one of the animating principles here is a quality under the law. and as he has said, no man not even the president is above the law. the flip side of that point is that nobody, not even the president, should be scrutinized or closely or held to a higher standard or more heavy-handed prosecution than anybody else. and he has made that clear. and i believe that he is a believer in the rule of law and so it was a head-scratcher when

it was announced, including by trump's lawyers that the charges to be filed now have been filed, appeared to be very narrow. and in focus particularly on fringe benefits as trump's lawyer pointed out. that's highly unusual. it's unusual for corporate entities to be charged criminally in the first instance and it's even more unusual for them to be charged with fringe tax benefits or payroll tax evasion in the like. and so it does seem like there is something missing here and that there will be either additional charges and a superseding indictment or perhaps that the broad scheme that is actually alleged will be broader than trump's lawyers have made it appeared to be. it could be a larger tax scheme or additional tax fraud acts or it could be a larger scheme to

defraud. but it does seem that this is something bigger either we will see that tomorrow or see that is part of the superseding that mint. >> but why would they be sequenced? is there something about an initial indictment, like the one we're expecting to see tomorrow that would somehow facilitate or make possible a second indictment, either additional incitement for defendants or charges against new defendants that are unnamed in tomorrow's charges. i mean, that's the thing i don't understand. if there is a broader scheme that prosecutors are pursuing here that they want to try and court, why wouldn't we learn about it all at once? >> so, the quick answer to respect to weisselberg is that he is being charged because they want to put a squeeze on him and there is nothing more persuasive than charges that are actually filed in order to

convince a target to actually flip and give the goods on the targets. so it could very well be that weisselberg is charged now in order to turn him so that he can then provide evidence against the bigger fish, likely donald trump himself. with respect to the organization, it could be part of the same answer. it could be the facts are still developing but as i said, i do suspect that we will see tomorrow that this is not just a small potatoes case with respect to just fringe benefits but it will actually be a larger stint into fraud. that may develop based on whether or not they turned mr. weisselberg or others but i think we will see a larger case that will evolve. >> danya perry who has experience in these matters as a former assistant u.s. attorney, that's the federal

side and a deputy u.s. attorney general and that's the stateside. thank you for your time tonight, i think everybody is going to be obviously waiting on that news in the afternoon but i think even once we see those charges will need further explanation for people who have done stuff like. you thank you so much for being with us danya. >> good night. >> all right, we've got much more ahead tonight. stay with us. stay with us 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. ♪

[john legend's i can see clearly now] ♪♪ make your reunion happen with vrbo. ♪♪ your together awaits.

♪♪ a note today has been a huge and at times, to seeing news day and tomorrow might be even bigger. tomorrow at 10 am eastern time, the last u.s. supreme court decisions of the term are going to be released. two cases, left their both election related. one is about dark money. political donations funneled through third-party organizations that don't have to disclose their donors. the transparency group open secrets has roughly a billion dollars of dark money has been spent influencing our politics. since a supreme court decision in 2010 made it legal. right now, the state of california has a small transparency measure that's

designed to target. it requires nonprofits to close their largest donors, specifically to the state attorney generals office. supreme court justices tomorrow will decide if even that teeny tiny level of transparency is allowed. the second case centers on to arizona voting laws. two loss to the democratic party says partially targets minority communities and violation of the voting rights act. if the supreme court justices agree tomorrow with the democratic party that laws like these can be thrown out because of that discriminatory effect on minority voters, that white be good news for voting rights advocate at stopping voting restrictions that target minority voters. on the other hand, if the supreme court justices decide that it doesn't matter and those laws disproportionately affects -- one more brutal blow against the voting rights act which they gutted in 2013. so if you want to keep track at

home, the brennan center is tracking all of the bills that the republican party across the country has been pushing this year to restrict voting rights often in ways that target minority votes and their count is up to nearly 400 votes introduced this year across 40 different states. this couldn't be more consequential and more timely. those questions would be answered tomorrow morning at 10 am eastern by the supreme court. but obviously, there's obviously a larger question in the legal world and in some ways on the mind of everybody who pays attention to the news and politics. which is the question of whether supreme court justice will announce retirement tomorrow. stephen breyer has been in -- he's been facing increasingly impassioned calls to voluntarily retire. step down from his seat on the court. those calls coming from people who worry about a repeat of what's happened in 2016 when republicans blocked president obama from filling a vacancy.

also, people worried about what happened when ruth bader ginsburg died while still sitting on the court at a time when republicans controlled the united states senate. that is how we got president trump's third supreme court justice nominee on the supreme court. in worst-case an area, if justice breyer should step down after the senate is retaken by the republicans, nobody believes that president biden will be allowed by the republicans to put his own nominee on the court. justice breyer has given no hints that he is going. from the outside, we can objectively observe that he has authored a few of the courts bigger decisions in the past few weeks. maybe that sort of a last hero, we don't know. history says if he's gonna go and make that announcement, it will be soon. ten of the past 11 justices to retire from the court either announced their retirement or times the retirement for the end of the term.

again, the end of the term is tomorrow. big day tomorrow. potentially gigantic news day tomorrow. watch this. i discovered some very interesting documents on ancestry. this is the uh registration card for the draft for world war two. and this is his signature which blew me away. being able to... make my grandfather real... not just a memory... is priceless. his legacy...lives on. 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. boost® high protein also has key nutrients you need an ecolab scientific clean here. and here. which is why the scientific expertise that helps operating rooms stay clean

now helps the places you go too. look for the ecolab science certified seal. today it was the biggest news

day that we've had >> today was the in a long biggest news day we've had time. just news coming in every strike and every and a long time. tomorrow is likely to be a bigger news day than today was. make sure you get your beauty sleep tonight. make sure you eat your wheaties in the morning. i will see you here again tomorrow evening. now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening, rachel. we will of course be reading every word of these indictments which should be made public sometime in the mid afternoon tomorrow. >> and you know me i'll be at the television. >> it's gonna be up there on the screen, no one is gonna miss anything. it will be a big revelation about exactly where is this