elaborate and agreed upon conspiracy. >> ari, luckily for you we get to keep the coverage going. we're in the 3:00 p.m. hour. i'll continue that coverage right now on all of the breaking news stories that we've been following involving this arraignment. i want to bring in the conversation while we keep the legal team here, jennifer weisselberg, the former daughter-in-law of allen weisselberg. i know that you have not yet read the indictment. i'm not going to ask you specifically about that. can you tell us a little butt more about what the testimony -- that you shared with investigators has been about now that this indictment is public? >> i would like to know what it says. i'd like to confirm or deny if i believe it's true. i heard, from you know, the producer at msnbc that it was a

long day in court. but it seems like it's more than a text. is that correct? >> i'll share with you some of the general outlines as our team continues to go through it. they're alleging it was over multiple years, not just one specific year. it alleges an amount of $1.7 million and it was a scheme that involved members of the organization and not just a one individual, if you will. so some of the general -- i don't know grand larcony, second degree is a specific charge. i'm not sure that would mean something to you. but in in the context of what we're talking about, the charges allege that it is an organizal effort to defraud city, state, and federal taxpayers if you will by not paying taxes as well as this amount that we're talking about in the amount of $1.7 million. >> are we talking about just allen himself or talking about trump or -- >> we'll have to look into that

specifically. i want to know from terms of what you participated in with the investigators, can you talk to us about what you have said tonight? >> in specifics, it's better that i don't. i'm thrilled to hear that this is not just about an apartment and a mercedes. yes. you mentioned something prior about the white house. this is a serious criminal organization. the grand larsony, theft, it bleeds into the white house. it is allen, it is all the officers, it's the family. i need to look at the indictment itself. if that's what the d.a. came up with, they didn't come up with

it because of a witchunt. they came up with it with proof. and, yes. that's the evidence that has been showing them and happy that jeff mcconnie and others were able to walk them to the documents i had to prove that that is true. you mean this is very serious. >> what kind of documents did you provide them with? >> the documents pertained to trump compensation. payroll. information regarding had the controller into the trump payroll. allen weisselberg having a guy at chase that stole my money behind my back and moved to fidelity in order to put him, himself and his son on bank accounts so that they could funnel money which is one of the d d.a.'s issues, what is funnel

as compensation? what belongs to who? and depositions where they contradict themselves numerous times. that being said, we're just getting started. but i mean i'm shocked it's the first time i'm hearing this is 1.7. i don't think that that's something to poo-poo at. what did you think of allen being walked in with handcuffs? what were you feeling when you saw him walk in there handcuffed? >> i missed it. i knew he was going to come in the back. i didn't see him handcuffed. i haven't seen it yet. i've been busy fighting all day. i'm still working with the d.a. on continuing this case in terms

of cash and the woman rank and other issues. but i'm very grateful that -- oh, gosh in this country to my children it matters that you do the right thing and there is justice. i didn't see him handcuffed. but, i mean, your senior produce er he was still there and listening to indictments. i think he found out for the first tomb this is real. and by the way, i'm the one that was able to put my voice to the documents to say that there are still other things that were compensated. and the 1.7 i'm not sure exactly what you're saying in terms of the white house. but it was all to benefit them. >> okay. jennifer weisselberg, thank you so much. we'll give you time to look at the indictment and speak to you later. joining me now is "washington post" reporter and msnbc

analyst. ari, let me begin with you if i can to go back to a pount that trump organization lawyer was making which was we wouldn't be here. we would not have seen these charges if the name on the organization was not trump. you get a sense a little bit of what the defense strategy here is. they're saying this is politically motivated and crosses a line. this is unprecedented. what is your take of the framing of the defense argument that we may see play out in court? >> i thought the lawyers spoke -- we don't usually hear from the trump organization lawyers. first of all, shows how serious this is. they have to come out now. they made a couple of arguments, as you say, one is politically selective prosecution. and, two, reference that may make -- made more familiar to

people and less familiar to others. a lot of companies provide the extra perks or benefits. town cars, some sort of residential units, other things that are not direct compensation. and so that is an effort to sort of launder, minimize what is going on. i think those are argument that's can work to a point. they're not going to cancel them out nor allowed to if they follow the rules. simply because someone says this person was targeted because they are rich, famous, hated. and this is practical in a new york jury. having said all that, what is more important is the evident. they have evidence this is not corporate policy. some people get town cars if

they leave work late or take them to the airport. this has a lot of specifics including the allegation there was an internal spread sheet. yeah this is technically income and now hide it and move it off the books. that went on for 15 years. i don't think saying that your boss is unpopular gets you from under that if the jury buys the evidence that you did it on purpose. >> the statement from the new york state attorney general says that investigation will continue. it dent necessarily end with what we're seeing today. but no you that we have seen

this specific charges, these hefty enough to force his hand? >> trump argument. to this before it came out was well this is just normal stuff. we didn't know this is wrong. we just gave people a car. he needed an apartment. he is old n this ok, looks like they kept a ledger. then they told the irs they didn't exist. i think that is sort of evidence that you understand what you're doing and then you do the wrong thing anyway. that is what prosecutors are looking for in financial crimes. it is hard to find sometimes. they have it here. i think that will make it a lot harder for weisselberg to get out of this. that's not what is in here.

if you believe the evidence in it here, it's a long scheme with concrete proof they knew what they were doing. >> ari -- >> i can read you? >> yes, please. >> just on this point. we're getting breaking news. a whole trump organization indicted. the we're talking a lot about the cfo. that is the person and the company doesn't go to jail. a person can. but these are 15 counts against both. the company and mr. weisselberg. on the point we were just discussing, reading from the -- reading from the indictment, the trump organization maintained unternl spread sheets that track the amount it paid for the rent, utility, garage. the trump organization reduced the amount of direct compensation that he received in the form of checks. then that they say was hidden from a tax authorities. the implication if true would be

federal and local tax evasion. we're just dealing with the local da, feds, the justice department would also have to look at the facts. and so if this is true and provable, that is different than someone taking a town car from a bank late at night. those town cars are not typically in any case i've seen counted one way as income and lied about somewhere else. thaur just cars. here it is a higher stack. when we get a trump filing rebutting this, as we do, we report their side. the d's prosecution argument is this was a deliberate multiyear scheme to call it income over here and then treat it as something else over here to steal. en that is, of course, an echo of or familiar with what michael cohen agd in his testimony. they would do a lot of this. . is there enough evidence, paper for a jury to be convinced this

was a scheme rather than say a casual habit that wasn't intent to defraud. >> everyone stay with me. tom. >> ayman, there is a lot of interest and speculation in this indictment. there are references unindicted co-conspirator. the reason why there is speculation, just explain why we're here and why certain people made the leap to who it could be is that in the past, in a federal indictment, totally separate matter, related to michael cohen and payments to stormy daniels, it was a reference to individual one. but in this case, i want to be very clear here, it is our understanding that unindicted co-conspirator number one in this trump organization is not the former president of the united states donald trump.

there is a lot of speculation in the world of social media and my e-mail that it could be the former president. it is not. i want to share that with you. secondly, we just received a copy of what kerry dunn said in court. he really helped quarterback this case along. here's what he told the judge. in light of the statement that's have been made in this case, i'd like to clarify for the court briefly what this case is and is not about. this was a 15-year long tax fraud scheme involving off the book payments, a type of krum charged against companies and executives all of the time. he says contrary to today's assertion by the company's former ceo, this is not a standard business practice.

dunn is referring to donald trump. instead, orchestrated by the most senior executives. who were financially benefiting themselves and the company by getting secret pay raises at the expense of state and federal taxpayers. it hardly amounts to a fringe benefit. dunn continued saying the former ceo assigned himself many of the illegal compensation checks. to put it bluntly, this was a sweeping and audacious payment scheme. it goes on from there. i just want to kind of give you a sense of what dunn said in court. things move so quickly. and also that he did address this idea that this isn't something that is charged all the time. which is something that obviously the trump organization and others involved on the trump side have suggested. that's the district attorney's office on the record in court. we'll continue to comb through this speech.

i do want to read one other section. address what this case is not about. it's not about politics. this investigation which is on going has been thorough, careful, proper and limited to subject matters within our new york jurisdiction. politics has no role in the grabbed jury chamber and i can assure your honor it played no role here. the charges were considered by an impartial grand jury and we look forward to the court's review of the grand jury minutes which will confirm that impartial shlt. thank you, your honor. that ended the speaking portion of it. the two sides to have a great start here. >> tom, i bresh. that keep going through the indictment. bring us any more nuggets that you pick up on. david, i want to get your thoughts on something we heard post arraignment. that is allen there talking in

that press conference. he tried to and in contrast to what we're hearing from ari talk about this scheme that was being set up here by the organization itself, was that he was saying at the core of this case are complex questions about fringe employment benefits that would be settled in discussions between a person being accused or perhaps somebody who did not pay their taxes. your take away from what you've seen so far in terms of the indictment and whether that legal defense argument apluz here. >> well, i think there are two questions here. the first is, you know, could you argue that the trump organization was truly confused? they did not understand what they were doing? they thought they were doing the right thing by accident they were doing the wrong thing. i think that we mentioned earlier, the internal ledger in terms of every dollar they gave out to him, they subjected from the compensation. so they understood these were

payments to him as part of the job. but they understand also they were not paying taxes on all of the payments. i think that makes it a hard argument. the other argument, there is an informal argument. should we settle this with a discussion? in the old days, wouldn't da follow somebody in and say did you a bad job. i won't charge you. just pay rest constitution. there is some informal settlement deserved in this case. that certainly has happened in the past. but i don't think you can insist on that as a right and just say, you know, because in the past this would have been worked out without charges. it must be worked out without charges in my case even if it is technically illegal. >> let's cross over to washington, d.c. i believe they have a statement now from the former president on all of this. if we were to use his -- their attorney for the trump organization as any cue, politics was mentioned in that statement, right? >> yes. and absolutely was.

let me -- i'm going to read you the statement. it's short. this is coming out just in the last couple of minutes here from former president trump. he says, and i'm quoting, the political witchunt by the radical left democrats with new york now taking over the assignment tunz. it is dividing our country like never before. one mute imagine that if trump still had had access to a twitter account, this is what he would be firing off. instead, it goes to an e-mail list of reporters. this is not at all even a little bit surprising to hear from the former president. he has portrayed this investigation all along as part of what he loves to describe as this witchunt. pointing to cy vance and the new york attorney general as in his view, liberal democrats out to get him. this is all the signalling we got about this investigation. what the news would be would be if donald trump came out and didn't do. that and didn't have that reaction to what we are seeing today. so this is very expected from donald trump. keep in mind though that he has been trying to change the

subject on this. another illusion to the january 6th select committee that was created. st so talking about others as well, obviously, feeling the need to respond to this. i can also tell you that i just received a statement from another trump organization attorney basically saying the same thing. i won't read the whole thing. but essentially saying that everyone knows the only reason they're proceeding with this case according to one of the trump attorneys is because it is

trump they believe this is almost personal. they're taking it personally. it's important to know what we heard from the courtroom. one of the prosecutors tried to prebutt this line of argument saying this case is not about politics. this case, this investigation which is on going by the way, is proper am trilg to make the point to the judge. and to everybody in that courtroom that this is not because donald trump is donald trump. this is because there were, you know, legal issues that were going on as it relates to allen weisselberg. i need to these this out more. this has been a very intense pr push on the part of the trump organization. we saw allen. i think we saw awe different trump attorney. we got the statements now. we heard from the trump organization earlier today.

they're looking to compete in the pr wore. i think there is a sense of the significance this could have on the trump brand. let's be clear. i you this we have been. donald trump is not being -- was not indicted to day. donald trump was not charged in this case. that said, the organization that bears his name has been charged. an organization for which he has not and never fully die vested from. he should do so. his sons, one of whom are still managing the organization and this is his brand. the now i defer to david, the previous guest on all things related to the trump brand which is objectively taking a hit at the time he's been in office. that he was in office and now out of office. fwhaut is something that could be very perilous to the trump work brand as a whole and create consequences. i'm talking about beyond the legal spear. i just want to make one final

point. this is not the only potential legal jeopardy that he faces. we may not know for a very, very long time whether this is going to end up in legal trouble for donald trump himself. house speaker nancy pelosi did he clind to say whether she believes they should use the subpoena power against donald trump. you have what is going on in georgia with mr. speakerors there that are seeking to investigate criminally whether donald trump tried to subvert the election by putting pressure on officials in those phone calls in the days after the election in 2020. there are a number of things that donald trump is facing. yet, he is still consideration very publicly musing about the potential for 2024 presidential run. from a political perspective, we know based on the numbers that we've seen over the last five years that the people who are in thinks base are largely going to remain in his base and that

questions about any legal potentially or ethical issues related to donald trump are in effect baked in. there is a sense among those who back donald trump and i'm not saying anything regulatory. he is being prosecuted by the liberal media and prosecutors. that is something he is taking to heart and continuing to push at this point. by and large they have stul stuck with donald trump. we're seeing that unfold now. but what happens with some of the other republicans who are allies of the former president who are looking to themselves run in 2024 who are seeking to hold the donald trump base and also expand it. if they don't, they will not win. and how this plays into it, it's a lull early right now in 2021 to be talking about that. but, you know, as we said, this is not the end of this investigation from the manhattan

da. >> i want to bring in a former district attorney. a former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst. daniel, let me read for you a part of the statement that halle is referencing. this is from the trump organization. i'll tell you why i want to ask you this specifically about. this in it, he says in my 50 years of practice, i have never seen this office in reference to the office that you used to serve in bring a case like this and quite frankly i'm astonished. the district attorney is supposed to be apolitical but everyone knows that the only reason they're proceeding with this case is because it is trump. i want to give you a chance to

talk about that. your reaction to it. what do you make of that statement? >> first of all, it's a tactic that they use to vouch for their case using their own experience. we don't know how much he knows in his 50 years of practice. that is depletely irrelevant. you can't use those arguments in court whatsoever. right? but to answer directly, the real answer is that this appears to be and by the way this is much broader than we were led to believe over the last few days largely from other defense lawyers. but this is an off the books compensation scheme. there is no way to put it. those cases are prosecuted all the time. this is not an uncommon kind of

scheme. the method they did it here, creative. but tax fraud schemes and praud in general are limited by human ingenuity. they happen in different ways. but this appears to be as alleged and obviously they'll have a chance to answer these charges. but this appears to be a very conscious, orchestrated systematic scheme to do this not just with mr. weisselberg but with two other ploys of the trump organization. >> your take way from the indictments? i assume you had a chance to roughly comb through it a little bit. you know, to his point, a lot of the information that we're getting over the past couple days is narrowly -- i don't want to sigh leaked but was from the trump organization attorneys that was being shaurd with reporters. i can't say definitively that most of the information is coming from the district attorneys office which has been pretty tight lipped. now that we have seen the indictment and it has been unsealed, it is 15 counts. it spans nearly 15 years. i guess of alleged wrongdoing.

basically, he is accurate. he spun it in the favor of his client. i have two different views of. this first of all, the -- as to the crimes alleged in the indictment, the evidence seems to be very strong. they have spread sheets clearly. they have the tax returns, they have the tax returns. they have signed leases from the trump corporation itself. it is very powerful evidence in support of this scheme. i think the real question though is -- looking at this from a 30,000 foot view, not the very fine point view that we as lawyers will look at, this is

not the type of crime that i think there have been a lot of rumbling about. . where the trump organization itself was defrauding insurance companies, was defrauding tax authorities by misvaluing their properties. misstating assets to get loans. those are a tup of crime of a different nature. this really had to do with breaking the law. it was skirting the tax laws for the benefit of the employees. essentially so they could pay fewer taxes and getting the same compensation.

the evidence is very strong of that. but i do think there is some credence to the notion that this is not usually charged against corporations. st it's charged against individuals a lot. but it is not the type of crime that is usually charged against corporations on the flip side, 15 years and what is a sophisticated scheme to do this is the type of persistent and pervasive conduct that is considered when charging a corporation. it's not that it's unjust or unmerited or unwarranted, it's not as serious of the types of crimes that they said they were investigating. >> to that pount, do you think we're at this point today because of a mus calculation by the district attorney's office? could they perhaps want to get more information about the organization or perhaps even higher ups in the organization and it came to this point as some earlier have suggested,

legal experts suggested in an attempt to get the cooperation of somebody like a mr. weis sechlt elberg that they would threaten him and ultimately he called their bluff out and they either had to walk away from it or proceed with what we're seeing today? and that's why we're where we are. >> i don't think this is it. i do agree with dan. these are not of the level of seriousness of the things we heard they're investigating. but they also as i understand it, i wasn't in court, but they said on the record that their investigations are continuing. they asked for protective order for discovery. i think they have five months left in the special grand jury. so there is every indication that the reason they brought the charges now is, i'd say, 1 1/2 fold. one is because they're calling allen weisselberg's bluff.

the other half is there are executives that pear to be part of this and if if the indictment is to be believed and taking face value as i do, then those people are likely just as guilty as allen weisselberg. the they are just as guilty. they are potential people that could cooperate. some people's names popped up. it could be that they're trying to flip those people as well. >> could i ask a quick question of dan? i personally don't understand why the d.a.'s office would charge the company now as the first of successive indictments. in my experience, the company would be the last thing charged. at the tail end of an investigation. the company is not going to

cooperate in any meaningful way. what would be the reason since you are in that office why the d.a. would charge the company partially now and potentially more later? >> many companies are waiting to negotiate with the government in hopes of getting out of a charge. i don't think the trump organization looking at this indictment had a particularly good argument. the office is required to file corporations. this is not a company that could seriously argue they cooperated or that, you know, the wrongdoing wasn't pervasive. the factors didn't really work for them. but they had the charge. and now they're ready to consider it under the policy. there wasn't a realistic chance the company was going to

persuade them not to go forward. so they're going forward now. and then there may be additional charges that can bring down the road. that's best i can tell you. obviously, i wasn't in the room. >> to both of your points, the statement from if la teesha james after this arraignment does specifically say this investigation will continue and we'll follow the facts and law to wherever they may lead. the this is not the end of the process. daniel, thank you for you both for joining us on this breaking news. we're going to take a quick break. house speaker nancy pelosi announcing her picks lead the select committee to investigate the january 6th riots and liz cheney is on it and that might not go unpunished by her caucus. we'll explain that next. npunish. we'll explain that next. liberty mutual customizes car insurance so you only pay for what you need. how much money can liberty mutual save you?

one! two! three! four! five! 72,807! 72,808... dollars. yep... everything hurts. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ ♪ when technology is easier to use... ♪ barriers don't stand a chance. ♪ that's why we'll stop at nothing to deliver our technology as-a-service. ♪

this is the sound of change. the sound of a thousand sighs of relief. and the sound of a company watching out for you. iss the sound of low cash mode from pnc bank, giving you multiple options and at least 24 hours to help you avoid an overdraft fee. because we believe how you handle overdrafts should be in your control, not just your bank's. low cash mode on virtual wallet from pnc bank. one way we're making a difference.

the house select committee to investigate the riot at the capitol is getting down to business. the eight members appointed by nancy pelosi including panel betty thompson and congresswoman liz cheney help the first meeting this afternoon. five more members could be appointed by house republican leader kevin mccarthy. after that session, cheney was asked about reports that mccarthy threatened to strip committee assignmentes from any member of his caucus who accepted the speaker's invitation to join the panel. watch her response. >> our oath to the constitution, our duty, our dedication to the rule of law, peaceful transfer of power, has to come above any concern about partisanship or politics. before the select committee held the first meeting, mccarthy denied making such a threat. he did take a shot at cheney for dwreg to join the panel. >> i was shocked she would

accept something from speaker pelosi. it would seem to me since i've been hear from her, maybe she is closer to her than us. i don't know. >> all of this comes as investigators continue to uncover new details about the accused rioters and those that played a key role in planning the attack. joining us now, jake sherman, an msnbc political contributor and investigative reporter scott mcfarland who is following every twist and turn in the january 6th investigation. great you have both with us. jake, i'll start with you. punch bowl news reported that what kind of action can we expect kevin mccarthy to take against liz cheney for joining this panel? and what will he likely do when it comes to appointing members of this panel? is he going to put some of his allies on? >> he'll put people on, ayman that have experience in this area and whoe feels can fight for their position.

the house republican conference is unified in defending donald trump and standing against basically unified and standing against a select committee to investigate january 6th. a few thoughts. i don't think mccarthy is going to strip cheney of her committee posts. i think that most republicans think that she'll either lose in the next election or might not even run for election. so i think mccarthy is like from my reporting to let that take course before removing her from a committee. i think frank will you it will be difficult to remove her from a committee for reasons that we don't have go into here. but just strategic and the process of removing her from this committee would be quite arduous. they have made islam phobic and homophobic. >> so jake, when the panel is up and running, when that does happen, what can we expect the investigation itself to look like? will it be an investigation of

substance or mere down in politics? >> it can't get done in politics. everything can get mired in politics. this is congress. everything runs the risk of being political. but the chairman of this committee, betty thompson from mississippi, she is well respected on capitol hill, she has a long history of homeland security. he can issue subpoenas and issue depositions on his own. he doesn't need republican consent. if they hold open and public hearings, those could become political. but at the end of the day, they have a big majority to do what they want and conduct the kind of investigation that they want to conduct. so i imagine that in the next year or so we're going to see something from the committee and, of course, we're going to all be covering this as it unfolds and as they investigate. >> yeah. no doubt about that. scott, one of the republican arguments, excuse me, against the select committee in the independent commission as well is that the additional probes aren't needed because the fbi is

already investigating it. what are the major problems with that argument? i know you've been coringing almost every twist and turn legally and investigatively in this. >> this is a dubious argument from the republicans. the fbi investigation is so much more narrow to what a select committee would be doing or independent commission for that matter. that said, the fbi investigation is making some head way over the past 72 hours. they now have three accused oath keepers who not only pleaded guilty but pledged to talk, to help the feds with their investigation. typically when you get that in a federal crime, they're trying to flip you for a bigger fish. right now those oath keepers, they are the big fish. they face the most serious charges. so if they're cooperating, it's clear this fbi investigation is headed somewhere bigger. who funded, who conspired? who organized? so there is an investigation. but if republicans are going to conflate that, that is dubious.

>> i also follow you on twitter, scott. i noticed a key part in the last 24 hours new cases on those who attacked members of the media that day. and even in real time on that day a lot of people were shocked to see members of the press attacked. talk to us about what we learned in those cases, in those investigations. the. >> really, over the past 24 hours, the arrests keep coming. several of the cases the defendants are accused of destroying media property or threatening media with vulgar terms. that is a pattern we see. the insurrectionists, accused defendants are not only channeling their anger against joe biden, congress, but also against the media. they're going to face charges, perhaps serious charges. the they're now in the que with those that assaulted police and damaged the building. >> all right. thank you both on this. a greatly appreciate it. joining me now is new york democratic congressman jones. great to you have. thank you for your patience

throughout the afternoon. are you pleased with what we've seen play out so far and with the democratic appointee that's speaker pelosi has placed on the committee? and what is your response to liz cheney's additional appointment? >> well, look, let's remember how we got here. the speaker, i think, very graciously negotiated what would have been a bipartisan commission. still we cannot get ten republican senators of good conscience to vote for that. the and so we have to get to the truth. that's precisely why in the alternative house democrats passed a resolution creating a select committee. i'm so excited about these appointments. i think that they are bipartisan in nature. obviously, we have formerly the chair of the republican conference liz cheney on there. someone that cares about the state of american democracy and we have a number of incredible colleagues that are interested in getting to the truth which is what we need to get to in order to salvage our ailing democracy. >> yesterday only two of your republican colleagues voted

favor of the january 6th select committee. today as we were mentioning there, there is reporting that mccarthy threatened to strip all committee assignmentes from any republican that accepts a pelosi appointment. what do you make of that threat? do you think he'll make good faith recommendations to the speak for gop membership? who do you anticipate him putting on that panel? >> unfortunately, mccarthy voted to overturn the free and fair presidential election that occurred last year. just hours after nearly dying in the capitol alongside me. so i'm under no illusion that he is going to attempt to appoint people of good faith and good conscience to the select committee. and, of course, all he can do is make recommendations to the speaker. it is up to her in the final instance. >> i want to switch gears. we've been buried with a lot of big news. there was a very important decision from the supreme court

earlier today. upholding restrictive arizona voting laws. you and congressman today introduced the inclusive elections act of 2021 which would restore section 2 of the voting rights act. critical part of that bill. why did you introduce this bill? do you think it has a chance to pass both chambers? >> our democracy is in crisis. we saw that on january 6th with the violent insurrection. we saw it hours later when two-thirds of the republican colleagues voted to not certify the presidential election. we saw it recently when we couldn't get enough republicans to vote for that bipartisan investigation. and we're seeing that our democracy is in crisis all across the country, especially in plasz like georgia and in florida and in texas where voter suppression has been enacted or attempted. and unfortunately, even the laws that occurred that were enacted

in it places like georgia and florida and arizona were allowed because of that 2013 shelby decision which gutted the heart of the voting rights act. we must restore section 2 which was the latest thing to really be hampered in today's decision by the supreme court. the roberts court is consistently hostile to republican democracy. the but we're not powerless to stop it as the united states congress. and that's why i myself along with congressman of arizona introduced today's inclusive election act of 2021 to save american democracy. >> given that allegation that you made against the chief justice saying that it is hostile towards american democracy, you have been also outspoken advocate about more justices to the supreme court. today's vote, 6-3. what is your response to your republican critics who would say such a move would be a democratic power grab? >> well, i think we can look at the fact that mitch mcconnell

packed the court on two different occasions over the past several years. we can also look to the fact that the size of the supreme court has changed seven times before in our nation's history. this is a deeply american concept. it is rooted in article one of the constitution. congress has the authority to do precisely this. and it is necessary to have a majority of people on the court who are pro-democracy. this isn't about republicans versus democrats. justices john paul -- excuse me, john paul and souter were justices. that is the message. if you care about saving american democracy, if you care about a court that will uphold the voting rights act which was nearly unanimously reauthorized in 2006 but yet gutted anyway by a 5-4 majority in 2013 in that shelby decision, you ought to be deeply concerned about the state of affairs when there is even more partisan 6-3 conservative majority on the court that has not seen a voter suppression law

that they disagree with. >> all right. congressman jones, sir, thank you so much for your time. i greatly appreciate it as always. >> thank you. the nation's president in florida to offer support to the families and first responders at the scene of that deadly condo collapse. he's due to speak any moment now. we'll bring his remarks to you as soon as they happen. you're watching "ayman mohyeldin reports." u're watching "ayman mn reports. a regular movie night. but if you're a kid with diabetes, it's more. it's the simple act of enjoying time with friends, knowing you understand your glucose levels. ♪♪ i'm not hungry! you're having one more bite! no! one more bite! ♪ kraft. for the win win. still fresh

unstopables in-wash scent booster downy unstopables downy unstopables this is dr. arnold t. petsworth, he's the owner of petsworth vetworld. business was steady, but then an influx of new four-legged friends changed everything. dr. petsworth welcomed these new patients. the only problem? more appointments meant he needed more space. that's when dr. petsworth turned to his american express business card, which offers spending potential that's built for his changing business needs. he used his card to furnish a new exam room and everyone was happy. get the card built for business. by american express. (vo) nobody dreams in conventional thinking. it didn't get us to the moon. it doesn't ring the bell on wall street.

or disrupt the status quo. t-mobile for business uses unconventional thinking to help you realize new possibilities on america's largest, fastest, and most reliable 5g network. plus customer experience that finds solutions in the moment. and first-class benefits, like 5g with every plan. network, support and value-- without any tradeoffs. that's t-mobile for business. hearing is important to living life to the fullest. that's why inside every miracle-ear store, you'll find better cheers with your favorite fans. you'll find a better life is in store at miracle-ear, when you experience the exclusive miracle-ear advantage. our team is devoted to your care, with free service adjustments and cleaning of your miracle-ear hearing aids for life. we're so confident we can improve your life,

we're offering a 30-day risk-free trial. call 1-800-miracle today and experience the miracle-ear advantage. - grammarly business turned my marketing team into rock stars. (diana strums guitar) maya swears by grammarly business because it keeps her work on brand and error-free. fast and easy. - [announcer] learn more at grammarly.com/business.

any minute now we will be hearing from president biden who is in florida today meeting with families of those still missing in that devastating surfside condo collapse and the first responders working to find survivors. those rescue efforts, though, came to a halt early this morning due to concerns the remainder of the building was at risk of collapsing. this as the death toll continues to climb, now at 18, with more than 140 people still unaccounted for. joining us from surfside with the very latest is nbc news correspondent allison barber. good to have you with us. let's talk about the president's visit. what have you seen so far? what has his message been to the families of those unaccounted for and to the broader community

down there? >> reporter: in a nutshell that he knows that they are in pain, that he feels that grief with them and the country is with them. we expect to hear more from the president soon. as you mentioned he did spend the last three hours roughly meeting with families. he said he would stay and keep meeting with them until he had spoken with every single person who wanted to talk with him. that meeting was expected. we expect to hear on a bigger takeaway from the president at the end of his day here, but before that happens let me let you listen to a little bit of what we did hear from him earlier today. he started the day by meeting with some of the first responders. listen here. >> a lot of pain and anxiety and suffering and even need for psychological help in the days and the months that follow. and so we're not going anywhere.

>> thank you, mr. president. >> for real. >> reporter: at least 145 people are still unaccounted for. as you mentioned, ayman, rescue efforts have temporarily stopped. we don't have any indication right now when they could go back to what they were prior to 2:00 a.m. because structural engineers noticed what is left of the building was starting to move and they had to evacuate the area because they were worried the rest of the condo building could collapse. ayman? >> i know yesterday, unfortunately, more victims were found in the rubble including two children. we are now in day eight of this search and rescue operation. do officials still have hope there may be survivors? >> reporter: they do. when i talked to a member of the miami-dade urban search and rescue team yesterday they said that obviously they know as

every day passes that the likelihood of finding survivors shrinks, but they said their goal is always to save lives and even if they can save one life they he are still hoping for that. they still think it could perhaps be possible and they and the families here and members of this community are still doing their best to cling on to that hope. ayman? >> allison barber live for us in surfside, florida. thank you, as always. that wraps up the hour for me. i'll see you back here tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. eastern. "deadline white house with nicolle wallace" starts after this quick break. s after this quick break you already pay for car insurance, why not take your home along for the ride? allstate. here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands.

click or call to bundle today. (upbeat pop music in background throughout) we were alone when my husband had the heart attack. you're in good hands. 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.

hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east on a giant news day in the world of politics. surrendered -- the disgraced ex-president's company has been indicted today in manhattan. the trump organization's top money man allen weisselberg surrendered to the manhattan d.a. and has made an appearance

in court and pleaded not guilty before being released on his own recognizance facing charges of grand larceny, tax fraud and more. weisselberg accused of avoiding taxes and more than $1.7 million in unclaimed income and fringe benefits. in all it encompasses 15 counts against weisselberg and the trump organization as a whole surrounding what prosecutors allege was a deliberate multiyear scheme. we are continuing to sift through the indictment which was just unsealed in the last hour and we'll have more details on the first crimes now being charged in the two-year investigation by manhattan d.a. cy vance and letitia james. the charges against the trump org and mr. weisselberg whom mr. trump once praised for doing whatever was necessary to protect the line emerged from the district attorney's sweeping inquiry into trump and his