hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east. the national campaign to roll back access to the polls was aided yesterday by the conservative majority in the united states supreme court. the majority opinion written by justice alito even includes a reference to fraud which trump attorney general bill barr has stipulated was not a factor in donald trump's defeat, but here we are talking fraud. fighting to preserve the hallmark of american democracy, equal access of the right to vote, with one more hurdle thrown in the way this time by the supreme court. "the new york times" describes yesterday's ruling this way. quote, voting rights activists on the face of restrictive new voting laws grappled thursday with new guidance from the supreme court signaling that the challenge will be even steeper now for opposing these laws in

court. the 6-3 ruling established a series of guide posts for what could potentially constitute a violation under section 2 of the voting rights act. appearing to limit one of the few paths democrats and activists have for mounting challenges to new measures being proposed and passed in republic can-controlled states. just a reminder this is a real-world problem in 48 states in this country where more than 389 laws have been introduced this year with 28 signed into law and enacted and it may impact the one lawsuit that the garland justice department has filed against georgia's voting restrictions. forcing the doj to argue against the law and narrow legal grounds. "the washington post" editorial board argues the court's decision on arizona's election restrictions will serve as a green light to further limit minority voting. quote, the court upheld two arizona election rules. the democratic national committee claimed discouraged

minority voting. the legitimacy could be debated and the court could have struck them down without indulging in overreach. the six justices in the majority including the chief flashed a green light to lawmakers eager to erect new barriers to voting. "the washington post" goes on to argue the court even acknowledges the arizona laws discriminate against minorities. but then it claims it's too small a number of minorities, contradicting its own case about the impact of fraud. alito argues even small amounts of fraud could impact a close election. a reminder there was no fraud in 2020 that impacted any of the election results. so "the post" goes on admitted that laws in question disproportionately affectblack, latino and native american voters, often decided by fraction of percentage points

and every vote should be seen as precious. "the post" and "the times" point out there are other legal avenues to challenge restrictions but a legal path that was already the equivalent of a black diamond ski slope is now a double black diamond, legally speaking. quote, the supreme court decision further weakening the voting rights act affirmed that the only way democrats can we verse restrictive voting laws in gop-controlled states is to pass new federal voting rights by curtailing the senate filibuster. and so it is the filibuster or democracy? that is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. a "new york times" domestic correspondent all over this story for many months now. also joining us the reverend al sharpton, host of msnbc "politics nation" and our friend, a former spokesman for the house oversight committee, now an adviser. as we've talked on the show and

i've read all of your coverage, just put this into english for us about what this decision does for efforts for others to fight the voting restriction laws. >> at its core and most basic level this removes one of the tools that was left in election lawyers and voting rights activists toolboxes to fight back against these repressive laws we've seen passed both last year and in years past. it narrows the definition in terms of what kind of impacts would constitute a violation of section two of the voting rights act and it also takes issue with a lower court's ruling regarding intent. and this all comes after the voting rights act was significantly gutted in 2013 by the supreme court when it took out section five and said they removed what was known as

preclearance then which said states would have to get preclearance from the justice department before changing voting laws. so when you take the 2013 gutting and yesterday's decision it makes it that much harder to challenge a lot of these laws. now i was just speaking a few hours ago about how they might approach future lawsuits. they've been one of the main funders and litigators in a lot of election cases recently. and they pointed to the 1st, 14th and 15th regarding equal access and said while this is certainly upsetting, disappointing, they're disturbed by the court's decision and the trend they're seeing in federal courts against voting, it's not that they don't have any options left. >> rev, i think that is the flash of hope here, but the

hypocrisy even in the written opinion, justice alito makes a point of saying it's so important to guard against fraud because fraud can impact a very close election and the majority opinion talks about how very few minorities are impacted by these restrictions anyway while making the opposite argument about the reason to put in place measures to guard against fraud which wasn't a thing. so said bill barr. i mean, where do we go from here in terms of the lack of reality in the state houses now being matched by a real lack of the grasp of the situation on the ground in the supreme court? >> i think that this -- >> sorry, let me get the rev in, nick, we'll come back to you. go ahead. >> i think this is a disaster if we don't stop it right away and one way is to deal with the filibuster and as the legal experts deal with the legality, those of us in the civil rights

community, and i've been on the phone all day and yesterday with civil rights leadership, have said we've got to put the pressure on the senate now, deal with the filibuster, deal with making law. the white house has already come out and we need to be in conversations with them. this is as serious as it gets. you have the supreme court now in a 6-3 vote say that we, in fact, are going back to states rights and let states decide what the elections laws are. and even if some people suffer, well, it's hard to vote anyway. and that is what they said. well, there will always be some impediments but the arizona case is not enough for us to stop. it's almost like saying, yes, we know they told blacks to look at that jar of jelly beans. how many jelly beans in that jar? well, it may be enough for them to be able to count. that's what the court is saying to us now. this is how far backwards this

has gone. the white house and others to bring law while the scholars figure out how to fight it which makes us talking about those of that's are in the civil rights community and the voting rights community need to put the pressure on the senate. we need to rally. they wounded the righting votes act. they've all but announced us dead on arrival with what they did yesterday because it empowers states to go as far as they want to go. the supreme court has sent the signal we're not going to stop. >> i don't accept this is a problem just for the civil rights community and democratic activists to solve and polls suggest that it isn't, that all americans think that we live in a country where access to the

ballot box is equal. that is increasingly not the truth because of breaking bad, rushing around after trump's defeat in 2020 to try to rig the rules so if that election were rehad it would have ended differently. how do you help the groups that are on the front lines push through filibuster reform or whatever needs to be done to get something on the board to push back against the laws? to me with this decision it removes the legal path which a lot of democrats will say the justice department is suing. suing just got a lot harder. >> i don't think this is a situation where we can rely on the judicial system to get the outcome that we want. i think about the fact we're about to enter july 4th weekend and we are going to be flooded with tweets and statements

expressing patriotism, love of country, words like liberty and freedom and sacrifice and all of these catch phrases they like to use. i like that we live in a country. i think that one of the things we need to really do as democrats, as americans, we need to message this. this needs to be front and center. this needs to be issue one. all the other issues we discuss and debate and have lively discusses about, climate change, gun control, infrastructure, the budget, the military, all of those don't matter if we don't have a functioning democracy. republicans have made the deliberate calculation when the playing field is equal, they can't win. they realize that, they are the party of extreme, their policies do not align with where people are. instead of recalibrarecalibrati

are going to try to rig the game for all the talk about fraud, which is total nonsense and bs, they're the ones that are trying to be the architects of the fraud now by making sure we have a system that's not equal. they want to choose who should be able to vote. it's the most anti-american, anti-democratic thing. when you see those statements this week, those tweets, those july 4th patriotism, remind them they are the ones killing democracy. it doesn't die in darkness. it's dying at the hands of the republican party. >> nick, i want to read from some of your reporting because we covered this decision yesterday when it came down. i think it is dense and i want to get more recording on the record as we talk at the same time about what comes next. and i think you made this point,

nick. there are other legal avenues to challenge restrictive voting laws besides the voting rights act, the 1st, 14th and 15th amendments to the constitution. the act has been paramount to helping rein in laws that could affect communities of color and could threaten legal strategies that voting rights groups and election lawyers have been drafting to challenge some of the new laws. that includes the case that the garland justice department was planning to make against the georgia law. explain the argument and the prospects of success. >> well, certainly as we saw with the supreme court session difficult to predict how the courts will rule. but what's left, i think, of the georgia lawsuit, and i think you saw in the drafting of their complaint, the doj kind of recognizing that this decision that could be coming from the supreme court might not go their way and might not be what they

hoped for in terms of strengthening the voting rights act. they focused on what's known as the intent and the intent to a law, a violation of section 2 of the voting rights act. and so that is what is still left untouched in a way for the doj's case against georgia's sb-202, the voting law. now, that said, intent is almost always a very difficult case to prove especially absent the smoking gun that shows emails or data asks that show the different ways communities might vote and tailor laws that might implicate those like what happened in north carolina. in order to prove the intent case, a higher bar to climb. as i was talking to a few election lawyers yesterday, they said the doj doesn't bring cases unless they're pretty sure they will have the evidence to meet

both thresholds. that said, the fact they filed the complaint and brought the case thinks they have the evidence to back it up. >> this gets dicey, but you have republicans in georgia saying the intent is a lie. you have the lieutenant governor who went on tv and said he doesn't support the voting restrictions because they're solving a problem that doesn't exist. republicans haven't really tried to hide the reason for the lies. pushing the voting restrictions out to state legislatures. in texas you have activists wanting to come in to more urban centers, all of the laws limiting drop boxes and early voting in places where voters have a propensity to vote for the democratic choices. do you think it's a reach to sort of prove or try to rally the evidence that the intent was clearly to disenfranchise voters of color? >> i think that it is a reach

that we don't need to try and make. the lawyers and legal scholars should do what they can. we have the voting rights act in the first place because people and citizens started marching and telling official this is is what we want or we don't want you. we need to put this senate on notice that you have a mid-term election coming and if we have to go through these flips in order to vote we will not be voting for you. if you do not protect our right to vote. we cannot act like it was lawyers and think tanks that got us the voting rights act. it was a movement that got it for us. you knew we are back now where we were when john lewis was heading across the bridge and we intend to not go backwards because we cannot allow them to

make us get into little language to act like this is a civil conversation about our right to vote. they have gone back to state rights. we know it. we have to confront it and the federal government must protect us. >> rev, are you surprised this republican effort predicated on a lie, to quote a republican official in georgia has been so successful? 28 laws passed, close to 400 pro-he posed, the supreme court described as flashing a green light at these laws saying they will pass muster on a lot of grounds if they make it to them. and there's no movement really in the senate. nobody came out and said they're re-evaluating the filibuster. >> i'm surprised but also offended. when you look at the fact the only reason there are 50

democrats sitting in the senate is because of the more than usual turnout of black voters. we tied the senate for the democrats and they cannot have laryngitis when we have seen the voting rights act gutted out by the supreme court yesterday. the deafening silence by many sitting there on the prerogatives of our standing in long lines, on the prerogatives of our doing early vote on sunday to the polls, we sponsored you there and you're planning the fourth of july weekend in silence while these people just took a serious swing at our rights? so i'm not as surprised as i am offended and insulted and we intend to do something about it. >> this is the thing. i think you and i having been inside the republican party are maybe less surprised by the ferocity and focus and

competence with which they are rolling back access and changing the referees for who will count the votes that do come in with such focus, without any regard for the polls, without any regard for sort of the moment where the country is moving toward equality, republicans trying to disenfranchise, the democrats reach out and you have to fight this like republicans. there has to be a refusal to back down, a refusal to say i will let you suppress the vote. it's not a bipartisan negotiation when one is trying to disenfranchise minority voters. what do you make of the strategy you've seen so far from the democratic party? >> someone recently asked me what my observation was. the difference between how democrats operate and how republicans do. and the answer i keep coming back to is republicans are shameless about how they exercise their power. they're not hesitant.

they're deliberate. democrats when they're in power seem almost embarrassed to use their power to stop things like this from happening. democrats are in the majority. they have the house, the senate, the white house. narrow margins, i understand, but you spent the last two, four years asking the american people to entrust with you the reins of power, and now that you have them, there's a hesitancy to use them. even if you don't want to go all the way and abolish the filibuster, there are many mechanisms at your disposal you can use if you want to try to implement change. if the situation were reversed and the republicans were in the position, one, they wouldn't hesitate to blow up the filibuster but they would use the power of the purse. state a, state b, if you want to do this, impose draconian anti-democratic laws we're going to withhold funding, pass this major infrastructure bill the you're not going to get a dollar of it if you're going to act this way. we would put pressure on you. we would use every means at our disposal whether it's private enterprises, companies, donors,

the legislation process, committee hearings. every weapon in our arsenal to try to implement the change that we want. and i just don't feel like democrats are calibrated to act that way. and in this case this isn't a brazen political grab. this is a meaningful and necessary defense of our democracy. if we aren't willing to our rig vote, i don't know what else we are going to fight for. this is the most important fight we're going to have. if we don't win this one, we sure as hell aren't going to win the other ones. >> thank you all so much for starting us off on this topic today. i'm so grateful to see you all. when we come back a michigan republican risking it all to tell the truth. we'll bring you exclusive new reporting from our friend about the crumbling of the big lie in michigan and the republican who says the ex-president's claims of fraud are nonsense. plus, do you believe in patterns? well, prosecutors may just be on to a pattern of tax fraud in

jed's charges against allen weisselberg could be the tip of the iceberg. the conservative supreme court is increasingly injecting itself into every hot button debate in american politics. is it time for democrats to rethink their approach to judicial nominations and confirmation fights? we'll ask an expert. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. after a quick break. ♪ welcome to allstate, ♪ ♪are you down, d-d-down, d-d-down, d-d-down♪ where we're driving down the cost of insurance. ♪ ♪ are you down, down♪ ♪d-down, down? are you♪ drivers who switched saved over $700. ♪ allstate. here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands. click or call for a lower rate today.

oh! don't burn down the duplex. terminix.

go left! i'm gonna go where don'tnavigation says.uplex. ah! [ navigation ]- turn left. thank you navigation. the difference in try and triumph is just a little "umph". upsies! i need upsies! we try to make it very clear there's obviously from all of the signs, all of the facts, all the deductions we can make there's no evidence that there is some sort of organized or

widespread effort to defraud the election. i find it particularly troubling to me that i really wanted to show my party, some people within it, some people representing it made this critical mistake in judgment and it caused more harm than good for sure. >> the report thoroughly debunked each and every claim of voter fraud in his state, yet another devastating blow to the big lie. and efforts to undermine our efforts to democracy with it. a comprehensive profile was written of him. he has now become the target of the disgraced ex-president's ire because his report dares to tell the truth. quote, mcbroom had led an

exhaustive probe of michigan's electoral integrity. his committee interviewed scores of witnesses, subpoenaed thousands of pages of documents, dissected the me can inspection of michigan's highly decentralized system and scrutinized the most trafficked claims about corruption at the state's ballot box in november. mcgroom's conclusion hit lansing like a meteor, it was all a bunch of nonsense. let's bring in the writer and reporter, the senator who decided to tell the truth, tim alberta. another extraordinary piece of reporting and i think when people come back and study this period he will go in the category with republicans who voted for trump who would have wanted him to win in november but had the job of counting the votes and telling the truth about what the people who voted in november said. tell us what surprised you in doing this reporting. >> you know, nicolle, it's pretty interesting. this is a guy who i told your

friends on "morning joe" this morning is seen in michigan republican circles as sort of a choir boy and he is literally a choir boy. he leads the choir at his baptist church in a little town in the upper peninsula of michigan. and he is seen as sort of the last completely earnest man in politics, if you will, known as a do-gooder, somebody who wouldn't steal a dime, wouldn't kill a fly. and so when his committee, the oversight committee, took charge of this investigation, there was a lot of murmuring and a lot of conversations -- side conversations among democrats and among republicans about him being a very unique figure to take this on because on the one hand this is somebody who was sort of a dyed in the wool

conservative animated by the anti-abortion cause, considers himself a constitutional conservative. he does not have a progressive bone in his body and yet somebody who his colleagues knew to be very offended and put off by the president's behavior and the behavior of some of the president's inner circles and enablers. it was sort of an interesting almost immovable force situation because ultimately here was this one guy who had an incredible amount of authority and discretion as the chairman of this oversight panel to subpoena and interview whoever he wanted and to chase down just about any rumor that had been throating in michigan and there were a lot of them.

what he did, you couldn't call it completely exhaustive because you can't examine every precinct in the state but what he did and what his committee and their staff did in smoking out basically the seven or eight most prominent charges and claims and conspiracies in many cases, what they did was pretty extraordinary and i think what's most extraordinary about it, nicolle, they didn't even come back with a whiff of saying there was a little bit of wrongdoing here or a little bit of fraud here just at the margins but not enough to affect the outcome. actually, no, they came back and said there was nothing. they looked and looked and looked and they didn't find anything. >> and it's almost proving chris krebs right. the closer people look, it does seem it was the most secure election in our country's history. they have been audited two or

three times since election day. i want to read more from your incredible reporting. 9 you write this. in many ways trump was a stand-in for the constituents mcgroom knew who insisted the election was stolen, who raged against the scheming democrats and spineless republicans. most of them, mcbroom realized, would not read the report either and he wasn't sure what more he was supposed to do for them. i can't make people believe me, he said, an air of exasperation in his voice. all i can hope is people use their discernment and judgment to look at the facts i laid out for them and look at the theories and ask the question does any of this make sense? i thought of italian military lasers, claims about venezuelan boat swapping. being sued billions of dollars

for the voting machine companies. and i thought of this question that he poses to you. does any of this make sense? and i wonder if he had any larger observations about a party that his have use are very much in line with but has been taken over by disinformation. >> he and i got into that quite a bit. and really where it led, the most meaningful place, was a conversation about his own constituents. i think it's important to keep it in context here that this is an individual who is a dairy farmer. he runs a large farm, fourth generation dairy farmer, and he keeps very busy working with his hands all day and sometimes all night and basically works almost a side hustle as a state senator. this is somebody who works 20-hour days. i only mention that to say he is a pillar of his local community. his family has been there

forever. he knows everyone and he represents an area that is overwhelmingly republican and very, very culturally conservative. this is somebody with a lot of credibility and this is also someone who understands the way his constituents think and i think what he found most troubling was the fact that he could spend eight months compiling this comprehensive report turning over every stone, digging and digging for the truth and eventually presenting it on paper for the layman in his district and to come under siege from some of the people in his district, people who he's known for his entire life saying they don't believe him. i think that's why i wrote that piece you just read in there. he's looking around realizing it's one thing if donald trump doesn't want to read the report i put out and he doesn't believe me, it's another if sydney powell doesn't want to read the report but the folks in a

district like mine who know me, who have known me for decades and everything i'm all about, they buy milk from my farm, they know my kids, go to church with me and my wife, but they don't believe me when i'm telling them that i just undertook this investigation and i'm not finding anything. some think he is bought off by the chinese government, that he's engaged in a cover-up. and so he's looking around thinking do i even know these people anymore? it's strange for people like you and i, nicolle, and, look, we know people like this ourselves. for somebody like ed mcgroom to be immersed in a community of these people and be hit across the head with a 2x4 that they are living in this alternate reality was discouraging and he

looked emotional at times discussing this because it raises some fundamental questions about his life and his community and his own sense of belonging and where we go from here. >> yeah. and, george packer writes about that, too, very small communities. but his neighbors and his kids and community members that he sees in church didn't just turn on him randomly. >> i think it was 12 hours or 15 hours after mcbroom's report published trump pout out a release and accused him of a cover-up. those were his words. i think we become desensitized to some degree with what the president -- the former president, says and does in these situations.

for a guy like ed mcbroom, a simple dairy farmer and the people in his community to have the former president of the united states who has this vice grip on the consciousness of millions of conservative people in this country, to have that person accuse you of a cover-up, to have this person say you are covering up the greatest crime in american history is pretty dangerous. and is receiving a steady diet of threats, is worried about his children and his wife. he is commuting eight hours by car from the upper peninsula and down to lansing leaving his family all alone up there and he's being inundated with messages and phone calls and emails, people in large part animated, galvanized by the president's own words here and, you know, to take it one step

further, nicolle, i would add we ended our conversation, the senator and i, by talking about this notion of an imminent civil war that we soon will have exhausted reconciling our differences peacefully and that soon we are going to come to blows with our neighbors. and i mentioned to him how frequently i've been hearing casual talk of that the last couple of years and he just stopped me and said i'm hearing it around here almost every day. and that's the sort of thing that really makes you stop in your tracks and wonder if people really believe that an election was stolen and that the greatest fraud in american history was perpetrated upon your candidate, the person who you think is the rightful president of the country and you've stocked up on firearms and you believe that

you are part of a zero sum struggle where does this go from here? >> you left me with 7,000 more questions for you. i think i need to you come back and try to help me answer those questions because i think it calls into pretty sharp relief the damage that kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell did to this country by not coming out and disavowing the law. the reason mcbroom's neighbors threaten him is because those lies took hold not just for days and hours but for months. we're now on month six since the insurrection. so that just feels like the defining question of our time if mcbroom has the courage to tell the truth. we should help spread the truth. it's another extraordinary piece of reporting. i'm really glad to have you

here. thank you and congratulations. >> i appreciate it. up next for us, the tax fraud alleged to have gone on at the ex-president's family business didn't just revolve around the weisselberg. it is a familiar scheme other members of trump's family engaged in according to investigative reporting in "the new york times." the reporter will join us and whether another indictment with other names in it could be coming. ngmi made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right, not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. ♪ usaa ♪

♪

♪ 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. ♪

following the bombshell news yesterday about new charges by the manhattan district attorney's office against the trump organization and its chief financial executive, allen weisselberg, more than a decades worth of tax fraud schemes, "the new york times" today on the legal and personal threats facing the ex-president and tests of loyalty that could make these charges just the tip of the iceberg. "the times" reporting this, weisselberg whom a former co-worker described as a dissign for his devotion to mr. trump will now have to weigh that loyalty against spending time in the prison. also, quote, those familiar with the methods of mark pomerantz, the experienced prosecutor, say that thursday's indictment could represent the starting point of a broader case. alluding to that with a warning for the guy so used to getting away with thing. here was the ex-president donald trump's niece with our

colleague, rachel maddow. >> he doesn't believe allen weisselberg will flip on him. they will be going for the bigger fish, which would be donald, who has been running this organization for over 30 years now. so i think he would be surprised to learn that i don't believe my cousin would exercise that kind of loyalty towards him because his relationship with them and theirs with them is entirely transactional and conditional, i should say. >> joining us now "new york times" investigative reporter whose work on reporting on trump's tax and business record earn her and her colleagues a pulitzer prize is ann craig. she is also an msnbc contributor. first, just your reaction to the indictments yesterday, the repeatedly describing the fraud and seeming to allowed to more to come. >> i think the scope of it was incredible.

it wasn't just there was tuition paid for. we're going tuition, cars, cars for -- a car for allen weisselberg's wife, carpeting his florida home, a systemic payroll tax issue where they were trying to avoid certain payroll taxes by giving out one-time bonuses through different companies. it was one thing after another to the point even where he managed to avoid new york city tax by claiming he was living outside the city when apparently he wasn't. this is one thing after the other. what i thought, and to get to one of the points you're driving at, "the new york times" obtained his taxes in 2020 and we can see through those taxes that in some instances specifically with some of the bonus that is were paid to allen weisselberg that had the effect of avoiding payroll tax, other people got them. you have to think not only did other people get those but allen

weisselberg probably won't the only one getting perks. when i think about this now, are they going to charge trump and when i think about this sort of situation, it's sort of like dropping a large investigation when you're a reporter. you don't know exactly where it's going to go. i think this now we'll see will the indictment yesterday lead to pressure on other people, and will they then cooperate with the d.a.'s case? we just don't know. all of that could lead to something at the end against donald trump, to more charges against other people. i think right now we don't know. i think that's what they're trying to figure out. and then separately they're also continuing with the investigation on other fronts that they had going. yesterday's indictment when i looked was very much something about allen weisselberg's taxes and not donald trump's taxes. >> yeah, i mean, i've consumed voraciously your reporting on donald trump's taxes. you were the only game in town for most of that journalism.

i watched the documentary about how some of that reporting came to be. and i thought yesterday when i read the indictment about the intersections and i thought about what you have reported i believe about how ivanka was sort of paid on one book and written off on another, i want to read some of your reporting and ask if you saw any echoes to this or think they may have as investigators scrutinized this. there appears to be a closer to home explanation for at least some of the fees. trump reduced his taxable income by treating a family member as a consultant and deducting the fee as a cost of doing business. ivanka trump recorded totaling $747,622 that exactly matched the consulting fees claimed as tax deductions by the trump organization for hotel projects in vancouver and hawaii. it appears they have access to

the same and more kinds of documents that you had. do you think those practices are under scrutiny, and should they be? >> the new york attorney general did say they had been investigating that. they are looking at it and subpoenas have gone out on it. what is interesting about that and we need to know more, we only had the tax returns, that sort of thing where ivanka trump works at the trump organization. she made $2 million in 2017. another year she's made half a million dollars. she is a highly compensated executive of the trump organization. why is she getting a bonus? when the irs looks at that they say it has to be reasonable and ordinary so why is this person who works there in a related party bonus? it has the effect, which is great for donald trump, there were consulting fees, by paying them out. he has a business expense. he reduces taxable income so less there for the irs to tax. and what it kind of feels like they're doing by paying this through a company not only owned by ivanka and her brothers are

also involved called ttt, it could be a transfer of wealth that should be subject to a gift tax. these are all questions we have and we'd love to see more documents on it. cy vance and the attorney general have a lot of documents we don't that hopefully they can start putting this stuff together. these cases really are like you have the taxes and then you want to get bank records and you want to get somebody else's taxes. you saw very much in the indictment yesterday that's what they did. they were referring to two sets of books and they had them. they had a lot of other information they were able to put together. it was cool to see it as a reporter, even had donald trump's ledger where they had made notations about tuition for one or both of allen weisselberg's grandchildren. >> yeah, that stuck out to me, too, this reference to two sets of books, which for normal people usually signals some sort of crime is being committed when it comes to fraud. it's a pleasure to get to talk

to you. i hope we can continue to call on you as more of this investigation becomes public. susanne craig, thank you for spending time with us today. up next for us rethinking the supreme court. progressives concerned about the new conservative majority are out with the public pressure campaign for justice stephen breyer to retire. our next guest says silence is no longer an option.

replace old pipes? i can do that. install energy-efficient windows? i can do that. build an electric car? i can do that. weld the tower of a wind turbine? modernize the grid? install 10,000 solar panels? do what i've been doing my whole life? rebuild the country and protect america against climate change? we can do that.

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. rugs starting at $39.99. but you'll make 'em look like a million bucks. home. there's no place like it. ♪ ♪ life can be a lot to handle. ♪this magic moment,♪ but there's plenty of magic in all that chaos. ♪so different and so new.♪ ♪was like any other...♪ as the conservative majority

supreme court term comes to a close, some democrats say now is the time to get serious about their approach to the court. they were hoping justice stephen breyer would have used yesterday's final day of opinions to announce his retirement. with the threat of mitch mcconnell retaking control of the senate, liberal activists have been urging the 83-year-old justice to step down to give president biden the opportunity to appoint a new justice. breyer has remained quiet on the issue even as it has been on the minds of progressives for quite sometime. our friend asked him about it in 2015. take a listen. >> you have been on the court over 20 years. >> yes. >> how do you know in a job where only you decide, how do you know when it is time to retire? >> oh, that's a good question. i feel i will know. i feel so far i seem to be able to do the job, and there will perhaps be some indication or

i'll think about it, but i haven't thought it through enough yet to be able to give you much guidance on when i'll retire. >> joining us now is brian fallon, executive director of the progressive court group, demand justice. brian, i have read a little bit about folks like yourself sort of taking a look at not the substance of how republicans appoint judges and approach these issues and the politics around it, but the results of it. i wonder just first your broader philosophy on how democrats try to match sort of the zeal and efficiency with which republicans race through conservative judges and get them confirmed. >> well, i think that democrats have the best of intentions with how they approach the court, but i think, unfortunately, we tend to cling to bygone notions of the court as an apolitical institution. it is a very quaint view of the court, and i wish that the judiciary behaved that way, but

rulings like yesterday's which fell on party lines, 6 to 3, gutting another section of the voting rights act, tell the story that this is a completely political institution on the cases that decide who wields power in this country, on cases related to our democracy and the right to vote. you see consistent party line votes coming out of this roberts' court on citizens united, on allowing republican secretaries of state to purge voter rolls, on allowing gerrymandering and on gutting the voting rights act on two separate occasions. for people like justice brooifr breyer close to the court including journalists on it being an apolitical institution doesn't do anybody service. i like to deal with the real work, and on mitch mcconnell blocking another supreme court pick if he happens to be majority leader when stephen

breyer deigns to retire or god forbid falls ill. >> mcconnell said it is highly unlikely he would let president biden fill a vacancy in 2024 if the gop flips the senate. should justice breyer retire and allow president biden to make the appointment while democrats control the senate? >> absolutely. some have said, well, he has a full other year he could serve on the court and still retire in time. but as you know, nicolle, the senate is a 50/50 senate. if one democratic senator falls ill and happens to be in a state with a republican governor, that majority could flip and mitch mcconnell could be the majority leader at any time. so we don't have the benefit of a guaranteed democratic senate majority all the way through 2022. so i think that stephen breyer has an opportunity to retire now, and, quite frankly, i think for him to stay on past the end of this term is reckless.

but all appearances it seems that's what he is doing. he hired a full slate of clerks and as you mentioned at the top, the last day of the court's term was yesterday. he did not take the opportunity to retire. it would be surprising if it happened now. but it is better late than never. if he does it this summer, that's when justice o'connor announced it, and we would still cheer it if he announces it in july. >> brian fallon, i'm going to ask you to come back because i think there is a bigger conversation to be had about how republicans have hard wired their voters to vote on these issues, to vote on the supreme court, and you are right. democrats have treated it like this sacred thing outside of politics, but with yesterday's opinion with justice alito writing about fraud in his decision majority opinion, sometimes have changed. brian fallon, thank you so much for spending some time with us and starting this conversation to be continued. the next hour of "deadline: white house" starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. k break. don't go anywhere. not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit,

usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. ♪ usaa ♪ rugs starting at $39.99. we're made for. but you'll make 'em look like a million bucks.

home. there's no place like it. ♪ ♪ 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. ♪

we support the brave patriots in georgia and in florida and all across this country that want to protect the integrity of the vote! >> president trump is my president, too. he should be our president right now. but the dirty, rotten democrats stole the election. >> the truth is being censored and covered up. as a result, the doj is harassing peaceful patriots across the country. >> we must go forward based on truth. we cannot both brace the big lie and embrace the constitution. we cannot be dragged backward by the very dangerous lies of a former president. hi again, everyone. it is 5:00 in the east. one of those things is not like the other. the first three gop lawmakers you heard there and all of their conspiracies, disinformation and kowtowing to the disgraced ex

president and his big lie are tolerated by minority leader kevin mccarthy, welcomed either. but the last bite from congresswoman liz cheney who in the sound bite tells the truth about the big lie and the former president's role in fomenting the violence on january 6th, that apparently cannot stand in mccarthy's party as we saw her purged from leadership and attacked yesterday by him again for accepting an appointment from speaker nancy pelosi to be a member of the house select committee investigating january 6th. where mccarthy draws his red line demonstrates what the party has become as congressman adam schiff, another member of the select committee, spells out clearly in this fiery tweet righting this. in mccarthy's gop, you're still in good standing with you fund raise with white nationalists, promote dangerous conspiracy theories. but if you dare participate in an investigation into a deadly insurrection? you're finished! a cult of lies with loyalty to trump overall else. schiff and the other select committee members say they will stop at nothing to get to the

truth of january 6th, but the variable of whom mccarthy will pick to fill the remaining five republican slots still looms. his choices will determine how much the committee becomes one devoted to truth seeking or how much it turns into a partisan circus on the right. one thing is clear however. that in all of the developments in the house surrounding an investigation into the insurrection, speaker pelosi has been the one holding all of the cards. punch bowl news reporting this morning, quote, since february 15th when she first called for a bipartisan commission to look into the insurrection by supporters of former president donald trump, pelosi has repeatedly forced mccarthy back on the defensive. pelosi has tried to push him into a political choice she knows mccarthy can't make, between trump -- still the most powerful figure in the gop -- and someone mccarthy can't afford to alienate if he ever wants to be speaker, and his own responsibility toward the congress as an institution. the minority leader will also have to contend with possibly being subpoenaed by the select

committee for information regarding his communications with the former president on the day of the insurrection. here was congressman bennie thompson, chair of the new select committee yesterday when asked about who he might call to testify. >> you would not resist calling in donald trump? >> well, let me -- i would not, but from the standpoint of doing our work. >> and how important would it be to hear from those members of congress who were having conversations with donald trump in the run-up to january 6th, people like mo brooks, jim jordan and those types? >> well, i think we need to have access to all available information, and part of what we plan to do is hire some of the best people who can help us get access to that kind of information. >> uh-huh. >> so if we need to get it by request or by subpoena, i'm not reluctant to do either. >> what's next for the select committee investigating january 6th is where we begin this hour with the aforementioned

congre member of the new select committee on the january 6th attack. he's chairman of the intelligence committee and was lead impeachment manager during trump's first impeachment trial. thank you so much for being with us. i want to ask you, having investigated misconduct by the ex-president how this investigation of an event that includes the ex-president will differ in scope. i wonder just a second part of it if you can speak to the ongoing threat of domestic violence extremism animated by the big lie of election fraud? >> sure. in terms of how the different scope, it is difficult to answer because that investigation of the first impeachment was pretty sprawling given that involved a country half a world away, ukraine. the events of january 6th though don't just rely on what happened on that one day. you had weeks and, indeed, months leading up to that date we need to examine, of course, why we were so ill prepared on that date, the intelligence that we had or didn't have, what was

shared or wasn't shared. most important, what do we do going forward to protect ourselves. one big difference though i can tell you is we had to fight the trump administration to get a single document. they sought to stonewall all of our subpoenas. we'll now be working with an administration that will be much more forthcoming and that will make a world of difference in terms of getting answers. >> congressman, will you seek to sort of fill in our gaps of our understanding? i mean i think there are some open questions about who was effectively the country's commander in chief. there's new reporting that it was mike pence who called the national guard and urged them to come. there are obviously big gaps in our understanding of why the national guard was loaded on to buses and then never deployed. there are big gaps in whether or not members of the republican party, your colleagues on the other side of the aisle, were in contact, communication, giving any sort of tours or information. is all of that pieces of this

sort of empty puzzle that you are hoping to answer? >> absolutely. those are just the kind of questions we want to answer. you know, i would start out, and we've been looking at this for weeks in the intelligence committee, we still don't have a good sense of what intelligence was in the possession of agencies. that is, how much did we know before january 6th that the capitol might be a target and what did we share of that information and what more was out there to be had. those are some of the questions leading up to that date, but also what was the organization of that event like and how much forewarning was there of violence among those organizing it? how much foreknowledge was there in the white house that this might turn violent? what happened on the day of the insurrection? why did it take so long to get reinforcements to the capitol? was there anyone standing in the way of sending those reinforcements? so these are just some of the questions, and i think we are all determined, those of us that

have been appointed so far, to follow the evidence wherever it leads. if it leads to some of our colleagues, it leads to some of our colleagues, but we can't blind ourselves to the reality. >> it seems to me that people take some of the wrong lessons in drawing parallels to the benghazi committee. i mean one of the powers was the subpoena power, the ability to get, as you said, reams and reams of e-mails, obviously most famously from the state department and other places. but i wonder if you have thought about when the first subpoenas will go out and whether there's a desire to get right to work immediately? >> well, i served on the benghazi select committee, and i like to say the only thing that i found worth while about that was getting to know elijah cummings. i hope that we -- and i expect we will have a very different experience with this select committee. that was set up for a very particular purpose of kevin mccarthy, to take down hillary clinton's numbers. it also took place after there

were half a dozen very bipartisan investigations already into the matter that had debunked the same conspiracy theories. here, you know, we really are going to do our very best to operate in a non-partisan way. you know, we'll see what mccarthy does, what kind of people he wants to appoint, but we want to make sure that we use that subpoena power wisely to get the information that we need, that that power of compulsion will be very important. we've had difficulty, frankly, getting information about the intelligence even though we provide the budget for the intelligence agencies and we have suggested that we will withhold some of that budget unless we get what we need. but having that select committee with the particular focus, the gravitas, the professional staff will help us get those answers. >> the capitol police have become the face of really feeling betrayed by republicans

who refused to award medals, about 21 of them refused to sign on to an award for them. but then even more substantively at the policy level refusing to move forward with the bipartisan commission outside of congress. but it seems that there are still questions about what they knew and whether any of -- i believe there were more than 30 capitol police officers suspended in the days and weeks after. are there still a body of questions there or have the congressional committees answered most of them? >> no, there's still i think a great many questions. you know, i think about -- and we are already talking about our first hearing. one of the capitol police officers who raised that question after being the subject of racial epithets defending the capitol, is this america, that question is really at the heart of this enterprise, at the heart of this select committee

investigation. it gets to the point you were making about the domestic terrorism threat which is now the predominant threat to the country and exceeds the threat of international terror. so we want to hear from those police officers. they do feel that they have been not only victimized on that day but let down by our gop colleagues. they should have an opportunity to speak out to tell the american people what they went through, but we also want to learn how they were trained by their department, how they were treated by their department. the house administration committee has made a lot of progress into some of the media questions about how that department may need to be restructured. and as chairwoman lachlan said, we may need to build that part of the plane while flying it, but, yes, there were a tremendous number of unanswered questions. >> i want to ask you what is to be learned about the ex-president's role. i don't know if you have seen the video. there are video of his own rally, his family backstage,

clearly enjoying the fervor that the supporters felt in and around his event, which was the warm-up event for the insurrection. his comments that he would join them to march to the capitol were obviously made in public, and then there's been a lot of investigative journalism that has made clear that he sat and watched the insurrection, transfixed. his first video, he said, "i love you" to the insurrectionists, 500 of whom have been charged with crimes. what are the questions you still have about the president's conduct that day? >> well, we know really very little about his conduct. we know what you've described that we've seen publicly from that video in terms of his public-facing role at that rally on the mall. but what was going on in the white house, what the reasons were behind the delay in the deployment of the national guard, whether he had any role in that or he didn't have any

role in that, we really don't know. among the most important questions for me is was there any warning given to the president about the violence that may ensue. there has been public reporting about that and, you know, was the president on advance notice of who some of these extreme elements were that were going to be gathering there, and was there any concern about any of the rhetoric that might be used in light of who was attending. these are open questions, but i think they need to be answered. and, you know, the -- i think the house managers during the second impeachment did a remarkable job, but they had a very short time to try to assemble the evidence of what role the white house played or didn't play. we certainly know he incited this attack, but there's a lot we don't know about his particular role.

>> you've been so generous with your time. i have one more question. it is about sort of the spirit with which democrats move forward. it seems to me that what has been bipartisan was the vote to impeach the ex-president, even the vote to convict the ex-president was bipartisan. the vote for the bipartisan commission in the house was bipartisan, then there were even some republicans in the senate that voted for it. the only thing that's been partisan was the republican obstruction. will you fight aggressively against the perception that the select committee is some partisan endeavor? that feels like it is already sinking in on the right. i wonder how you will go around that disinformation to make sure that this investigation is sort of experienced directly by the american people, that they're able to see the testimony? would you put some of these hearings in prime time, for example? >> yes, i think that's very much the plan, is to have, you know, a portion of our work product very much out in the open so

people can see what we're doing. we won't be able to do all of it that way. there just wouldn't be time to do everything in public and there may be some things that we need to do, particularly if they involve intelligence issues, that can't be public. but we want to do everything we can to give the public confidence in what we're doing. look, we can only control what we do. we're going to try to do a very non-partisan, objective job. they obviously don't want that. mccarthy doesn't want that. if he did, he would have supported the commission that was five democrats, five republicans, neither of which could issue a single subpoena without the other. they don't want that. >> right. >> but the fact that they're abdicating their duty to the constitution doesn't give us the right to abdicate ours, so we go forward. but, you know, i would fully expect on the far right they will attack it as partisan, but then they attacked the original commission that was 5-5 the same way. so i view that as just one of the obstacles to overcome, and we will have to overcome it.

>> if anyone is used to that, you are, congressman adam schiff. thank you so much for spending some time with us and starting us off this hour. we really appreciate it. >> thank you. joining our conversation, john heilemann, nbc news and msnbc national affairs analyst, host and executive producer of show times "the circus." host of the helen highwater podcast and "the recount" and my friend, anna palmer, co-founder of punchbowl and msnbc contributor. john heilemann, i have clips that i know we both like very much, but first you reaction to what we heard from congressman sclif. >> i think -- hi, nicolle. it is great to be back. >> hi. >> i think, you know, here is the -- adam schiff obviously is an incredibly skilled prosecutor. if you look at the democratic side of the makeup of the select committee, it is very impressive. as soon as i come on television we get the dog here.

hi. >> hi, dog. >> i'm impressed with the makeup of that -- super impressed with the makeup of the commission. they are -- you know, it is a heavy-hitting group of the house democrats and adam schiff is asking all of the right questions. i think that the right -- the most important thing to think about in all of this is the thing that i know you and i both believe, which is that there are a lot of really important things in america right now. you know, there are a lot of things that the country is dealing with, we're still recovering from the pandemic, we have the questions of racial equity, we have the economy, we have all of that stuff. it is all really important, and the temptation is to focus on things that affect the real lives of real people in a very direct way. i know the biden administration wants to do that and so on, but i think that all of us -- and i feel like adam schiff reflected this although he didn't come out and say it, and i know that you believe it and i know that i believe it, this is the most important work the congress is going to be doing. there's nothing more important really for history and for the

issue that's on the table right now, which is nothing less than is this country going to continue to be a democratic republic or not. there's nothing more important that's going to happen in congress over the course of the next year or 18 months or however long it takes to get through this than this commission's work. the larger questions, even the voting rights stuff, which obviously has enormous implications and you have been focused on it. i have watched you come back to it again day after day. the reason why that work matters so much is what we saw on january 6th. if we don't come to a -- >> right. >> -- maximally clear view for the country of what happened, why it happened, who was involved, who is responsible, we are going to be missing -- we are going to be doing grave damage to the country and to the fight that we're in right now, this generational fight to save america in a lot of respects. i just think that that should an animate everything going forward

on the questions of are we going to subpoena mccarthy, try to force the answers, how far are we going to get the answers we need. i think the answer is we need to go as far as necessary to get all of the answers and get to the truth, because it is that important. >> and i want to show you -- i think john and i talked about the importance of this "new york times" video coming out today. i mean if you -- you were both there, i believe, on that day. so i'm sure this is traumatic to watch, but let me play a little bit more of the ex-president's supporters at the capitol on the day of the insurrection. >> and it is now that the protest turns violent. >> usa! >>reporter: without hesitation, the crowd overpowers the police. nearby, a second group breaks through on another approach.

others jump fences. >> go, go, go! >> reporter: and now hundreds of rioters rush forward on several fronts. >> d.c. is a [ bleep ] war zone! so, anna, i think john hyman is making an important point about the work of the government, also about politics, but there's a point in here about trauma, too. the trauma really, the narrators of the trauma have been the police officers themselves whose bodies were tased and mutilated and damaged in ways that caused physical and mental harm. but everybody that was there that day suffered trauma, and i wonder what it is like to continue to see one of the two parties white wash this event, even as the select committee has been appointed. there is no acceptance that this attack needs to be investigated, just pure politics, and attacks on liz cheney for being part of that investigation. >> yeah. i think -- you know, i got goose

bumps watching that video again. i think every time you have to relive it, it is extremely -- i still kind of can't believe that it happened, frankly. but i think to your point, the police officers and the people that keep the capitol safe are in a very, very demoralized place right now, worse than i have ever seen it. i think the broader point is that you don't have trust between republicans and democrats here. you know, what is the truth? what is right? there's just so much skepticism on both sides of both parties. it is hard to see how democrats are going to be able to say, listen, this isn't partisan, this is actually a truth-finding mission. that's going to be their biggest challenge because we've already started to see it, whether it is mitch mcconnell or kevin mccarthy, republicans are going to attack this select committee even though they tried to do a commission which would have been bipartisan as, you know, just basically a partisan witch hunt. that's where you are going to see republicans go i think from here forward as long as this committee is doing its work.

>> well, i'm going to have as we watched that happen, because i'm sure you're right, anna palmer, video of them taking the attack as seriously as their democratic colleagues on that day. here is what we're going to do. we took longer with the congressman that we thought we were going to. i'm going to ask anna palmer and john heilemann to stick around and we will bring in another friend. we will ask how serious republicans will take this investigation. we will continue that conversation after a quick break. later, that neverending sham audit of ballots in arizona drags on and on and on. we still don't know when it will be over, but we know republicans across the country are ramping up their efforts to make it harder for democrats to vote and have their votes counted. more than one year after their father passed from covid, a brother and sister are honoring a life well-lived in the most unique way with the quest to get a word he invented added to the dictionary. we will talk to them later in the hour. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. welcome to al. ♪ ♪

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.

♪ sometimes you wanna go ♪ ♪ where everybody knows your name ♪ ♪♪ ♪ and they're always glad you came ♪ welcome back, america. it sure is good to see you. delicia: this is where all our recycling is sorted -- 1.2 million pounds every day, helping to make san francisco welcome back, america.

the greenest big city in america. but that's not all you'll find here. there are hundreds of good-paying jobs, with most new workers hired from bayview-hunter's point. we don't just work at recology, we own it, creating opportunity and a better planet. now, that's making a difference.

and later when trump does take the stage -- >> we're going to walk down to the capitol! >> reporter: some view his words as a call to action. >> we'll never take back our country with weakness. you have to show strength and you have to be strong. >> take the capitol building. >> take the capitol! >> take it! . >> we want our country back! >> reporter: but these believe they've been deputized by their president to stop a crime. [ bleep ] we're back with john

heilemann and anna palmer. joining our conversation is tim miller, writer at large for "the bulwark," former communication director for jeb bush's campaign. now lucky for us, an msnbc contributor. tim, watching this this week as the select committee was announced and just reminding people we are at the beginning of the beginning of investigating the insurrection of january 6th, your thoughts? >> look, absolutely nicolle. i think you asked this to congressman schiff in the last question, which is the most important one, which is we still don't really know what was happening at the white house that day as those rioters invaded the capitol, as the vice president and the speaker of the house and other members' lives were put at risk. we still don't really know what was happening inside the white house, why there was such a long delay. i think it is a very important part of what is going to happen on this committee. i think that's why the subpoena power is so important, bringing mark meadows to the committee to hear from him and hear from others in the white house. i just want to say i think

that's why it is so important that liz cheney is on the committee. i have never -- >> yeah. >> i was never a huge liz cheney fan as far as republicans were concerned. i remember i even offered free consulting advice to mike yancy when she went to primary him and came out against gay marriage. she really kind of rubbed me the wrong way at the beginning of her career. i have to tell you what she is doing to be on this committee, to stand with adam schiff and nancy pelosi is the biggest, you know, act of political courage i think that we've seen in a long time. she is lighting her career on fire in order to do this because it is right for the country. i know some people say she is playing the long game and, you know, there is no political future in wyoming for somebody that's going to work with nancy pelosi and adam schiff. that might be wrong. you know, it is crazy to me that's the case, that just simply saying "i want to know what happened in a domestic terrorist attack on the capitol" is enough to harm you politically, but that's where we are and liz cheney is doing it eyes wide open. i think that's why it is important to have her on the

committee and to have the subpoenas to hear from the other people in the white house and have a republican there saying, "no, i want to hear from the white house, too." >> yeah. i mean, john heilemann, like there is no long game anymore, right? i mean to your point, we're at the fork in the road and we're either going to be a country that investigating attacks on the united states capitol, deadly attacks incited by an ex-president or not. we will be a country where everyone can vote or 389 voter sprigs laws who change the arbiters of the count are going to -- i mean to your point, there isn't a long game to be played right now. everything seems very much up in the air. >> i mean i don't think anybody sensible -- tim can speak to this with more inside knowledge than i have, but i don't think anybody sensible thinks that republican -- if you are a republican right now that you think, well, you know, there used to be all of that talk about how if trump lost we would have a civil war in the republican party and the old, the establishment republicans would take on the trumpists and we all have seen what has

happened here, right. that turned out to be utterly illusory. there is no long game that's in our imagination, a length of time that's meaningful for us who live here in a normal human life span where it is like you can see, well, there might be a team when what we used to think of as normalcy in the republican party comes back. the republican party is totally captive to this trumpist cult now. so you would have to be mentally ill to think, well, a couple of cycles from now if i play my cards right, this will do me good politically. that's not -- tim is 1,000% right about that. this is a suicide mission for liz cheney given the way the current republican party is constituted. i will tell you how i know that, nicolle. i know that because as horrifying and deleterious and disgusting as the big lie is, the big lie about election fraud that republicans have rallied around and decided that they're all going to either explicitly or implicitly support, the craziest thing -- and this is the thing that's been making me more incensed than anything else, you know, you and i

looking at that "new york times" video, right, what's the thing that makes you -- there are many things in it that make you very upset. there are things that make me -- that make me almost physically ill again, having been up there that day and been, you know, hearing flashbangs go off like ten feet from me as i was up there trying to cover it. it is like there's a little ptsd in it, but the worst part of it is the setup for it where they walk through and say -- and show you the degree of denial about republicans who aren't just -- who just bought in on the big lie that the election was stolen, now are going -- are building another big lie on top of that big lie, and that bigger big lie is the memory holing of this event, which is the -- this was not that bad, they were just tourists, they were all patriots. that is not everybody in the republican party, but explicitly it is way too many of them. implicitly, it is now kevin mccarthy, because unless you are really down for finding out what happened on january 6th, you are implicitly then on the side of

the memory holers. i can't -- i just -- it is as bad as the big lie is, this is the lie that says "we're going to with video out there, with all of the evidence available, with this "new york times" thing on the web and a dead police officer and 100 injured police officers, we're going to stand up in front of you on television and say it didn't actually happen, don't believe your eyes, it wasn't really an insurrection, they were all patriots, it was all a day at the beach." that is the explicit for some and implicit for many message of the republican party right now, and that is the ultimate lesson for liz cheney. if your party is there, yeah, being on the committee is political suicide. i get it points to why i think the stakes for finding out what actually happened here are as important as they are. >> anna palmer, i mean the republican bed -- kevin mccarthy's bed, and i played it

at the top of the show, getting in bed and pulling up the covers and snuggling in next to mr. gosar and marjorie taylor greene is only a good bet, i think there were four or five homeland security threads of domestic terrorism that nothing else would happen, and i pray nothing else happens. but the intelligence community and the homeland security intelligence bulletins suggest it is quite possible that something does. is anyone on the right concerned about the ongoing threats? >> listen, i think kevin mccarthy has been loath to try and roll back or punish any members of his conference when it comes to them embracing white nationalists and other things, whether it is marjory taylor greens, matt gaetz, paul gosar. every week it seems to be coming up more and more and he

continues to bear hug the former president. he has all eyes on trying to become the next speaker. i think it is a true reflection of where the republican party is, to both tim's point that they are the party of trump. besides liz cheney and adam kinzinger, they are all marching ahead and the party is becoming more aligned with white nationalists, more aligned with the donald trump part of the party. and the establish republicans are either lost or retiring or probably will be finding themselves in a different business because they're not going to be able to get reelected again. >> you know, tim, this is the saddest part of it all. the party is just broken bad, and the idea that these are good politics seems like the dumbest calculation of all. i mean the ex-president lost the white house, lost the senate, lost the house, but the idea that all -- you know, trump is out. it is about believing in the

same stuff at this point. i think it needs to be called out for that. this is about the gop being fine with white nationalists. this is about the gop being fine with the january 6th insurrection. this isn't anymore about -- trump is deplatformed and, you know, off in mar-a-lago. >> look, it is the table to be an apologist for what happened on january 6th and to want to memory hole it. i mean that's just the entry card to being able to run in good standing, and that's why liz cheney is standing out there alone. i mean you look at anthony gonzalez, for example, who voted for impeachment, was in a district in ohio, was a college football star there, is a conservative republican, you know, voted for impeachment, and now he has some nobody trumpist primarying him. there are rallies happening in his district to try to get rid didn't run afoul of anything except simply say, no, it is not

okay to incite an attack on our capitol building to try to stop an election. that was all he did. they're trying to run him out on a rail. i think more to the likelihood are going to succeed with that, and i think that's where all of the energy is. everyone is making a decision for themselves. everybody had an opportunity. i know we discussed this, nicolle, on january 7th to say it is time to move forward, you know, enough of the craziness, and you heard from that. you heard from even the john cornyns and the lindsey grahams, even some of his biggest allies saying that, and within a minute they all decided that's not it. now, this week, you know, there were only two left. there was adam kinzinger and liz cheney, only two who said we should figure out what happened when our capitol was attacked. i mean that's madness. i think if i would have come on to the show on january 7th, you know, people would have said, oh, tim has got trump derangement syndrome again, that's crazy, there's no way there will only be two people who hold the line on this.

there it is. there are only two. >> there are only two. sounds like a good title for a book. tim miller, anna palmer, our friend john heilemann, it is wonderful to see you. i know you are busy with your book and other pro zwrekts. thank you for making time for us today. when we return, that so-called audit of 2020 election ballots in arizona's biggest county is on hold again with ballots and voting machines packed up and moved out to make way for a gun show. but, of course, arizona secretary of state joins us after a quick break. don't go anywhere. where. some say this is my greatest challenge ever. but i've seen centuries of this. with a companion that powers a digital world, traded with a touch. the gold standard, so to speak ;)

i'm so glad you're ok, sgt. houston. this is sam with usaa. do you see the tow truck? yes, thank you, that was fast. sgt. houston never expected this to happen. or that her grandpa's dog tags would be left behind. but that one call got her a tow and rental... ...paid her claim... ...and we even pulled a few strings. making it easy to make things right: that's what we're made for. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. get a quote today.

i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! hs wearily] with thirty grams of protein. here, i'll take that! woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one gram of sugar, and now with two new flavors! we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. ♪ ♪ 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. ♪

there are new signs that the sham audit of the 2020 vote in arizona, which is central to the fever dreams of the ex-president and his supporters of the big lie, is set to drag on for many more months. "the washington post" reports, quote, nearly 2.1 million ballots and hundreds of tabulating machines at the center of a controversial republican commissioned review of the 2020 election in arizona were packed up in trucks thursday and moved again. it was the fourth time the ballots and machines used in arizona's maricopa county have been moved since april. arizona's secretary of state katie hobbs tells "the post" that the delay in wrapping up the audit might be intended to financially benefit groups that have been raising money from private deanors to supplement the $150,000 in taxpayer dollars earmarked nor the audit. joining us is arizona secretary of state katie hobbs, also a

candidate for governor in arizona. madam secretary, first, is there no recourse to regain possession of these ballots so that they're not moved again and potentially tampered with? >> well, the recourse would be between the maricopa county and the senate, who has ordered this audit. but, really, you know, this is exactly why we have been fighting against this from the get-go. these are not experts. they're making this up as they go along. it is not a real audit. they don't know what they're doing and they're not taking their role right now as custodian of these ballots and equipment seriously. that's very clear from everything we've seen. >> and, in fact, your ability to do your job is being hampered by -- i want to read from the npr reporting on this. arizona republicans stripped some election power from democratic secretary of state, arizona republicans have stripped the secretary of state's office, currently held by a democrat, of the right to defend the state's election laws

in court or choose not to. the change enacted as part of arizona's newly signed budget, a spending blueprint governor ducey signed into law wednesday, declares that the attorney general, currently in position republicaned by a republican mark brnovich, has sole authority over the election-related litigation. we talked about it before, but with the supreme court up holding arizona's voter restriction, it seems that the voter suppression laws and to change the arbiters of the vote count are steamrolling through unchecked through 48 states. i wonder if you think that democrats in washington are taking that threat to our democracy seriously enough? >> well, i think what -- what these -- we're seeing with the power grabs across the country and this supreme court decision just continues to underline the urgency with which the federal government must act to enact protections for voters across the country, to continue to protect their access to the

ballot because they are being chipped away by all of these moves, and now by the supreme court decision yesterday. >> there's been a lot of reporting. we've asked you about your security and safety, and we always want to hear if there's any update. but there's news it is taking a real toll and that the untry's- -- one of our blessings is people willing to volunteer to help to work in our elections, that they're quitting after being targets of threats and targets of threatened violence. what is sort of the degree of the crisis in this country? it feels like a ten on a scale of one to ten to me. >> that, unfortunately, is one of the consequences of the things that we've seen piling up over the last several months since the election, is the toll on election workers and the -- and them leaving the field. not only the seasoned election administrators who work full-time in these offices but we're concerned about the next time it comes to recruiting poll

workers and the folks who work in the tabulation centers for the next election that we're going to have trouble finding those folks because it is not just the election administrators that are being targeted but all the way down to poll workers which are seasonal workers who step up to help make sure that our democracy can work. >> madam secretary, what do you sort of understand that maybe people who don't spend time down the right wing media echo chambers know about how the count in maricopa is being used by the ex-president to sort of further his delusions about election fraud? >> well, i can't emphasize enough, and i think i have done it every time i have come on here, nicolle, this is not a real audit. i know that you know that. so what we're seeing is they are doing things that -- that are based on these conspiracy theories. there's bamboo fibers or water marks or different folds that don't make sense or whatever.

i mean none of this is real or based on how elections actually work. the former president is continuing to ramp up the rhetoric. these folks are starting to believe he's going to be back in the white house in the fall, and it is, frankly, dangerous. i mean we saw what happened when this kind of rhetoric was going on after the election before january 6th, and we are these same folks going to do when he's not back in the white house as they're all being told to believe will happen right now? >> arizona secretary of state katie hobbs on the front lines. thank you for spending some time with us today. have a wonderful weekend. when we return, a sister and brother on a very unusual quest to pay tribute to their dad and the life very well lived indeed. that story is next.

life... doesn't stop for diabetes. be ready for every moment, with glucerna. it's the number one doctor recommended brand that is scientifically designed to help manage your blood sugar. live every moment. glucerna. just to talk. clearly he had his priorities in order. family over everything else. that's not to say he didn't have an impressive career. neil spent 20 years in neuro

science before he found a consulting company. above all that, he was as husband and a father. known for his warmth and wisdom. it was not enough to set the table for the holidays. everyone needed their own unique hand crafted place setting. new year's cards were never store bought. it was a custom-love. in that way he lives on. we are so sorry to report, he died from complication of covid-19, his family made a mission to honor his memory. joining us now is his daughter and son. hillary and jonathan. you first, hillary, tell me about your dad. >> our dad was an unconventional

person. he didn't chase after things. he focused on what was meaningful for him which was his family and friends. he was always looking for opportunities to make a connection with somebody. i remember growing up he didn't wear a watch because he said that it was a great chance to talk to a new person when you ask them what time it was. he just lived life in his own terms and pass that wisdom onto us. >> jonathan, what do you find yourself thinking of most in the strangest moments? >> my dad was somebody that believed in celebrating the moment. something really great happens for you then it was something the same happening to him. you got to take advantage of this and you got to make sure you celebrate it. he was somebody enjoyed the

sunset or sitting and talking with his friends. for me personally some of he is have, go-go and having that reminder of the importance of the slow part. >> i want to get what you both are doing adding a word. i want to read something that you wrote, hillary, it just struck me. in your piece back in may last year, you wrote about thinking about how your dad asked once, you are a journalist, is there more you can do. he urged me and my news organization to produce more stories exposing what the governor was or was not doing. the lives he was playing with. there was some blame that he said referring to the action of the authorities but it is not yours.

what you wrote was the most beautiful thing on complicated nature of grieving a loss of a loved one to covid. since you wrote that, do you have any thoughts you want to share. i think it was hard as a journalist, she was involved covering the story of covid before this happens and seeing this terrible thing coming and really being a person in this story, experiencing that was really hard and feeling like on some level i let my dad down. but, after he passed away i just felt one of the things was that was very hard to find a purpose and get up for. because i was involved in the news and the story, i could do something to help more people know about him obviously and our family's experience and other people's experiences and the

bigger questions and issues and having the ability to connect to people around that and to be engaged professionally as much as it was hard. it was really important in the process of moving forward with the grief. >> jonathan, there are so much that you obviously have all shared about the experience and about your dad. there are something else that you are both trying to add to our ability to remember him. that's a word. explain, jonathan. >> the word is arbisculate. our glad came up the word. in our house we always thought it is a word. it is not a word for everybody else but it was a word for us.

that word is a tiny part of who our dad was but captures his creativity and playfulness so we set out a mission in his honor to get the word, orbisculate in the dictionary. >> it is a perfect word. i am going to track you guys when i find it in the puzzle. it is going to happen. i know. i have to say as someone who tried to pay tribute of people who lost loved ones everyday, what you are doing really matters. i know this loss and grief is impossible and private and harder in public. i appreciate both of you coming on and taking some time to share your dad's sorry, we are so sorry for your loss. >> thank you, we'll be back after a short break. we'll be ba after a short break. ut out the . but with nurtec odt that's all behind me now.

nurtec is the first and only option proven to treat and prevent migraines with one medication. onederful. one quick dissolve tablet can start fast and last. don't take if allergic to nurtec. the most common side effects were nausea, stomach pain, and indigestion. with nurtec, i take on migraines my way. what's your way? ask your doctor about nurtec today. ♪ welcome to allstate, ♪ ♪are you down, d-d-down, d-d-down, d-d-down♪ where we're driving down the cost of insurance. ♪ ♪ are you down, down♪ ♪d-down, down? are you♪ drivers who switched saved over $700. ♪ allstate. here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands. click or call for a lower rate today. wayfair has everything you need to make your home you're in good hands. ready to seize the day.

make it look like, it's from another planet. make your new sink work a little harder. make your home everything you need it to be. and make it yours. oscar will love that. [ bark ] however you make it, make your home like no other. ♪ ♪ 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. ♪

thank you so much for letting us into your home. "the beat" with ari melber starts with us now. >> hi, nicole. we begin with donald trump's kids speaking out. it was 15 counts of the charges we have been running through our coverage starting yesterday afternoon. growing pressure and heat on allen weisselberg, the money man to talk and flip. now, there are many ways to count this up, there are