political showdowns. formally declining donald trump's request to exert executive privilege in order to withhold a massive batch of key documents from the january 6 select committee. in a letter to the national archives obtained by nbc news, white house counsel dana reamis writes, president biden has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not in the best interests of the u.s. white house press secretary jen psaki stressing that point in a press briefing just over an hour ago. >> it was in many respects a unique attack on the foundations of our democracy. the president is dedicating to ensuring something like that could never happen again, which is why the administration is cooperating with ongoing investigations, including the january 6th select committee to bring to light what happened. as a part this process the president has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not warranted for the first set of documents from the trump white house that have been

provided to us by the national archives. as we've said previously, this will be an ongoing process, and this is just the first set of documents. and we will evaluate questions of privilege on a case-by-case basis, but the president also believes it is clear it is of utmost importance for the american people and congress to have the an understanding of the events of that day. >> to be crystal clear of what jen psaki said there, this applies only to the first batch of documents requested at the early stage of the investigation. documents that do cover trump's action asks communications and movements on january th, including his rally at the ellipse on white house grounds and white house meetings and communications throughout the day. the white house has not yet announced its position for example, on the four trump adviser who is were due to turn over subpoenaed documents

yesterday and who have been subpoenaed to testify on capitol hill next week. also breaking this afternoon was an update from the select committee on the status of some of those witnesses, the committee suggesting former white house chief of staff mark meadows and d.o.d. official cash patel are quote engaging with the committee. they stopped short of saying they are cooperating. steve bannon indicated he will try to hide behind vague references to privilege of the former president. the committee expects all of these witnesses comply with our demands for both documents and deposition testimony. the committee continues in a letter to say this, though the select committee welcomes good faith engagement with witnesses seeking to cooperate with our investigation we will not allow any witnesses to defy a louisville subpoena or attempt to run out the clock. we will swiftly consider advancing a criminal contempt of congress referral. the breaking news on the house select committee investigation into donald trump's role in the january 6th insurrection is

where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. betsy woodruff swan is here of politico. also joining us, tim miller, former rnc spokesman, now a writer at large for the bull work. and jeremy bash is here live on set. all of them msnbc contributors. jeremy, i want to start with you. this whole executive privilege exertion was so -- it was just one of the other sort of norms defiled by donald trump during his presidency. explain why it doesn't pertain and why the biden white house is doing what they are doing. it has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with what executive privilege is supposed to protect. >> exactly. it is great to be back here in person. >> it has been like home alone by myself. >> this decision today by the biden white house, by white house counsel dana reamis to say, no, we are not going to defend donald trump's bad action is clearly the right decision.

yes, it's important to defend executive privilege, particularly when it contains to policy dligs, sensitive activities that a president is going to engage in with his advisers in the oval office. but what we are talking about here is an unprecedented extraordinary assault on our democracy, our electoral system, on the right of the people to choose the next president. that's what donald trump was engaging in on january 6th. i think the biden team is exact low right. they are loolly right and also just morally right, that no country should defend and shield from public scrutiny an effort to engage in a coup. >> what do you make of the other update that we had this hour, that a few of the subpoenaed witnesses are engaging? they haven't gone all the way to cooperation, but they have engaged or made contact with the committee. >> looks like mark meadows and cash patel are talking to the committee. i think that's right. it's an important investigation. after all, i think our number

one objective here -- not the pig your out so much what happened, i think we largely know what happened. but to prevent it from happening again f. donald trump runs again, if he has his hands on the power levers in our country, we are going to have to figure out what constitutional powers exist to prevent usurpation of the american people's will. >> yeah. and that, to me, seems to be driving the white house decision making. we should say, betsy, that they have been restrained. i'm sure no white house wants to be in this position, having to make decisions about executive privilege of a predecessor who incites a coup. they seem to be showing restraint, but a clear signal from jen psaki there that when it comes to on a attack on the country, on our democracy, we are to the going the hide anything from the investors. >> the biden white house is in a

position that would be uncomfortable for any white house because every current president knows that he or she will ultimately be a former president. and so current presidents are loathe to take steps that could weaken executive privilege protections that they some day down the track may want to use. that's part of the reason, i believe, that the white house counsel's office and the president himself have been moving only as quickly as they have to. they really aren't getting ahead of their skis whatsoever, when it comes to executive privilege in the case of these materials. that said, even moving at the slow and deliberative pace that the white house is moving, it's still you have this to make trump absolutely irate. i obtained a letter that trump himself sent to the head of the national archives today. in this letter, trump lists almost two dozen documents within this first tranche of documents we are talking about that he claims should stay secret because of executive

privilege. we don't know what's in those documents. they are only identified in the letter by certain numbers. but we do know that's a lot of pieces of paper that the president specifically has looked at and specifically said, no, i don't want the select committee getting these materials n. that letter, trump said that he also is going to try to make what's called a protective assertion of privilege. he's telling the national archives not to give anything else to the january 6 select committee. in a way that kinds of speeds up this legal conflict because now the national archives and the biden white house have to decide whether they are going to take seriously that further step that trump has taken to push this conflict forward. and it creates just a tense, fascinating, real high-stakes legal standoff that we have never seen before this the history of the modern presidency. >> yeah, i mean, look, it's such a good point. it's a good jumping off point for the specifics. i want to get into them. you know, trump has made people

google all sorts of news we never thought we would need in cable news coverage. insurrection. all sorts of conduct that he ushered in because that's how he rolled. but i want to go through what the white house has freed up for the committee with you, tim. twitter messages, phone and visitor logs, videos and photos of trump's events. i will never ever forget gloria and the dancing to that. documents. communications related to pence's movement and security. i want to come back to that one. planning around congress's vote count. thousand we have got a lot of reporting about what that planning looked like, the eastman memo and whatnot. and any other documents referring to the rally at the ellipse. i want to come back with you, tim, to this documents communicated related of pence's movements and security. the new lentic rucker book has reporting that suggests pns once

evacuated went down to the basement refused to get in the limo. not because he didn't trust his own agents, but he wasn't sure what they would do with him. that they might take him away and he might not be able to do what he had to do which was certify the count. i wonder your thoughts about what this specific list of evidence will show. i mean, if it does end up in the hands of the committee. i think the pence movement bullet there, i think you zeroed in on the most important point. because i think the most important question that the committee has to answer, that you have had with adam bull wark and adam kinzinger and others working on the republican side, what was president trump doing over the course of those many hours? some of it might be revealed from the twitter dm messages in that list. i think also some of it is very

much related to documents about the vice president's movements. like, one would think that the president would be engaged when wanting to make sure their vice president was protected when there was a mob shouting for the vice president to be hung. you know, in normal times, that seems like bear minimum thing that you would want a president to be doing. so i think it will be interesting to see what kind of overlap there is on the pence movements with his interactions -- with his interactions with the white house. and i think that in addition to that, that was the one thing that was kind of missing from that list. and as we go forward i think that's where some of the bigger fights are going to be, over the president's movements, the president's actions, since that speaks more directly the privilege. i think the list that you just provided seems to be more of the low-hanging fruit. betsy's comments lead me to wonder, who are the lawyers gearing up for this big fight for donald trump?

he is already scraping the bottom of the barrel? who is aiding and abetting this effort to kind of hide and protect these documents? i think that is going to be kind of another problem that he faces as the stakes get higher in this fight. >> betsy, i will let you respond to that, if you know. >> it is certainly a good question who would be handling that. i can tell you on this letter to the national archives which was clearly written by a lawyer because it cites supreme court cases and uses legal terminology it is signed by the president himself -- i should say the former president 678 it's the kinds of lawyer that normally a lawyer would want to put his or her name on. normally former presidents aren't righting letters to national archivists. but in this case, it is that famous pointy donald trump signature at the end of it. remains to be seen first if the president follows through on the threats he has made -- former president again, follows through on the threats he has made and decides to go to court to try to block the national archives from

sharing she is materials with capitol hill. of course, if he does go to court, if trump would be able to fine serious talented lawyers who would want to work for him. it has been very difficult in the past for him to find good lawyers n. part because he is notorious for not paying his lawyers. most lawyers don't like to work for free for people who purport to be billionaires. all sorts of threads to pull here. something we will be tracking at a minute level of detail. >> betsy has great reporting on the big and the minute. let's step back and take into account when we are learning today. i think there was an attempt to make this idea of a coup plot sound like, well, it's an argument not a fact. i think adam kinzinger put that to a rest in describing the eastman memo as incite men for a coup. it was a failed coup attempt but it was on attempt to overturn the will of the voters in our

democracy, straight up. you have to wonder at one level if donald trump had tried that hard to end covid where we might be right now. we never saw anything that concerted on any other effort that he encountered as president. but you take this sort of chipping away at what has been five years of a cover-up for him. i mean, mueller never got to interview him. it sounds like the answers he gave mueller were lies. he was impeached twice. never convicted. could this represent a first successful evident to hold him accountable? >> it's possible, nicole. of course where is this all going? of course, the january 6th committee sends their request every to the archives. the archives turns to the white house and say what say you, mr. president? you are of course the current holder of the privilege and it is important for you to help us decide whether or not former president right side entitled to it. then, obviously we see this letter today from dana reamis the white house counsel who says

it is a situation that is so unique, when a president is trying to steal the election from the american people. the report clearly showed yesterday he was browbeating d.o.j. officials trying to get them to interfere in the vote count n the certification of the votes. he was whipping up his supporters to storm the cap toll in an armed attack to go after his sitting vice president, to disrupt the procedures of our government. that's not the procedures of a president. i think and the white house is within their core right to deny this assertion of executive privilege. >> do you think there is a scenario where trump sflly keeps these documents -- >> we all know the supreme court is unpredictable.

i think the supreme court will probably defer mostly to assertions of privilege. who will they listen to? the current president or the former president? this court is tilted politically in the direction that might support donald trump. but it is impossible to know how it will go down in the courts. i would like to think he would be held accountable nicole but we have seen too many times the way he slithered out of it. >> tim i want to read to you the response from the national archives, what they did. according to nbc news, the national archives immediately began scouring records in its possession for items responsive to the committee's request issued in august. it has been producing relevance dechlts to trump's legal representatives and the biden white house since then. the initial pact of documents were introduced to both parties on september 8:. i want to read a list of what this request included.

communications between trump and hope hicks, ask ao, maloney, short, bannon, flynn, rudy giuliani, roger stone, any member of congress or congressional staff, the department of defense, theent did of justice, the department of homeland security, the department of interior, or any element of the national guard. what do you -- what do you think it sounds like they are looking for that that vast list? >> just to list the content is to condemn him, you would think. >> correct. >> mike flynn had already been guilty of essentially acting as a foreign agent while as the national security director. and then he ran around and was the point man for the most insane conspiracies about the election where he was pretty forthright, frankly, about the fact that he was supporting a coup that would keep donald trump in power when a lot of people kinds of dance around their coup support. look, i mean i think that,

presumably n these sorts of conversations, the former president was grasping around for somebody that was going to tell him what they wanted to hear. i think what the committees wanted to see is not just, you know, what a certain aide may or may not have told him as far as preparing that famous video that he did many hours late where he congrats lated the great patriots that were storming the capitol. >> told them he loved them, we love you. >> yeah. told them he loved them. >> yeah. >> what other conversations might have been more extreme or other plans that might not have come to fruition might have happened. i think that's why those conversations are relevant. i think if you look at some of the names on the list, in today's news, it is steve bannon who is asserting privilege. jeremy is the legal sport here but i think i could say clearly as an amateur that the co-host of a racist podcast is not going to have executive privilege and bannon is not going to be in

good stature on that front. >> i think tim is exactly right. the weakest of all these claims i think is steve bannons. he wasn't working at the white house. he was no more a presidential adviser than anybody else, the kibbitsers on the outside. the mar-a-lago crowd. >> for all the whacka doodle that is were the oval, it was more the flynn and sidney powell strain. i have been thinking, since yesterday's judiciary committee report came out about all the complicity among republicans. i want to play what republican leaders had to say about the lie about election fraud the first 48 hours after it came out of donald trump's mouth. >> president trump twhon election. so everyone who is listening, do not be quiet. do not be silent about this. we cannot allow this to happen before our very eyes.

>> president trump is 100% within his rights to look into allegations of irregularities and weigh his legal options. >> the president wasn't defeated by huge numbers. in fact, he may not have been defeated at all. [ indiscernible ] >> he's not president right now. don't know if he will be president january 20th. but whoever is will get the information. >> which as you know, there has been a long pattern. mail-in voting is much more susceptible to fraud, much more success spentible to irresponsible partisan operatives trying to steal votes. >> the urge to fact check comes on like hive force me, but i will restrain myself. all of these men, some of these men were elected in the same election they were impugning in all of these statements. all these men have blood on their hands. all these men have something to say to whoever their god is

about the four cops who died by suicide. all of these men are part this whole conversation. but the tragedy is not many of these men say thing markedly different now. >> what struck me, nicole, is that after an election when one party loses the white house, doesn't take the senate, doesn't take the house -- usually in our experience, nicole, we have been around presidential elections before, going back a couple decades, you have a little bit of self review, what happens, usually the party tears itself up a bit and you have reports and analyses and experts come forward. it hasn't happened at all. >> because -- >> they have pretended. not only have they suggested that donald trump did win, but they are acting as if he did, acting as if he is still in charge of the gop. acting as if -- nothing at all happened in the election that should give them any concern. you are telegraphing something clear, they are okay with him running again in 2024. if they weren't they would be

laying the groundwork right now to fully repudiate trumpism. instead they are playing ftse with it, trying to woo their voters, trying to have it both ways. donald trump is going to run again. and if they continue to act this way he could be their nominee. >> which would be a tragedy. betsy thank you for starting us off. tim and jeremy are sticking around. when we come back, so much losing, an investigation on trump uncovering millions of losses in his hotel. plus, a rare instance of commonity from democrats and a couple in the republican party, their target, mitch mcconnell and the gop that would rather turn on each other than get serious about avoiding economic catastrophe. again, more disinformation.

all those stories and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. break. don't go anywhere. people with moderate to severe psoriasis, or psoriatic arthritis, are rethinking the choices they make like the splash they create the way they exaggerate the surprises they initiate. otezla. it's a choice you can make. otezla is not an injection or a cream it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines

and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. ♪darling, i, i can't get enough of your love babe♪ ♪girl, i don't know, i don't know,♪ ♪i don't know why i can't get enough of your love babe♪ ♪oh no, babe girl, if i could only make you see♪ ♪and make you understand♪ get a dozen double crunch shrimp for $1 with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

an investigation by house democrats has pulled the curtain back on one of the disgraced expresident's most opaque and controversial businesses, the trump international hotel in washington, d.c. a property that is lease by trump's company from the fed real government. the house oversight committee accuses the expresident of filing misleading financial disclosures that, quote, grossly exaggerated the state of the hotel's finances and hid millions in foreign payments.

"washington post" writes donald trump's luxury washington hotel lost $70 million while he was in office despite reaping millions in payments from foreign governments according to the daumts released by the committee. the documents allege that trump received $3.7 million from foreign governments and received preferential treatment from deutsche bank which allowed him to defer payments for six years on the $170 million loan on the property. joining our conversation, david barren that will reporter for the "washington post," also an msnbc political analyst. jeremy is still here. david, i feel like this interweaving of his businesses and the state, the government, was a beat you were on. you uncovered everything that became known for the most part during his presidency. this is a bombshell, though. and it pulls in all the shady

actors from deutsche bank to the hotel to foreign money. explain what we are learning. >> well, you are right, this throw as light on something we have wondered about for a long time. trump nixed his business in his presidency nowhere more so than in the trump. did it work out in profit? no. did it work out for him in influence he could wield on other people? deutsche bank say we think trump got basically forbearance on his loan from deutsche bank where he didn't have to pay the principal on his loan until years later. they don't have the proof on that. but i don't think that part of it is as well proven as the house would like it to be. >> i want to read the letter from maloney and connolly in terms whereof the investigation might go. the committee found that trump providing misleading information about the fonl situation of the

trump hotel in his annual financial disclosures, received undisclosed preferential treatment from a foreign bank on the $171 million hotel that the president permanently guaranteed. accepts millions of dollars in emolument from foreign governments without accounting the money's source or purse. concealed hundreds of millions of dollars in sent from gsa when bidding on the old post office building lease and made it impossible for gsa to enforce the conflict of interest restrictions. as discussed, this letter raises many questions that need investigation i am not a lawyer, but at least four or five criminal acts. no? >> remember the gsa who owns the lease this total.

they did everything they could to look the other way. there were clauses that said someone in public office can't own an interest in this hotel. when trump was elected, they figured out a way around that. one of the allegations -- i am not sure it is a criminal level but raises questions for the future, was the gsa purposely looking the other way on enforcing that. the trumps said we are taking trump out of the management of this hotel. he's not going to get a dollar of this hotel while he is president. so it is okay for him to continue owning the hotel. what the house said here is money flows out of this hotel to all kinds of different trump entities, management entities, sales entities, and any of those could have sent the money back to trump. this fire wall you set up to keep money from hotel out of trump's hands seems to have been useless. >> the foreign money seems to also line up with questions that have pervaded his presidency about his debt, being overleveraged. what are the questions, what

where might they lead? >> this is a question about what trump was as president and what he would be like if he was president again. one of the arguments people made was, look, if his hotels lose money he can have a conflict of interest. how can he have a conflict of interest if his hotels are losing money. actual lesion it could be so much worse because a president in financial dire straights as we are learning trump was at this hotel for a long period of time, that president might be more open to financial influence. it is even more important to know which foreign governments were doing business at the hotels and how much did trump need that business? what did he do to get it. >> there anti-a financial scandal story that doesn't involve deutsche bank. let me read you about gsa looking for an investigation. documents raise new questions about trump's $175 million construction loan from deutsche bank's u.s. subsidiary for the

hotel including how and why loan terms changed during his presidency. under the terms of the loan and prior to trump becoming president the trump hotels was scheduled to begin principal payments on the deutsche bank loan in 2018. however in 2018, one year into the trump presidency the terms of the loan were changed to allow trump to avoid any principal payments on the loan for six years. >> he got a sweetheart loan from deutsche bank. as other investigations have shown, deutsche bank was the banker for the kremlin, the banker for vladimir putin. there are many questions here, nicole, as to why did deutsche bank extend this sweetheart loan to donald trump despite his terrible financial record? there are at least two other red flags i see in david's reporting. first the mere fact that foreign dofts could shovel millions of dollars to the trump organization just by renting hotel rooms and catering services basically shows that the trump administration had a for sale sign around its neck

during the four years he was in the oval office. second, most important, this hotel was losing millions of dollars. any time a financial fraud investigator sees a business that's losing money, they think two words. money laundering. think about the pizza shop on the corner where it's not really a going concern, they don't care if they lose money. but it is a way to get cash in and cash out. that's money laundering. i would be wondering if i was investigating this whether or not the losses in the hotel were designed to conceal other financial transactions by the trump organization. they didn't care if they made money at that hotel, they just wanted that mean cleaned up. >> that's interesting. we have also learned since trump left office that the mueller probe -- andrew weismann writes mueller never looked at his finances. the "new york times" has investigated his financing. david has been on the beat for years now. we really don't know. i mean it is still an very opaque picture. i wonder if you think this investigation might open all

that up? >> again, maybe. back to that point because, again, here you have a democratically controlled congressional committee gaining access to information. fantastic reporting by people like david and the "washington post." but the reality nicole is that there are legal assertions upon legal assertions the president will make. he will try to fight this new york criminal case that is going after his organization in new york. who knows whether or not his finances will ever be opened up. i think, actually, another issue that will come up is the extent to which the current administration, the current white house will say to congress we will show you his tax returns, his financial records, his financial disclosure information because, then, they are in the possession of the u.s. government. the people who control the government right now are the biden team. >> david, we have been talking about emoluments. something that benefits from a very understandable name. that comes up in this letter as well. do you have new lines of questioning about what you are

learning on that front? >> we do. emoluments, that clause, old word, it was intended to stop people like presidents from taking payments with foreign governments. trump said i can do business with foreign governments. they are renting a room. that's a business transaction. democrats sued, challenged and because it was a new area of law the court system choked on it and didn't get any answers until after four years, when the cases became moot. we noent know what foreign governments paid who to who, did they overpay or underpay and even the number in this report is just an estimate. it doesn't tell us who the customers were, what they paid for? that's one of the most important unanswered questions about trump's finances leftover from his presidency. >> a whole lot of rooms. david, thank you for joining us. jeremy the sticking around. the u.s. will soon be bafling through an economic cliff. what kind of deal can congress

hobble together next time with mitch mcconnell facing republican criticism making another deal look even more difficult. that's next. ♪ 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 with allstate. ♪ at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner.

(vo) i am living with cll and i am living longer. thanks to imbruvica. imbruvica is a prescription medicine for adults with cll or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. it will not work for everyone. imbruvica is the #1 prescribed oral therapy for cll, and it's proven to help people live longer. imbruvica is not chemotherapy. imbruvica can cause serious side effects, which may lead to death. bleeding problems are common and may increase with blood thinners. serious infections with symptoms like fevers, chills, weakness or confusion and severe decrease in blood counts can happen. heart rhythm problems and heart failure may occur especially in people with increased risk of heart disease, infection, or past heart rhythm problems. new or worsening high blood pressure, new cancers, and tumor lysis that can result in kidney failure, irregular heartbeat, and seizure can occur. diarrhea commonly occurs. drink plenty of fluids. tell your doctor if you have signs of bleeding, infection, heart problems, persistent diarrhea or any other side effects. i am living with cll and living proof that imbruvica

is right for me. ask your doctor if it's right for you.

republicans played a dangerous and risky partisan game, and i am glad that their brinksmanship did not work. senate republicans insisted they wanted a solution to the debt ceiling, but said democrats must raise it alone buy going through a drawn-out, convoluted and

risky reconciliation process. that was simply unacceptable to my caucus. and yesterday, senate republicans finally realized that their obstruction was not going to work. >> senate majority leader chuck schumer last night after the senate passed a measure lifting the debt ceiling. 11 republicans voted to allow the vote on raising the debt limit to happen. not a single republican actually voted to lift the debt ceiling. the deal struck by the two parties means the country avoids catastrophic debt fault. only for a little bit, until december when the measure expires, which means we could be back to the brink of economic crisis in just a few weeks. in yet another sign that the gop has ceased to be a governor party interested in doing anything, the country, mcconnell is facing attacks from the disgraced expresident and his buddies for letting democrats

raise the debt ceiling. understand why republican senators blinked but i wish they hadn't. i wish they hadn't because i believe we were on the verge of victory. >> we made a promise for two months that we would make them do it without our help. and we folded. i hate that we are in a hole. we have got to dig out this hole and we can't. we shot ourselves in the foot tonight. but we will revisit this issue in december. >> he gave them a lifeline. it's more than a lifeline. he gave them so much time now to figure out what to do. because they were in a real big bind. they wouldn't have been able to do anything. he had the weapon, and he was unable to use it. >> disgusting. back with tim and jeremy. i just -- we blinked. we folded. we are in a hole. we shot ourselves. given them a lifeline. trump is the biggest loser in republican political history. he cost republicans a majority in the senate, he lost by one of the margest margins of the popular vote ever, and he's

dragging the party down in the suburbs. and they come on the air as people who get paid by the taxpayers and attack mitch mcconnell for not shutting down the country's economy? who are they talking to, tim miller. >> they are talking to their super fans, the very on line, very fox news adult base that has been taught to look at politics like just this one big game. like we should really be surprised, nicole, that the republicans ended up nominating a game show host for president? we have been doing this for a dc aid now, maybe longer. treating politics like a game, treating something as serious as defaulting on our debt, as throwing potentially the global economy into crisis, as part of some stupid game of chicken in the senate. you know, and it has been going on since 2011 now, 2010. this is now just part of the entire republican ethos. like the notion that they are there to do a job, that they are

there to govern, to look out for the people is totally absent. and the only notion is what can we do to beat the democrats to own the libs today. i tell you this, mcconnell doing the responsible thing, i think that was a piece of gamesmanship. he is just smarter than ted cruz and lindsey graham. he didn't want republicans to take the blame on this. i think he thought he might losis had position on the the filibuster and manchin and sinema might vote for the filibuster if it came to default. i think he made a strategic move that saved us at least for a couple months now. >> yeah, at first blush you could come down on the side that it takes ted cruz and lindsey

game to make mitch mcconnell look good. i agree with tim's analysis here. he's playing for december. he's playing for the next round. none of it pour tends well, though, for the country. democrats with a razor thin majority in the senate and in the house. how does one party run the country? >> nicole, i think one of the reasons where the republican leadership decided to have this vote and raise the debt limit at this point is because there are real significant national security consequences to default. >> yeah. >> i think they did not want to pay the political price of having owned a national security catastrophe. you saw seven former seths of defense, including dick cheney. >> right. >> including people like leon panetta, of the mais, hagel, bill cohen, ash carter, all line up in a letter to the congress two days ago. and they said, if you don't raise the debt limit we will not potentially -- potentially, be

able to pay our troops. we will not potentially be able to pay for military readiness. and our standing in the world will be eviscerated, sending a very clear and disturbing message to both our friends and our adversaries. and when the republican looked at that and said we are going to own that, we have to move now. now, they have kicked the can down the road. i think these same issues are going to be present in december as they were here. the question that will be before mitch mcconnell and the republicans is will you put the country into harm's way, peril, purposely to score political points or will you do the right thing? i don't know what answer to that question is? we do know, tim, what the answer is for ted cruz and listen satisfy graham, i mean they have answered that question for us. they don't give a -- pick your expletive about the troops. that they don't give a -- about the seven former secretaries of defense including dick cheney. that they don't care. we know the answer to that

question. they don't care. >> yeah. they squeaked it by this time with only 11 republican supports. it is not like mitch got even half of his caucus on. we know that ted cruz is going to be a nilist and doesn't care when it comes to december. i think what the democrats have to look at is they have been given this extra period of time. i think they need to see this as an opportunity to get their ducks in a row on this reconciliation bill, come to a deal within their own caucus and either either eliminate this debt ceiling so we don't have to go through this idiotic brinksmanship every time the republicans get close to power for the foreseeable future or raise it si cantlie enough to get us through 2024. that's the democrats opportunity if they can get the reconciliation thing figured out by december 3rd. >> tim miller thank you for your insights. jeremy is sticking around. legal uncertainties leaving

texas abortion providers unclear about what their next steps are after the ban there was halted just as other states are starting to put the pressure on republican governors to follow texas's lead to greatly restrict women's reproductive freedoms. that story is next. story is net

♪ ♪ ♪ hey google. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ is struggling to manage your type 2 diabetes knocking you out of your zone? lowering your a1c with once-weekly ozempic® can help you get back in it. oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! my zone... lowering my a1c, cv risk, and losing some weight... now, back to the game! ozempic® is proven to lower a1c. most people who took ozempic® reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. and you may lose weight. adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. in adults also with known heart disease, ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. ozempic® helped me get back in my type 2 diabetes zone. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes.

don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. we have had to turn hundreds of people away over the last five weeks. people who are seeking abortion care because it's the best

decision for their health, for their families, for their work life, for their education, for their dreams and their future. it is heart breaking to look people in the eyes and deny them the health care that they need. we got an injunction. and it was a very strong injunc judge pitman and some of our staff and some of our doctors feel confident to proceed with care during this injunction. others have opted out and we respect that. this is a scary time. >> this is a scary time. that was amy of whole women's health, one of texas's largest abortion providers, on msnbc earlier today talking about the mixed picture of relief that she and other texans are feeling after a judge temporarily halted that state's near total ban on abortion. well, the ban cannot currently be enforced, it's still having an impact, as you heard there, on the lives of texans, especially women seeking healthcare. many providers have yet to reopen due to uncertainties about whether or not they can

still be sued retroactively if the ban is put back in place. but while the next legal steps are being worked out in texas, republicans in other states are actively looking at their options to implement a similar law. places like florida where anti-abortion activists are putting pressure on governor ron desantis to take a stand. in considering whether to become a safe haven for developing children who are inside their mother's womb as the manatee county florida commissioner worded, manatee is joining the effort to make florida the next state to implement an abortion ban. it also follows the playbook of one of the architects in texas, starting in small towns. joining us, fatima goss graves. i wanted to talk to you since the pitman ruling came down and just first your reaction to

where we are right now in texas. >> well, we had 36 days where both the right and access to abortion was simply not available in the state of texas. and so we have a bit of a mixed bag. we have some providers who are starting to provide care again. that's not going to be, you know, formally the case. we have a backlog of people who were not able to leave the state, who are desperate to get care. and we have real uncertainty as providers and patients and frankly anyone who cares for anyone who needs abortion care, they have been intimidated and harassed and there's a lot of fear in the state. >> let me play some of what that sounds like. this is sort of a mix of providers and patients talking about exactly what you're describing. >> about half of the people we're hearing from are past six weeks and are therefore needing to travel somewhere else. of course, we're being flooded with calls from women coming out of texas.

we're literally pushing them out several weeks. >> they're literally begging to get in and be seen as quickly as possible. >> our park hill health center in denver has seen a 520% increase in texas patients comparing august to september. >> 520%. >> there's something fundamentally wrong with forcing people to leave their home communities to get healthcare. >> and let me just add this. amy hagstrom miller added the staff are being surveilled constantly from the protesters on our sidewalks to fake patients. our opposition has been sending into our clinic. harassment, denial of healthcare, as cecile richards said, roe vs. wade has been overturned in texas. >> you know, there's a long history in reproductive rights and health of dealing with

vigilantes who have resorted to violence. so, it's not a new idea that clinic workers and patients feel unsafe. they now have this additional incentive, this additional bounty and there's a strange quirk in the texas law which tries to get around the idea of an injunction, which basically says that if at any point a court finds the law to stand, that you could still go after providers, so they are providing this care at a lot of risk. >> yeah, i want to ask you about that, jeremy. i mean, this is "the washington post" reporting on what fatima is describing. the law states they can be retroactively sued. pitman said that provision was of questionable legality, yet many providers remain worried. and i've talked to neal katyal about this for weeks. it sound like almost this legal gimmick was in there and confounded the supreme court, who let it go into effect.

and it's now confounding healthcare providers. >> yeah. and i'm hardly the expert here, nicole, but i would say this. the effort by the texas legislature here was to chill and deter people from providing healthcare to women. period. full stop. there are all kinds of provisions until the law, like this retroactive effort, you know, even if the law is invalidated somehow, there could be retribution against providers. this was done for one purpose and one purpose only. to say if you provide healthcare to women and let women make decisions about their own bodies, you will pay and you will pay notwithstanding what any court says and that shows you the full intent of this law was as nefarious as it sounds. >> the most depressing thing is it's being emulated in other states. >> that's right. there are copy cat laws that are coming in florida but also in some communities that are considering them outside of florida, and we can expect when most state sessions reopen at the beginning of the next year

that they will follow suit, and part of that is that they feel like texas was a success, that they effectively banned abortion in the state for over a month and the supreme court allowed it to go into effect. that is going to encourage lawlessness. >> unbelievable state of affairs in an unbelievable reality for women in texas. fatima goss graves, thank you so much. the next hour of "deadline white house" starts after a quick break. don't go anywhere. we're just getting started. eak. don't go anywhere. we're just getting started ♪ thet can get grating ♪ ♪ they're dressed for pastry baking ♪ ♪ the progressive family ♪ ♪ they're helpful but annoying ♪ ♪ they always leave us snoring ♪ ♪ accidents are boring with the progressive family ♪ so, when do you all go home? never. we're here for you 24/7. morticia: how terrifying. protection so good, it's scary. "the addams family 2" now playing everywhere. first psoriasis, then psoriatic arthritis.

it was really holding me back. standing up... ...even walking was tough. my joints hurt. i was afraid things were going to get worse. i was always hiding, and that's just not me. not being there for my family, that hurt. woooo! i had to do something. i started cosentyx®. i'm feeling good. watch me. cosentyx helps people with psoriatic arthritis move, look, and feel better. it targets more than just joint pain and treats the multiple symptoms like joint swelling and tenderness, back pain, helps clear skin and helps stop further joint damage. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections—some serious —and the lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. it's good to be moving on. watch me. move, look, and feel better. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.

i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! ( sighs wearily ) here, i'll take that! ( excited yell ) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one-gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health! ( abbot sonic ) when a truck hit my car,o support immune health! the insurance company wasn't fair. i didid't t kn whahatmy c caswa, so i called the barnes firm. i'm rich barnes. it's hard for people to k how much their accident case is worth.h barnes. t ouour juryry aorneneys hehelpou

i was hit by a car get t tand needed help.oiblele. t ouour juryry aorneneys hehi called the barnes firm. that was the best call i could've made. i'm rich barnes. it's hard for people to know how much their accident case is let our injury attorneys know he how much their accident cget the best result possible. the election of november 3,

2020, in maricopa county was free, fair, and accurate. maricopa county's the second largest voting district in the united states of america. i sit before you take as a republican who was voted into office in november of 2020. >> hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. did you catch that? the man you just heard from, his name is jack sellers, the chairman of the maricopa county board of supervisors, explaining, exposing the glaring inconsistency when people in his own party cry fraud about the 2020 election results. members of the gop say there was fraud. story goes like this. the election was stolen from donald trump, blah, blah, blah. but no one ever deals with the fact that every other down ballot election that took place on november 3, a lot of them resulted in republicans winning. was there fraud in those too? sellers made those comments during the congressional hearing yesterday, investigating arizona's so-called audit.

the audit where the cyber ninjas spent half a year and millions of dollars to examine ballots, including their search for bamboo. their work at the end just reaffirmed president joe biden's win there. sellers and other election officials in maricopa county have stood up to that sham audit, exposing the lies for what they are. here's bill gates, vice chairman of the board of supervisors, at the same hearing. >> this is without a doubt the biggest threat to our democracy in my lifetime. if elected officials continue to choose party over truth, then these procedures are going to continue on. these privately funded, government-backed attacks on legitimate elections. >> let me repeat. these are republicans. he also is a republican official decrying the conspiracies around the 2020 election result. no matter what they say, no matter what the cyber ninjas find, the big lie continues to

spread and spread. "washington post" reports, the six-month gop driven review confirmed the accuracy of the results, according to a report released last month, but that hasn't silenced trump, who continues to make false claims or those of other republicans, including several arizona lawmakers on the house committee. despite the fact that no evidence of widespread fraud has come to light in the 11 months since the election by anyone anywhere, republicans have only ratcheted up their ridiculous claims. there is now a push for a forensic audit of every state in the country. reporting in michigan news site my finds, quote, dozens of lawmakers from multiple states, including three republicans from michigan signed a letter to the american people calling for a 50-state audit of the november 2020 general election. 92 state republicans joined arizona state senator wendy rogers who released the letter in a post to social media monday. the letter calls for states to

decertify electors where elections were certified inaccurately and suggests the u.s. house of representatives, quote, convene and vote per the u.s. constitution by means of one vote per state to decide the rightful winner of the election. this disinformation is extremely dangerous to our democracy. we saw what happened when trump supporters tried to stop the certification of the actual, accurate results. our capitol was attacked. people died. we also know from that day that there were no elections certified inaccurately. u.s. congress certified the winner. president joe biden. after the insurrection. republicans pushing for more audits nearly a year after the election is where we start this hour. arizona secretary of state katie hobbs is here. she's also now running for governor. also joining us, michigan secretary of state, jocelyn benson and jeremy bash is still here, former chief of staff at the cia and department of defense and nbc national security analyst.

kay, madam secretary, i want to play something that happened. we covered this yesterday, but because it's your state, i want to show you, secretary hobbes, this exchange between jamie raskin and andy biggs. >> do you accept this audit which showed that joe biden won and indeed by more votes -- >> that is not what the audit conclude. >> who won the election in arizona, donald trump or -- >> we don't know. because as the audit, it demonstrates very clearly, mr. raskin, there are a lot of issues with this election that took place. >> there's the problem that we have. donald trump refused to accept the results and unfortunately we have one of the world's great political parties, which has followed him off of the ledge of this electoral lunacy, and it's dangerous for democracy. >> secretary hobbs, who is andy biggs and does he speak for -- fell me who he speaks for in arizona. >> well, i think unfortunately,

he's speaking for a lot of the republicans in arizona, but certainly not for the majority of voters in arizona. and at this point, you know, jamie raskin put it quite appropriately when he called it electoral lunacy. i don't know how we take these leaders seriously anymore. there was no fraud in the election. we all know that. and this road they're continuing down is dangerous for our democracy. >> has the cyber ninjas, which we should always remind folks, one of its founders was a stop the steal adherent, it had access to the ballots, it made a lot of people uncomfortable. we talked to you as it went on. they actually found the very same thing that the other multiple audits found, that president joe biden won. i think they found maybe six or ten or 20 more votes for him. has that stemmed any of the suspicion about the election result? >> absolutely not. and i don't really find any indication in their reports because we know their

methodology was entirely flawed so i don't know how they came up with that number but i don't have any faith in that. but the report itself was full of a lot of continued misinformation pointing out so-called anomalies, which are easily explained by election experts, but they're pointing to these anomalies to continue spreading misinformation and cast doubt on the election, and so, you know, this is obviously going to continue and again i cannot overemphasize how dangerous this is to our democracy. >> secretary benson, tragically, your state also flirting with the idea of audits. the, i guess, three republicans from michigan have signed on, asking for this 50-state audit of the election result. your reaction. >> there can be a 50-state audit. we've had over 250 audits just here in michigan that were all official, by the books,

following secure protocols. the audits are all going to show the same thing, as ours have, that the presidential winner is clear and unequivocal. it's the current president, joe biden. and so at this point, we need to realize that this consistent and even escalating call for these so-called audits or election reviews are no longer about reviewing the 2020 election and i think the results of arizona show that. this is about sowing seeds of doubt for future elections, to prepare for a narrative, to enable the potentially intervene or overturn future election results that partisan officials may disagree with. so, i think we need to start seeing this for what it is, and as opposed to a look back, even though it's masquerading as that, it's really planting seeds for the future. >> secretary benson, is it working? >> it's working on two fronts. one, it's not going to overturn the results of the election. those are clear. those are unequivocal. those have been reaudited and confirmed.

what it is going to do is cause more and more citizens to lose faith in our democracy. to lose faith in their voices and to potentially disengage and certainly have access to less accurate information. and i would argue that that's the goal as well. that this is really an effort to cause people to disengage, give up, not participate in future elections because they don't have faith in the outcomes. and if that happens, then we're going to lose our ability to hold elected officials accountable, which i would argue is what a lot of these folks are hoping for, that people disengage and let go of their power to hold folks accountable and in a time as my colleague secretary hobbs said, this is dangerous for democracy. the real danger is us as citizens disengaging and thereby elected officials not being held accountable for other bad, unrepresentative acts that they do. >> yeah, i mean, jeremy, i put secretary benson on the spot there because i agree, and i think the tragedy is how effective it is. and it's hard to call something

malevolent successful, but these efforts to sow distrust in one of our most sacred -- i don't know that there's anything more sacred, our free and fair elections, the peaceful transfer of power. we may have glossed over that too quickly. donald trump robbed the whole country of one of the hallmarks of our democracy by denying us a peaceful transfer of power, one without violence and death. the insurrection was both violent and led to death. and i wonder whether you think that the right frame is around this, because it would appear that if we are -- if it's been successful, we are already a country where 30%, 40%, maybe 50% of the country no longer trusts election results. has the damage been done? >> it's been done, nicole, and in the halls that i used to occupy in the pentagon, in central intelligence agency, it is very connected, actually, to what these two madam secretaries are talking about. because autocracies, dictatorships like china and russia, their main message to the world is that democracies are inherently unstable.

you can't trust the results. you're going to ping from one party to the next. it's not going to deliver for the people because an elected legislature is inherently unstable and wobbly. when you have audit after audit after audit, it's an effort to show instability, and i just wanted to maybe pose a question to the two secretaries. is it possible in arizona, is it possible in michigan, and we'll start with secretary hobbs, to enact a law that would prohibit, that would ban multiple audits of the same election. after all, nicole, you and i first met in a recount in 2000. there are laws governing recounts. there are laws governing how you exhaust remedies. secretary hobbs, how might this play if you're elected governor in arizona? >> well, in theory, it's absolutely possible to pass laws to prevent this kind of thing, and i absolutely encourage folks to try to do that. of course, the majority of our legislature right now is continuing to egg this on and support it, and so in actuality, that's a different story, but

certainly as governor, it's something i would work towards. >> secretary benson, what do you foresee in michigan in terms of the ability to outlaw multiple audits? >> two things. we have to remember that democracy prevailed in 2020 because good people on the both sides of the aisle did the right thing. they followed the law. they certified the election. they ensured that there were legal audits as we did in michigan. so, in many ways, the law was followed and what makes us find ourselves where we are are partisan lawmakers, as secretary hobbs just talked about in arizona, as we're seeing in michigan as well, who are abusing their authority to sow seeds of doubt about democracy and it remains to be seen what happens when you have the rule of law and i've said repeatedly here, the law is on our side here. we want to have clear, legal audits, which we've done. but it's when you have bad actors abusing their authority, be they lawmakers or others, then you have a recipe for disaster and i would argue again the disaster is not just future

elections potentially being overturned, the disaster is not just blocking access to the vote. the disaster is that the american people give up on democracy, give up on our system of government, stop participating at record numbers or at any numbers at all, because that then enables lawmakers to pass laws that don't reflect, ultimately, the will of the people. >> i mean, i want to follow up on jeremy's point. i think other than sort of the national security concerns of being that country, we are changing before our very eyes. i mean, the other wildly successful leg of this has been the voter restriction laws. they have raced through state legislatures, and many of them disempower folks like both of you, and i saw secretary benson, you tweeted this. you put out a statement yesterday. michigan's voter i.d. and election security procedures are second to none. fraud is infinitesimal and on the rare occasion it occurs, it's intercepted and prosecuted. countless voters have been convicted -- or have been convinced of the opposite by lying legislators seeking to

maintain power by any means necessary even as they tear apart our community, state, and nation. i cannot overstate how dangerous it is for our country that legislators continue to lie to voters in order to get them to support restrictions on their own constitutional voting rights. we're not without a remedy. i mean, federal voting rights legislation undoes all of that. are you -- do you feel that there's a disconnect with democrats in the senate? >> yes, i think this is no longer the time to wait and see if others -- >> hello. >> if others -- this is my 5-year-old. >> come back. >> the future of democracy is in his hands. this is no longer a time to ensure -- this is a time to be bold. this is a time to step up and use the constitutional authority of the federal government to protect all of us in the states. we're doing everything we can in the states to protect access to the vote, but the time is now for our lawmakers as well at the federal level to take this threat to democracy seriously,

pass the freedom to vote act, which will help us in the state to protect access to democracy and will go a long way to restore citizens' faith in our democracy all around the country. >> i love that. that's the highlight of my week. jeremy, do you think that a serious enough approach is being taken to doing away with the filibuster, passing voting rights legislation immediately to address what secretary hobbs and secretary benson are talking about? >> we have to redouble, retriple our efforts to ensure voters' access to the ballot and ensure people cannot play games with the fundamental right of the people. the electoral count act, this old law that basically says how you count the ballots after a presidential election, it's what we were doing on january 6th. i think that needs a serious look as well. because what these two state legislative leaders or these secretaries of state are saying is that if republicans are in charge in our state, they can essentially dictate the rules and change the rules to put

their own people in charge. imagine if republicans had controlled the house of representatives on january 6th. does anybody think for a second that they would not have tried to steal the election? not with mob violence but by simply using the procedures in the electoral count act and in the constitution on the floor of the joint session to try to put this in the hands of donald trump? i think we have to worry about that because if in 2022 a republican-controlled congress is running the show for the 2024 election, god help us all if they go down the road that we've seen in certain state legislatures. >> well, and a lot of the conditions are already in place. i mean, secretary hobbs, i interviewed secretary raffensperger, who has not been on the right side of voter restrictions in his state but he now famously walked the line in refusing to overturn and find 11,000 votes for donald trump. he's being primaried. the georgia state voter restriction law that sent major

league baseball to another state instead of holding their all-star game there, that disempowered some of the kind of people who made sure that trump's pressure campaign was unsuccessful. are you concerned along these lines that some of the conditions are already in place for a different outcome in 2024? >> absolutely. i mean, we saw a bill introduced in arizona that would allow the legislature with no evidence of any fraud or any other reasons simply to choose the electors they like if they -- and overturn the will of the voters. and that's -- arizona's not alone in that. this is highly concerning. as secretary benson said, people in both parties did their jobs and upheld the law, and we're looking at folks now who aren't interested in the rule of law but are interested in the outcome that they desire. >> yeah, i just think, nicole, it's clear from what these two secretaries of state are saying, what we know is that redistricting has been taken away from partisan politics in some states successfully to

avoid gerrymandering. i think we have to think about doing the same thing with respect to election rules and just secretary benson, if you want to have the final word there, what do you see from michigan? >> i think two things. one, people in michigan and all across the country need to stay vigilant and engaged. the number one thing we need to realize is that the goal here is that people lose faith in our democracy and we can all do more to ensure we're seeking out trusted sources of information, staying engaged and staying vigilant and holding lawmakers and other partisan officials accountable at the ballot box. if they make any changes to our laws that would restrict people's access to the vote, ultimately political and legal accountability is what's going to stop this escalated assault on democracy as the people of michigan and all around the country who have the ability to hold these bad actors accountable. >> you're so right about staying vigilant. secretaries of state katie hobbs, jocelyn benson and jeremy bash, thank you, my friend, for

being the first person back in the studio with us. so nice to see you. you're welcome every day. you know where to find us. when we come back, the looming legal standoff now that president biden has blocked the disgraced ex-president's claim of executive privilege as he fights to keep evidence from the january 6th select committee. that is next. plus, the misinformation, disinformation and downright lies that are dividing us even more as a country. as our friend eugene robinson puts it in a provocative brand-new column, how dumb can a nation get and still survive? we'll tackle that question later in the hour. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. if you're 55 and up, t-mobile has plans built just for you whether you need a single line or lines for family members, you'll get great value on america's most reliable 5g network. like 2 lines of unlimited for just $27.50 a line. that's our everyday price. plus, our plans always come with unlimited talk, text and data included. so, switch to t-mobile and get 2 lines of unlimited for only $27.50 a line. that's half the price of verizon or at&t.

only at t-mobile. the leader in 5g. i just became eligible for medicare and, can i say? it's so overwhelming. a, b, c, d - all the different plans and all those stacks of mail? i didn't know where to start. then i called humana, and they helped make everything simpler. i talked to a real live agent who was kind, patient, and she told me about humana's all-in-one medicare advantage prescription drug plans. they include coverage for hospital stays, doctor office visits and prescription drugs. most plans include dental and vision coverage. and humana has a huge network of doctors and hospitals. i can get telehealth coverage, a silver sneakers membership, and i stay covered in emergencies when i travel. i can get all that for as low as a $0 monthly plan premium. humana went above and beyond to get to know me, so i can find the medicare advantage plan that is right for me. so call or go online and get your free

decision guide. humana, a more human way to healthcare. this is... ♪♪ this is iowa. we just haven't been properly introduced. say hello to the place where rolling hills meets low bills. where our fields, inside and out, are always growing. and where the fun is just getting started. this is iowa. so, when are you coming to see us? ♪♪

so many people are overweight now, and asking themselves, so, when are you coming to see us? "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now there's release from golo. it naturally helps reverse insulin resistance, stops sugar cravings, and releases stubborn fat all while controlling stress and emotional eating. at last, a diet pill that actually works. go to golo.com to get yours.

we continue to follow the breaking news out of washington today where the white house has formally blocked an attempt by the twice impeached former president donald trump to claim executive privilege in an effort to withhold documents from congress related to the insurrection on january 6th it sets up the legal showdown for the ages between the current and former presidents on the issue of executive privilege. the white house now authorizing the national archives to turn over a large batch of documents requested by the january 6th committee. it includes a broad array of communications that account for donald trump's actions and movements that day. joining our conversation, chuck rosenberg, now an msnbc contributor. and congresswoman madeleine dean of pennsylvania, a member of the judiciary committee and an impeachment manager during trump's second impeachment trial for his role in inciting the january 6th attack on the capitol. chuck rosenberg, let me start with you.

this was announced in a letter that was made public from the white house counsel, jen psaki made clear that that first batch, which we should just remind our viewers, i had to remind myself, that it's a lot of stuff. it's communications. it's movements. it's about the president's event. it's about his tweets, his texts, his conversations and understanding of vice president mike pence's movements. before we get to whether they will or will not make their way to the committee, can you just speak to the request and what might be on its way to the bipartisan select committee? >> yeah, absolutely, nicole. so, these are really interesting legal issues, and i mean that in the nerdiest way possible. >> that's why we love you. >> well, thank you. the supreme court has said that there is a privilege for presidents, and believe it or not, the supreme court has also said there is a privilege for former presidents. let's talk about that second thing. because we're dealing with former president trump. the privilege for a former president turns on a bunch of

factors and maybe the most important one is what the current president thinks about the former president's invocation of the privilege. the supreme court has said the privilege is really to benefit the republic, not to benefit an individual, and so if president joe biden, the current president, wants to waive a former president's privilege, he more or less can do that. the court didn't really say how you weigh it out and what all the factors are. but what president biden did here is something that other presidents have done. they've waived the privilege when they believe it benefits the republic of a former president. and so, i'm not surprised at all by this. if joe biden is reading supreme court opinions, he knows that the privilege is for the benefit of the republic and the republic, frankly, is going to benefit if we figure out what the heck happened on january 6th and what machinations were behind it, including what the president was saying to his top

officials and what these documents show. and so, i hope that this can get through the courts quickly. i expect there will be a court challenge. but what president biden did today was sensible, lawful, ethical, practical, and i hope it works. >> congresswoman dean, in preparing for chuck to be here, we have a little bit of this language. the supreme court said the privilege is limited to communications in performance of a president's responsibilities. these are communications in service of an attack on the country. in service of an insurrection and a coup attempt. we lost the congresswoman. chuck, can you jump in and just address whether or not the fact that these are communications in service of the opposite of what you just articulated, an attack on our country, an attack on our democracy. potential violence against a sitting vice president. how that might play into what ensues now, a legal fight.

>> yeah, sure. so, let's assume there's a legal fight. let's assume that president trump goes to federal court and tries to invoke this former president privilege. i mean, the supreme court said there is such a thing, but again, the view of the current president really matters. and nicole, you're exactly right. this stuff isn't to benefit the republic. let's say you are the president of the united states and i am your senior advisor and we are having conversations about delicate national security matters and you want to keep those private. that's going to fly. the courts are generally going to credit that. and even a -- even if you become a former president, nicole, a successor president is going to see it in the same way. that's the benefit the republic. the stuff that happened here, not just trying to overturn the results of an election but the insurrection on january 6th in no way can be construed as something intended to benefit the republic.

this is intended to benefit donald trump. and so if you simply take those facts and run it through the supreme court case, what you're left with is a very weak invocation of privilege by a former president, trump, and a very strong waiver by a current president, biden. does the committee get the stuff? that's the really interesting question, because one strategy, and we've seen trump use it in other contexts, is simply to run out the clock. it's to go to court, even with a specious or frivolous claim, ultimately lose but it takes so long for him to lose that perhaps in a year and a half the congress is in republican hands and suddenly the work of the congress, work of the house is abandoned because the other party doesn't want to pursue this. so, specious legal claim by trump, valid waiver, i believe, by president biden, but trump could still try and run out the clock in court. >> we always get to how trump

can get out of accountability. can you run the thread the other way? i mean, how might the national archives respond to what the white house did today, get all this ready to simply be cleared of that legal hurdle and turn it over? and i guess the other piece here is republicans could have had control of the clock if they'd agreed to the bipartisan commission. by killing it, it is now this select committee with a democratic chairperson, liz cheney as the vice chair, but what is the other scenario? is there a scenario where the legal process plays out in a manner that compels the national archives to turn over the material? >> sure, well, so, first of all, nicole, you could proceed on dual tracks, meaning, part of this can be fought in the courts, right? you could have a battle in the courts for whether or not donald trump's invocation as former president of his privilege is valid. and on the other hand, and this is good news, i think, there are plenty of people who are willing to assist the committee in its

work. there are people who are willing to be interviewed. there are folks who are willing to turn over documents. there are folks to whom the privilege couldn't possibly pertain, and so you don't have to put everything to one side just to simply go to court and argue the former president's, you know, frivolous and specious claim. the committee will continue to work. the committee will continue to take testimony. the committee will continue to review documents. we may not, in the end, have everything we want in this investigation, but oh, by the way, nicole, that happens. i was a federal prosecutor for a long time. and even in federal criminal investigations, you don't always get everything you want. not everybody speaks to you. and that's okay. you do the best you can with what you have in the time allotted to you and you try to assemble as complete a picture as possible. and so, don't lose faith and don't lose hope, even with a frivolous invocation of privilege by a former president. my guess is the committee's going to get a lot of work done

and it's going to be important. >> chuck, let me ask you one more question about what we learned yesterday, having spent as many years as you did at the department of justice. what was your reaction to seeing in the senate judiciary committee's interim report the methodical, the near daily pressure campaign by the ex-president to enlist the justice department in his campaign or plot to overturn the election result? >> yeah. it's such a good question, nicole. so, i read the report. the interim report. and i had a couple of reactions to it. one, i was not at all surprised by what donald trump tried to do in overturning the election and pressuring top justice department officials to join him in his escapades. but i was also not surprised that many senior department of justice officials,including some trump political appointees, push back on him. there is an ethos at the department. look, it's not a perfect institution. the institution is comprised of human beings, it's imperfect, but there's an ethos that you do

the right thing in the right way for the right reason all the time. and that ethos extends to political leadership. in fact, much of the political leadership in the department under any president comes from the career ranks. merrick garland is an example. lisa monaco, the number two at doj is an example. they came up through the ranks of the department of justice, and they get it. and so i wasn't surprised that career senior officials and senior political leaders at the department pushed back on the president. thank goodness they did. because if the president had prevailed, it would have been a world of hurt. >> congresswoman dean, i know we had some technical difficulties and i apologize for them. i'm glad you're back. i want to jump in where i think we lost you and it's on this big development, a big deal, this white house has said that they have cleared the way, ensuing any legal back and forth, for the national archives to turn

over what is a massive trove of movements, communications, details about the president's tweets, what went into his communications about the vice president, the vice president's movements. what do you think the committee hopes this tranche of documents will detail? >> well, thank you for having me, and it's a pleasure to be with you and with chuck, and i apologize. the technical difficulties might have been on my end. so -- but it's -- you know what? as much as it is a tranche of incredible, dense information, it's really very simple. it is about the truth. what was the president doing? what was he planning? what were those around him planning? what did he do on january 6th? what did he do when the insurrection took place? what did he do immediately following? in some ways, it's very simple. it's about the truth. sure, it's going to be an awful lot of communications, and we know and we see the desperate measures that this former president, failed president took in the final days of his

presidency to try to get anybody to help him. and i agree with chuck. thank god for those of credibility and ethos and an understanding of the institutions they served, the country they served, that they took the time and the patience and the risk of making sure they did their jobs. under extraordinary pressure by a desperate failed president. >> congresswoman, liz cheney and chairman thompson and adam schiff and others have said that the committee investigating january 6th will look at everything leading up to it and i wonder, you know, if you take into consideration what we learned yesterday in the senate judiciary committee's interim report, some of the revelations from recent investigative reporting books about what trump was doing, what pence did before he went in there and ultimately did the right thing, his call of dan quayle. i wonder if you could just sort of articulate and tell me what

you would theorize the scope is. are they looking at the 4th, when john eastman was in there with his memo and the intellectual underpinnings of the coup to overturn the election? are they looking at the 3rd, when he was on the call with raffensperger? how far back do you think the select committee is going? are they going all the way back to election day? >> i would assume they're at least going back to election day. you remember -- i'm a member of judiciary committee. you remember pre-election day what was going on with both the former president and his then attorney general. already sowing the seeds of discontent and a mistrust of the elections because, as the president was -- the then-president was saying, if i lose, i'm not sure i'm going to accept the results. >> right. >> even by an honest count. and so, i am certain this committee is so thoughtful, so thorough, that it will not be a snapshot in time. it will be the entire process. what led up to the election,

what happened during the election, what happened after the election, and importantly, what happened on january 6th. and here's why. here's why it matters. for those who would like to say, let's turn the page, let's move on, let's look for brighter days, if we don't search for the truth as to what happened and what bad actors were involved, they may be among my very colleagues, they may be among my colleagues in the state of pennsylvania. if we don't look at the truth of what happened, you know, i knower at risk of this happening again. a failed president wants to run for office again. may he never, ever have his hands on the seat of any kind of authority. what you saw also today was the revelations that should not be revelations around emoluments, around the president's finances, his hiding of massive losses, his hiding of millions of dollars coming in from foreign countries.

this is a person who should never, ever again have any authority over the seat of the presidency, much less school board, dogcatcher, you name it. >> it's not even clear he can run a hotel. congresswoman madeleine dean, thank you so much for being our guest. chuck rosenberg, it's wonderful to see you, my friend. please don't be a stranger. when we come back, we heard it yesterday in this very hour, at this point in the hour, from fiona hill. why do so many people have such a hard time seeing what's happening in our country right before our very eyes? with the alarming rise and the addiction to disinformation destroying objective reality and a shared truth. it's a profound question at the heart of just about every single thing we cover here. we'll try to make sense of it next. here. we'll try to make sense of it next ♪darling, i, i can't get enough of your love babe♪ ♪girl, i don't know, i don't know,♪ ♪i don't know why i can't get enough of your love babe♪

♪oh no, babe girl, if i could only make you see♪ ♪and make you understand♪ get a dozen double crunch shrimp for $1 with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. ♪ ♪ ♪ hey google. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ people with moderate to severe psoriasis, or psoriatic arthritis, are rethinking the choices they make like the splash they create the way they exaggerate the surprises they initiate. otezla. it's a choice you can make.

otezla is not an injection or a cream it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. what happens when we welcome change? we can make emergency medicine possible at 40,000 feet. instead of burning our past for power, we can harness the energy of the tiny electron. we can create new ways to connect.

rethinking how we communicate to be more inclusive than ever. with app, cloud and anywhere workspace solutions, vmware helps companies navigate change. faster. vmware. welcome change.

i never thought i would see this here in the united states. this is not the united states i came to and there are millions of other immigrants like me who feel the same way. many of my friends from countries that have been ripped apart by civil war, who came here because the united states stood for the truth and was a beacon of hope, the land of opportunity, they're looking at themselves, looking at their families, they're saying to me, what's going on here? how can't people see this? >> how can't people see this? that is dr. fiona hill, who yesterday around this almost exact same time, so powerfully framed one of the most maddening

aspects of the current political climate, that not only is our country seemingly unable to find true north lately, but some americans don't even seem interested in looking at the compass. put more bluntly by our friend eugene robinson of the "washington post," quote, how did we become in such alarming measure, so dumb? why is the news dominated by ridiculous controversies that should not be controversial at all? when did so many of our fellow citizens become full-blown nihilists who deny even the concept of objective reality? and how must this look to the rest of the world? robinson then goes down the list from the droolingly stupid game of chicken in congress over the debt ceiling to the needless deaths at this point caused by politically motivated refusal to take the life-saving vaccine for covid, and here's where the piece comes to land. the final point. how dumb can a nation get and still survive? idiotically, we seem determined to find out. joining our conversation is eugene robinson, pulitzer prize winning columnist for the "washington post" and msnbc

capitol hill analyst. also joining us, the reverend al sharpton, president of the national action network and clint watts is here, former consultant to the fbi counterterrorism division. this column is one of my favorites, and it needed to be said. and you know, that fiona hill sound that i started with, that was her last answer. i said, what are you most concerned about right now, as a russian expert, russia or america? she said america. that was the beginning of that answer. we're in deep doodoo. >> we are. if there's no such thing as truth, if we can't agree on basic facts, if we can't agree on what happened yesterday or what happened this morning, and then we could argue about it, what it meant, but if we can't agree on the basic facts, how can we have a democracy?

you know, lies, disinformation, manipulation, all this is killing this country, it really is. it is pulling us apart in a way that is just shocking and intolerable and we have to find some way to at least get everyone on the same page. so then we can talk about which direction to go in. but i think -- i agree with fiona hill. you have to be deeply concerned and you have to ask, well, why? why don't people see this? why don't people understand how far down this road we have come? and see that there's a cliff that we're about to go off. and then let's do something about it. but people are -- people booed

lindsey graham when he suggested they might want to get vaccinated against a deadly disease, right? is that -- does that happen in a healthy country? or is there something really wrong here? >> look, i get asked, rev, about how politics are different now from when i worked in the bush white house, and one of the -- it's an oversimplification but one of the ways it's different is that the news was the news. and if it was a republican white house, fox news gave us the most benefit of the doubt. cnn played both sides. and msnbc, which i call my beloved home now, kicked our butts every single night especially. but they covered the same story. most days, they led with the same story. the devolution now is that a deadly pandemic took thousands of americans from us, and even hundreds of americans on our best days, two of those networks covered the pandemic and efforts

largely in the last president, failed ones, to protect the citizens. the other one often pretended it wasn't happening. it's not a problem that lays at the feet of both sides. one party, one side is addicted to propaganda. one party, one side is whitewashing an insurrection. one party, one side is making this country less safe. can the other side fix it alone? >> the question becomes not only account other party fix it alone. the question is, can we afford for the other party and other americans not to fix it? because i think that this is the first time -- we've always had our cult leaders and our people on the margins that would come with things, just use people for whatever their motives were, money or whatever, but now we have mainstream ignorance. we've mainstreamed lunacy.

and it has captured one of the two major parties in the united states, and that's frightening. so, i don't think we have an option but to turn this around. you know, i said to gene earlier this morning that i'm preaching at the chapel and howard university of washington sunday and i'm going to use his column as my text, rather than a biblical story, but now i've got a subject to the test. i'm going to quote sister nicole saying we're in deep doo-doo. that's going to be the subject matter. >> stay with eugene. >> i don't think we can say it better. people need to be shocked into understanding where we are because it's become so normalized that we don't even understand how we are really in real deep stuff. and that what you're smelling is doo-doo. you're not smelling sweet aroma. this is not normal, where we are. >> right and i do want to -- i'm going to ask you guys to stick around for the rest of the

program, because i do want to -- i do want to pick your brains about how we get out of it, but i just -- another beat on where we are, clint. what the right seems to have done successfully is to link the disdain for elites and owning the libs and that whole bucket of smears with information. with provable facts. with information about an election result that's audited once, twice, three, four, times, with data from scientists whose party affiliation we'll never know but they simply ran the data when the covid vaccine went through for its trials and its approval and whatnot, not just in america but all over the world. information that saves people's lives about masks for children too young to be vaccinated. data. the right, with tragic consequences, successfully linked provable facts with elites and i wonder how you delink those things. >> well, sadly, nicole, one of the consequences is, in the case of covid, you just die.

this is one of the weirdest strategies ever. usually, you try and impose cost on your adversary. they seem to be imposing cost on their voters when it comes to covid-19 and the vaccine. separately, though, what they have been able to do, which has really been lost on many people, is it's not just disinformation. it's not just tweets or ad campaigns. it is complete rewriting of history, rewriting of science, creating an entire false reality, and what, you know, dr. hill was talking about before she came on, what's super important, how did we get here? it's because people want to believe things that are false. in no time in human history have you been able, as any citizen can today with social media and the internet, to access complete nonsense, things that are totally incorrect, that link together and create an entire false reality. there's no way to do that. what we've come to learn, i think, in the last four years is when you have a president that just pushes lies,

disinformation, propaganda all day long, is coupled with an ecosystem in the online space that repeats those almost to the point where people are in a total bubble, the only thing worse than no information in the end is too much information. there's too much information that is false that's available to people and they are choosing to believe it. so it's part availability. there's just tons of it, and it's part demand. there's just confirmation bias and implicit bias that people want information that's a lie because that's what they want to believe. the dangerous consequence is, one, individually, it can lead to death and harms, but two, it leads to the death of america. >> and destabilizes our country. i'm going to need all three of you to stay. eugene, clint, the rev, stick around. a quick break for us. don't go anywhere. around a quick break for us don't go anywhere.

at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner. bogeys on your six, limu. vanguard. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ray loves vacations. but his diabetes never seemed to take one. everything felt like a 'no.' everything. but then ray went from no to know. with freestyle libre 14 day, now he knows his glucose levels when he needs to... and...when he wants to.

so ray...can be ray. take the mystery out of your glucose levels, and lower your a1c. now you know. try it for free. visit freestylelibre.us (brad) apartments-dot-com's 3-d virtual tours are so realistic it feels like you're actually. there. and that's all thanks to this guy, ted. (ted) oh, just a matter of perspective, really. (brad) apartments-dot-com. the most popular place to find a place.

at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner. you could fret about that email you just sent. ...with a typo. aaaand most of the info is totally outdated. orrrr... you could use slack. and edit your message after it's sent. [sigh of relief.] slack. where the future works. wealth is breaking ground on your biggest project yet. worth is giving the people who build it a solid foundation. wealth is shutting down the office for mike's retirement party. worth is giving the employee who spent half his life with you, the party of a lifetime.

wealth is watching your business grow. worth is watching your employees grow with it. principal. for all it's worth. . the dangers of engagement based ranking are that facebook knows that content that elicits an extreme reaction from you is more likely to get a click, a comment. facebook says they cannot adequately identify dangerous content. as a result those dangerous algorithms they admit are picking up the extreme sentiment, the division, they cannot protect us from the harms they know exist in their own system. >> we're back with eugene robinson. the dumbing down of america is also happening because of the

unregulated distributor, disseminator and mainliner of disinformation for so many americans. >> yeah. that's absolutely true. and this is a problem. it is very difficult to get arms around, facebook should have some responsibility, some liability for the damage that it is causing. i've looked into it. it is more difficult to specify exactly how you do that than it seems at first glance. >> one other thing we need to recognize is that as we were saying earlier. the democratic party, it's not fair but the democratic party has to represent the entire sane range of political opinion in this country right now. the republican party has checked out so the democrats from

kyrsten sinema to bernie sanders, they have to negotiate our way forward and that's what they're doing. that's why, that's what they're doing. they have slim majorities and they need to get around the filibuster so they don't go after the various cliffs. they need to just get rid of the debt ceiling. they need to protect voting rights. and surely you can get around the filibuster to do that. they need to be sure every american can have his or her vote counted for, in federal elections. they need to do things like that. it is not fair that it all falls on the democrats to do it but that's the way it is. >> that is absolutely the way it is. we have this conversation all the time. they don't need to do it because it is politically popular. it may not be. they need to do it because democracy is on the line. >> democracy is on the line.

and i've learned from growing up in the civil rights movement being involved all my life, what is right may one day be popular. it may not be popular then. when you look at the testimony that the so-called whistleblower gave to congress, when you have companies that intentionally let things go, their own data tells them is something they ought not do, you really have the moral obligation to stand up and stop this and forget about the popularity. we're not talking about people inadvertently doing things are damaging. we're talking about people with scientific data saying the results will be this and they do it anyhow. wait a minute. i don't know what can be done but something has to be done. >> it is important whistleblower testimony about what the company knew and when they knew it. we'll stay on it. thank you so much for being part

of the conversation. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. you're an owner with access to financial advice, tools and a personalized plan that helps you build a future for those you love. vanguard. become an owner. ♪darling, i, i can't get enough of your love babe♪ ♪girl, i don't know, i don't know,♪ ♪i don't know why i can't get enough of your love babe♪ ♪oh no, babe girl, if i could only make you see♪ ♪and make you understand♪ get a dozen double crunch shrimp for $1 with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. with any steak entrée. only at applebee's. ♪ ♪ ♪ hey google. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ people with moderate to severe psoriasis, are rethinking the choices they make like the splash they create the entrance they make, the surprises they initiate. otezla. it's a choice you can make. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

working at recology is more than a job for jesus. it's a family tradition. and if you're pregnant or planning to be. jesus took over his dad's roue when he retired after 47 year. now he's showing a new generation what recology is all about. as an employee-owned company, recology provides good-paying local jobs for san franciscans. we're proud to have built the city's recycling system from the ground up, helping to make san francisco the greenest big city in america. let's keep making a differene together. it's another day. and anything could happen. it could be the day you welcome 1,200 guests and all their devices. or it could be the day there's a cyberthreat. only comcast business' secure network solutions give you the power of sd-wan and advanced security integrated on our activecore platform so you can control your network from anywhere, anytime. it's network management redefined. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. comcast business powering possibilities.

thank you for inviting us into your home. we are grateful. hi, jason. >> thanks so much. and welcome to "the beat." i'm jason johnson in for ari melber. my blazer is an homage. we'll be talking about it later in the show. we start with breaking news. trump's secret evidence is going to the maga right investigators. nbc breaking the story writing