but, you decided to talk about canada. >> what a great country. can i say how much of canada? i love canada, all of canadians. i love many things about the society. i love all different parts of t. we have much to discuss. >> fantastic. >> have a good night. >> bye. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. in just a few minutes we will have the latest for you on the stunning report that the boxes of records that donald trump took to his golf club when he left the white house may have contained classified top secret material. plus we will give you lester holt's exclusive interview with president biden, the president's first tv interview in months. there is a lot to go tonight. let's jump right in. i want to start right now with gelatin. gelatin. gelatin is the jiggly wiggly stuff that makes your jello and gummy candy and a whole lot of

other foods and cosmetics, and it's in a lot of stuff, it's big business and most of it is made from animal products about. 15 years ago, a guy from wisconsin went down to mississippi with a plan, to make gelatin out of cat fish waste. all the stuff that's left over from cat fish processing. the stuff that would just typically be thrown away. this guy and his business partner brought in all of these potential investors and told them this business plan was a sure bet. there was nothing they didn't know about making gelatin out of cat fish waste. the gelatin was perfected and ready to be sold. they already had a $3 million contract set up with a buyer for it. it sounded great. investors handed over hundreds of thousands of dollars to the project. the state of mississippi also gave them hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants. they also got a loan from a bank. and for a while, seemed, things seemed to be going well, at least as far as the investors

knew. the guy running the gelatin from cat wish waste company was sending them emails and letters telling them how well things were going. telling them quote the company is shipping product and invoicing customers and we contracted orders from two large customers totaling 3,000 metric continues per year. we've completely sold out of gelatin at a good price. end quote. the u.s. navy is interested in our amazing cat fish waste into gelatin process. and hey, by the way we just signed a contract for over a million with a new processor, plus we're going to get 50% of the profit from that new second processing plant. but just a little short on liquid cash to get over the hump until that second plant is opened, so if you all could chip in $25,000 more a piece, or more, if you're feeling generous, that would be great. and so the investors kicked in

more cash. but guess what? and i bet you can probably guess where this is going. yeah, there was no new processor, or second plant. there were no million dollar contracts. in fact, there was barely even any gelatin. it was a whole lot of cat fish waste. from court documents they were quote never able to manufacture a sellable product, often pouring the results of they're tempts in a ditch behind the plant. in fact, they were only able to make viable batches of the product a couple of times, as a result the company had no customers, and never made any sales. end quote. the investor testified that he asked the guy running the company why he did not tell the investors the truth in these letters he was sending out, to which the guy replied, quote, they can't handle the truth. i said these were court documents because ultimately federal prosecutors brought multiple felony charges against this guy, and his cat fish waste gelatin scheme that bilked

investors and a bank out of their money. he always maintained his innocence but ultimately convicted on bank fraud and mail fraud charges, ordered to pay about $2 million and sentenced to 70 months in prison. he was released in 2014. recently, he's been peddling a new project. this was the headline in the milwaukee journal sentinel last summer, a wisconsin man is scanning ballots and suing a county clerk as he launches his own election review. the story that follows is as nutty as the headline sounds. to be clear, there is also an investigation launched by wisconsin republicans, into the 2020 election, run by a guy who says the election was stolen, and who has hired trump administration officials as his investigators. that investigation is ongoing to the tune of at least many hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars. but this is not that. this was just a random guy

tooling around making copies of ballots because he decided to run his own private freelance election investigation. and once the local press caught on to what he was doing, it didn't take long for them to realize that the guy wandering the state copying ballot force his own freelance investigation was in fact our friend who went to prison for his cat fish waste into gelatin scam. and look, this guy has served his time. he's paid his debt to society. even if as of 020 he apparently hadn't paid back much of the nearly $2 million he also owes in restitution and i suppose if he wants to travel the state of wisconsin making copies of ballots, it's a free country. and apparently, that is something you are free to do in wisconsin. help yourself. but which this december, things had kind of escalated. in a december lawsuit, he accused the director of elections in milwaukee of being part of a quote sect that

planned, conspired and implemented a massive election fraud, by using fake names and fake addresses to cast ballots. he claimed that this sect allowed somebody to print ballots for biden in a back conference room. his filing included a hand-drawn floor plan of an election office with a spot labeled, quote, hidden room. someone was sleeping. snoring. and now the cat fish waste into gelatin scam, make copies of all of the ballots, there is a secret sect in a hidden room printing ballots for biden guy, he was selected to give a speech by a committee. >> someone is using our systems, our databases, to cast illegal ballots. we have found tens of thousands. we don't know who's doing it. it's probably not the person

who's named. it's probably some bad guys, something wrong, something's in there, somebody's doing something wrong, casting illegal ballots, somebody's in there, they're adding names, they're adding fake voters, casting illegal ballots, by the tens of thousands, and i appreciate your time. thank you for having me here today. >> they're adding fake voters. they're casting illegal ballot, by the tens of thousands. we don't know who's doing it. but it's bad guys. bad guys are doing it. and he should know, he's got thousands of volunteers on the super computer working on this stuff. this is what republicans on the elections committee are doing in wisconsin right now. i will say there are a couple of democrats on that committee, they tried valiantly to pin this guy down on something, a bit like gelatin, tough going. >> and you did say that there

were people who told you or told you first that they had showed up to vote at the polls and were told that someone had already voted in their name. do you either have for us or for law enforcement affidavits from those people detailing those issues? >> what we do is we encourage those people, many of them are afraid to come forward, but we have found that hundreds and hundreds of them -- >> none of them would sign an affidavit. >> i wouldn't say none but if we have 500, maybe a dozen. >> five? >> i don't have -- >> the poor state assemblyman, any evidence? maybe five people? maybe one person. >> sorry, you have to take my word for it. >> we reached out to this gentleman this evening to see if he could provide us with any evidence, he didn't respond to our request for comment. but this ongoing republican project in wisconsin and in plenty of other states to be

continually investigating the 2020 election, to be entertaining any and all theories no matter how loopy about mysterious possible irregularities and fraud is not actually a pointless exercise. it has a practical purpose for republicans in these states and that is to create this churning backdrop of fear and suspicion around voting and elections to justify making it harder to vote. and to provide the justification for republicans taking over the administration of elections. the brennan center reports this week that quote legislators in 27 states have introduced pre-filed or carried over 250 bills with restrictive provisions, that's a tripling of proposals to restrict the vote. the bills would reduce access to mail ballots, limit or eliminate same-day voter registration, require proof of citizenship to vote, or register, or make it harder for people with disabilities to vote. and there are bills pending in

13 states on election administration, quote, some would give the state legislature the ultimate power to reject election results, others threaten election officials with civil or criminal penalties, or place partisan actors in charge of vote counting. end quote. and of course, plenty of states have already made changes, in texas, their new sweeping voting restriction law is wreaking havoc ahead of the primaries next month, with hundreds of absentee ballots and absentee ballot applications being rejected because the new requirements are so unclear, and election officials at the local level are afraid to go for help because promoting voting by mail is now a criminal offense in the state of texas. back in wisconsin, there are elections next week. and they look likely to be the last ones where voters are allowed to use ballot drop boxes. the milwaukee elections director says over half the people who vote by mail in her city use those drop boxes.

so you better get rid of them. you don't want too many people to vote. especially in, you know, a big blue city like milwaukee. of course, congress could intervene to stop the tsunami of voting restrictions across the country but thanks to unified republican opposition and lack of support from two key democratic senator, joe manchin on the left and kyrsten sinema on the right, the democrats two big voting rights bills died last month so now a group of lawmakers is turning to the justice department. democratic representatives iyanna presley and jones, and minority whip jim clyburn written a letter signed by 40 other members of the congressional black caucus to attorney general merrick garland. >> the letter does not mince words. quote, congress looks to you, the attorney general, of the united states, to enforce the constitution and our voting rights laws with unmitigated vigor and tenacity. we write to urge you to leverage the full might of the department

of justice to defend the sacred right to vote for all americans. any state that enacts a law infringing on the right to vote should be met with a lawsuit in defense of the american people. if states face no consequences for their actions, they will be emboldened to pursue even more draconian voter suppression tactics reminiscent of the jim crow era discrimination. our message is simple. be creative. be relentless. be unapologetic in your commitment to do whatever it takes to ensure that every american has their vote counted no matter how they look or where they live. end quote. powerful letter. joining us now is one of the authors of that letter, congressman mondair jones of new york, a member of the house judiciary committee. thanks for joining us tonight. this is heavy. this is big stuff. you're write together attorney

general of the united states to basically say we're running out of options, we're running out of time, democracy is being undermined, you might be the last hope. >> ali, always great to be with you. this is of existential importance. i mean the question before us is whether we will continue to have a democracy moving forward. and you already noted that because of the unanimous obstruction of my republican colleagues over in the senate, and of course, the obstruction of just two democratic senators, we were unable to pass the freedom to vote john r. lee wis act which would have solved so many of the problem that we are now facing including putting an end to so much of the voter suppression that has been enacted last year in at least 19 states and of course over 400 voter suppression bills were introduced last year in state houses across the country. >> congressman, you know, we started with this story about the cat fish guy, and it's a

ridiculous story, but that's sort of the point of the story, it's rid clourks and yet there are people entertaining these ridiculous ideas about voter fraud because the real stories about voter fraud don't exist and yet it is working, it is making people say we got to make sure that voting is safe in this country, would he have to take away any possibility that it wouldn't be safe and to the extent that is working on people who don't understand these restrictions are eroding democracy, what are we doing to right-minded people to say to stop listening to the bs? >> i think you've got to present the facts which are that there is no evidence of mass voter fraud in this country. as you know, ali, it's being fabricated to then justify the racist voter suppression that we have seen. and of course, we are seeing the effects of that, in counties across the nation, especially

and particularly where there are large communities of color. i'm thinking about harris county, texas, for example, and of course, in georgia, you've got counties whose mail-in ballot applications are being rejected. sometimes the rate is as high as 50%. and that is intentional. that is deliberately aimed at disenfranchising people of color who unfortunately the republican party of today blames for the election of this president and of the two democratic senators for its vote from the great state of georgia, and you've got to push back on the narrative of mass voter fraud whenever you're given the opportunity. otherwise, folks who hear something from tucker carlson or someone of like mind on similar networks is going to believe what they hear. >> you know, the brennan center says that as of january 14th, there are 27 states as we said

that have carried out some sort of, 250 bills, pre-filed, been reduced, they passed, whatever the case is, at least 18 bills in five states, would add new identification requirements for absentee ballots and the application, social security number, driver's license number, voter record number, whatever that happens to be, at least six bills in five states would prohibit election officials from sending out mail ballots or ballot applications. 13 bills in three states would curtail who can request an absentee ballot. all of this stuff, it would be interesting if one of these bills were actually done in reaction to something that was proved to be a problem. but we have had numerous court cases, dozens, probably 100 court cases or more now where we have proved that isn't the case. the allegations have never overcome the hurdle of convincing a judge or a jury that they were valid. this is what you're up against, and i guess this is the point why you're going to the attorney general, because you can't win with this in court anymore.

every one of these has been won and it still doesn't convince people. >> well, look, you know, to be sure, the far right majority that we have on the supreme court of the united states, which is hostile to democracy itself, has been very busy over the last decade gutting key provisions of the voting rights act which created, which led to multi-racial democracy in this country. but there are still successful cases being litigated under the voting rights act. decreasingly, because of the weakening of that key statute from 1965, it's why you have seen a lot of states refer to their own constitutions, where the federal law is in doubt now. you know, recently, as in just a few days ago, there was a case arising out of alabama, which has over a quarter of its population african american, and of the numerous congressional districts, they only drew one

congressional district which was majority black. and that was deliberately meant to reduce the electoral power of the black community in that state, and even justice roberts, who is the author of that 2013 shelby decision, which struck down the heart of the voting rights act, even he was in the dissent, because even he has lost control of the right wing majority of the supreme court. that's why folks like myself have called for other courses of action, including adding seats to the supreme court to save our ailing democracy. >> i'm glad you brought up alabama. 27.8% of the population of alabama is black, and 14% of the districts, congressional districts in alabama have a majority black population. that should tell you everything you need to know. congressman, good to see you again. thanks for joining us tonight. thanks for your time. just ahead, we got new reporting on the documents of donald trump, that he took home from the white house, it turns out that some of them were top secret. that's next. out that some of them were top secret that's next.

do you struggle to fall asleep and stay asleep? qunol sleep formula combines 5 key nutrients that can help you fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer, and wake up refreshed. the brand i trust is qunol. as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business:

comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable nationwide network. with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to $500 a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers. so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities.™

it was december of 2019, the president was just weeks away from being impeached for the first time, it was a stressful chaotic time for the white house, yet president trump's mind was elsewhere. >> we have a situation where we're looking very strongly at sinks and showers, and other elements of bathrooms. people are flushing toilets ten times, 15 times, as opposed to once. they end up using more water. so epa is looking at that very strongly, at my suggestion. >> now, in this job that i'm privileged to have, i have traveled all over this country, literally, i have interviewed hundreds and hundreds of people about the problems that they've got in their every day lives, and not once has anyone told me that they wish the president of the united states would increase the internal velocity of their toilets or the water coming out of their sinks. but for a while, it was

something donald trump was kind of obsessed with. >> i said sinks, showers, and toilets. >> it's the shower. it's the sink. i won't talk about the fact that people have to flush their toilet 15 times. >> dishwashers, sinks, toilets. >> sinks, toilets, and showers. >> we won't talk about toilets. >> toilets, toilets. >> sinks, showers, and what goes with a sink and a shower? >> truly the oddest call-in response of all time. making the audience scream toilets back at you. i don't really care why donald trump was obsessed with toilets, to be perfectly honest, i don't really know why, or where he got involved in discussions about having to flush toilets 15 times. unfortunately though the former president's bizarre predilection

for toilets is in fact in the news today. and as a series journalist it is my duty to tell you about it. according to "the new york times" reporter maggie haiberman, when donald trump was president, his staff used to periodically find wads of printed paper clogging the white house toilets. they believed president trump was purposefully attempting to flush pieces of paper down the toilet. the former president immediately poo-pooed these ideas reportedly saying he never put presidential records in a toilet which is definitely a thing that i cannot believe i just said on tv, but jennifer jacobs confirmed with her own sources, too, trump staffers were trying to fish clumped torn papers out of white house toilet and who knows maybe there is why the president was

obsessed with the fire power of toilets in this country. and he has a diverse range of tactics for destroying presidential records. and we have been reporting that how he reportedly ripped up white house records during the time in office despite being required by law to preserve all documents that come across his desk. staffers had to try and jigsaw them back together, taping them back together, other documents were just destroyed entirely, put into burn bags, and didn't know what burn bags were, and put into burn bags for staffers to decide what to keep and what to shred and potentially what to burn. one of the president's former aides, told me on my show on sunday that she once even saw donald trump chewing up the remains of a document he had shredded in the oval office. he literally put the paper in his mouth to destroy it. a germa-phobe by the way. didn't put much in his mouth. just today, "the new york times" reported that the january 6th investigation in congress has found gaps in the official white house telephone logs on the day

of the capitol attack. this week, the "washington post" has reported that he also improperly took 15 boxes of materials to mar-a-lago, which had to be later retreeved by the national archives and tonight the "washington post" "washington post" is out with a huge scoop about what exactly was in those 15 boxes. here's the leak. quote, some of the white house documents that donald trump improperly took to his mar-a-lago residence were clearly marked as classified, including documents at the top secret level. according to two people familiar with the matter. while it was unclear how many classified documents were among those received by the national archives and records administration, some bore markings that the information was extremely sensitive, and would be limited to a small group of officials with authority to view such highly classified information. end quote. the handling of sensitive classified information is a highly regulated thing.

mishandling that kind of material is against the law. which leads me to the other piece of explosive reporting in the "post" tonight that the national archives has asked the justice department to look into this matter to see if anyone should be potentially prosecuted for stowing top secret documents at the former president's beach resort. i am now officially out of my depth. so joining me is dan gold machb, the former assistant united states attorney from the southern district of new york, he served as the house majority counsel during donald trump's first impeachment trial, daniel, i'm okay with the plunger and the toilet side of the equation, i don't understand the rest of it, the removal of documents and what governs the removal or control of top secret documents and what this is all about. so please help us out here. >> from my experience on the house intelligence committee where everyone needs to have top secret clearance, there are

very, very carefully choreographed methods to protect classified information. classified information particularly top secret information, does not leave a secured classified area. if it does, you put it in a bag, with a lock on it. there are really, really detailed and careful procedures to make sure that no classified material is ever left out to the public, or anyone without top secret or secret or whatever classification clearance, that is necessary. and it doesn't really matter on one level, as to who was ultimately responsible for bringing those boxes down to mar-a-lago, because almost certainly, whatever was in those boxes should not have been classified information. now, the president himself does have the right, and the authority, to declassify

documents, but he doesn't just wave a wand in the air and say oh, that's what i'm going to do, and this document is declassified, that document is declassified. all of these documents have very clear markings on them. they'll say secret, top secret, a variety of other markings, and one of those markings would be declassified, or it would cross over the classification markings from earlier, if it were to be declassified. so there's a process, and the fact of there being top secret documents in random boxes, in mar-a-lago, is in and of itself mishandling of classified information. what would deknow who, what we don't know is who did that, who is responsible for that, certainly donald trump was not packing his own boxes but was he aware of what was in them and who else was aware? who oversaw this? and that's where the department

of justice and the fbi need to get involved. because even if there's no criminal investigation, or criminal prosecution that arises from this, it is a national security issue and the fbi's counter-intelligence division needs to figure out what happened. >> so we're definitely out of, we're in unfamiliar ground, and after the last several years, i'm not sure there would be unfamiliar ground but this is actually new, so our viewers are sitting around thinking what is supposed to happen here, someone is supposed to be held criminally liable? what are the national security implications because obviously documents are classified for a reason, does this fall under the purview of the january 6th investigation or is this an fbi justice department matter? because it does seem that the justice department's initial reaction to the national archives was why don't you let your inspector general or whomever take a look at this and we'll keep talking. their first reaction wasn't, this is terribly serious. >> no, and the report, it also

said that even when they uncovered the top secret information and relayed that to the fbi, the fbi was still figuring out what they should do with it. but i do think it's important to put this in perspective, okay? the classification issues, related to the stuff that was in the document, the presidential records act violation, is not something that really falls within the purview of the january 6th committee. the house oversight committee, under chair woman carolyn maloney has announced an investigation into that issue. that is separate from the january 6th investigation. what i think is important and that overlaps a lot with this presidential records act and the january 6th committee investigation, is two things. one, one is the fact that there are very few call logs from the day of january 6th is an issue. what happened? was donald trump intentionally

concealing conversations that he was having with people through his aides, personal cell phones, that are not protected, and are not supposed to be used, or where was he when he was making these, having these conversations, because we know that he was actually sneaking people in the side door for meetings prior to january 6th. and then the other thing that i think is very important here, and is a continuation of a pattern that we've seen from donald trump, is the destruction of these documents. whether he ripped them up, tore them up, ate them, flushed them down the toilet or whatever it is, he is destroying presidential records. now, that's a violation of the presidential records act. but this is also someone who obstructed the mueller investigation, who obstructed the first impeachment investigation that i worked on, and has a history of obstructing cases, of trying to hide what we can only assume now is

misconduct because of the pattern and practice of doing that, and so the question then becomes, what is he ripping up, what is he tearing, what is he trying to hide, and presumably, that falls under the january 6th investigation. >> and so concludes a discussion i never thought i would have on tv, dan goldman, i appreciate you joining me, you and i have had some strange ones but ones that start with clogging toilets with ripped up documents is something i never thought i would do. daniel goldman, a former united states attorney for the southern district, good to see you, my friend. senator amy klobuchar is here and lester holt's exclusive interview with president biden after this. lusive interview with president biden after this life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance

on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling.

so call now for free information.

the clock is ticking for president biden to pick a nominee to replace justice stephen breyer on the supreme court. two weeks ago today, president biden gave himself a

self-imposed deadline saying we pick a nominee by the end of february. february is the shortest month of the year. so the deadline is now only 18 days away. other than that deadline, the only thing we have known for sure about biden's pick is that he plans to nominate a black woman, the first ever on the court. beyond that, we've been in the dark, trying our best to read the tea leaves about who he might pick until today, when nbc's own lester holt sat down with the president and got a little more about where his process is. >> can i ask you where you stand right now on your nomination process for supreme court, what your short list looks like, or if you want to name the nominee right here, we would be happy to hear you. >> well, first of all, the short list are nominees who are incredibly well qualified and documented. they were the honor students, they come from the best universities, and they have experience on the bench. >> what's the number you're at? four, five, six?

>> what i've done is i've take been four people and done the deep dive on them, meaning this thorough background checks and to see if there's anything in the background that would make them not qualified. >> is it important that you believe they will get a vote from the republican side? >> well, i think whomever i pick will get a vote from the republican side for the following reason, i'm not looking to make an ideological choice here, i'm looking for someone to replace judge breyer with the same kind of capacity judge breyer had, with an open mind, who understands the constitution, and interprets it in a way that is consistent with the mainstream interpretation of the constitution. >> i know there's a lot going on in the news right now, but this particular decision, who biden chooses to nominate for a lifetime appointment on the supreme court could be one of the most significant decisions that he makes in his entire time in office, and he's narrowed that decision now down to four potential choices. today president biden met with democrats from the senate

judiciary committee, in a closed door meeting at the white house to discuss the next steps. back when he was in the senate, president biden spent some time as the chair of the judiciary committee, including involved in nominations of the supreme court, so this is a process, with which he is intimately familiar. i'm very bad at waiting. i work in the news. i want to know all of this yesterday and i wish i were a fly on the wall of the closed door meeting at the white house but luckily we have the next best thing. senator amy klobuchar of minnesota, a member of the senate judiciary committee who was in the room where it happened with president biden today. senator, thanks for joining us tonight. >> thanks, ali, i'll still trying to process that i am the next best thing to a fly on the wall. >> that might not have been the most delicate way of putting it but talk to us about lester holt and pred president biden talking about a deep dive into four

potential nominees, is that your understanding, a short list? >> he didn't go through names and very clear he was not going to do that, and the meeting lasted over an hour and incredibly generous with list time and understands the historic nature of this, the fact that we have 114 justices and 108 of them, ali, have been white men, and i have been surprised at some of the pushback from some of my republican colleague, not all of them, but some of them, given that they were overjoyed when rond reagan said he would appoint a woman, donald trump appointed a woman, and now, joe biden is taking the step to say he will put an african american woman on the court. so in the meeting, we talked about that historic significance, about the fact that this person would be attacked, we talked about the fact that we had already gotten 46 federal judges on the court, and all time record, really since ronald reagan was president, and that we also do not rule out, as he told lester

holt in that important interview, that we do not at all rule out getting republican support. i think there's a very good chance there will be republican support for the nominee, and the president goes into it with that open mind himself, and hoping to get some support and i think he will. >> so i thought that was an interesting point that you picked up on the president made, i don't want this to be an ideological choice, it used to be that the judiciary committee was less concerned about the idea that the president made an ideological choice, it was the idea of whether or not that judge, or that lawyer was qualified to be an associate justice or the chief justice of the supreme court, and it seemed to me that that's what the president was hinting at with lester, that when it comes down to it, we will find an appointee qualified and stand up to the scrutiny of the senate judiciary committee which is what your job is. >> and let me make clear, i

don't think in any way you need to short sell america on a strong nominee, when he's talking about someone like justice breyer, he's talking about someone who has an open mind and reaches consensus, but also is someone that has taken very strong stands for equal justice, including on the death penalty, and so many other things. so i really came away from it thinking the president has extraordinary nominees, that we, as the democrats on the judiciary committee, have been through a lot of hearings, on supreme court, from justice kavanaugh and amy coney barrett, to back to sonja sotomayor, and elena kagan, that we're united on getting a good nominee, and so is the president. i just think we have some excellent choices here. and also, we know, the attacks have already started against some of these nominees, we know that's part sadly of our politics today. but we're ready, we just say bring them on, because these

nominees are extraordinary that he's looking at. >> senator, good to talk to you. thank you for being with us. we appreciate your time. >> thanks. wonderful to be on. we've got much more of lester's exclusive interview of president biden next. le ster's exclusive inter view of president biden next

it's our ultimate sleep number event on the sleep number 360 smart bed.

it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to relieve pressure points. and it's temperature balancing so you both sleep just right. and now, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 24 months. only for a limited time. you just heard us play a little bit of lester holt's interview with president biden which the president confirmed he has narrowed down his supreme court short list to four people. the president sat down with lester in virginia earlier today for the first tv interview in months. aside from making some news about the supreme court pick, biden also made news on a number of other fronts including his administration's battle against coronavirus, the current debate over state mask requirements, and the showdown with russian president vladimir putin over ukraine. here's an extended part of that exclusive interview. >> mr. president, in recent days, we've seen numerous governors from blue states roll back indoor mask requirements.

essentially getting ahead of the federal government, the cdc. are those governors wrong? >> well, it's hard to say whether they're wrong, here the science is saying now that masks work, masks make a difference and there's a relation and there is i think only one governor drawing back immediately, most of them are somewhere in february, the end of february, march, april, they set a time limit and i assume it has something to do with whether the omicron variant continues to dive, and fewer and fewer cases. and because there's a relationship between the number of cases you have in your commune, and the need for wearing masks. >> you know there's a restlessness, and leaders bowing to the political winds. >>er, oh, i do, omicron and all of the variants have had a profound impact of the psyche of the american people. >> should children be required to wear masks in schools? >> well, look, when i took office it was 46% of schools

open and now 98% are open and they're wearing masks and every day children are being more protected and we're on the verge of having shots for children under the age of seven, and young children, and so the more protection they have, probably you're going to see less and less requirement to have the masks. >> the cdc hasn't changed its guidance on that and the question is, with these governors making these moves, does it begin to make the government, the cdc irrelevant, that people will gravitate toward the advice that really fits their world view, that this thing feels like it's over? >> well, look, i think it's one thing to say it's, to talk about masks other than to talk about shots, and boosters and the like, but it's, look, it is confusing, it's worrisome to people, and they're trying to figure out, but what i've tried to, do i've tried to make sure we have all of the vaccines needed, all of the boosters needed, all of the masks needed, all of the protection needed.

>> are you afraid some states and cities are moving too quickly to loosen indoor mask mandates? >> well, you know, it's -- i committed that i would follow the science, the science say as put forward by the cdc, and the federal people, and i think it's probably premature, but it's, you know, it's a tough call. >> and i asked about the tense standoff with russia, over ukraine. >> what are your plans toward american citizens who are in ukraine, and might be there during an invasion, and what scenarios would you put american troops to rescue and get americans out. >> you're not, when americans and russians start shooting at another world, we're in a very different world. >> not even on behalf of simply evacuating americans? >> how do you do that? how do you find them? if he's going to go in, i hope

he's smart enough to do anything that would impact on american citizens. >> you have told him that? >> yes. >> you have told him that americans will be aligned, that they can't cross, that there is a line that they can't cross? >> i didn't have to tell them that. i've spoken about that, he knows that. and you know, it's a little bit, look, that's, what i've asked is american citizens should leave, should leave now, we're dealing with one of the largest armys in the world, this is a very different situation, and things could go crazy quickly. >> on the subject of american citizens, i have to draw your attention to that army report and investigative report that has come up about the lead-up of the withdrawal from afghanistan and interviewed many military officials and officers, who have said the administration ignored the handwriting on the wall and another described folks trying to get ready in the embassy to evacuate and encountering people essentially in denial of the

situation. does any of that ring true to you? >> no, no. that's not what i was told. >> you were told that the u.s. administration officials were prepared, they knew it was time to get out? >> no, what i was told, no one told me that, look, there is no good time to get out, but if we had not gotten out, they acknowledge weed would have put a hell of a lot more troops back in, 2,000, 4,000, we would have to significantly increase the number of troops and we're back in this war of attrition, and there's no way we were ever going to unite ukraine. i mean, excuse me, iraq. afghanistan. no way that was going to happen. and so this is a much wiser thing to do. >> i just want to clarify, are you rejecting the conclusions or the accounts that are in this army report? >> yes, i am. >> not true? >> i'm rejecting them. >> more of lester's exclusive interview with president biden

will air tomorrow morning on the "today" show. one more story for you tonight. stay with us. " show one more story for you tonight stay with us

this is the graceful, she is a $100 million super yacht, the length of three basketball courts, according to the web site, boat international, she has an indoor pool, that can be converted into a dance hall, a drop-down screen and projector for private ocean movie

screenings, a heli-deck to land your helicopter, a gym, a cocktail bar and a spa pool alongside another two plunge pools for either hot or cold dips. back in september, the graceful docked at a german shipyard for some upgrades. she was there to be retrofitted with two brand new balconies and an extended swimming platform. but then suddenly, this week, german media reported that the graceful was departing that shipyard unexpectedly before workers could finish their upgrades, and this is important, because the russian owner of the graceful is believed to be none other than the russian president, vladimir putin. putin's luxury party boat was relocated from german waters into russian territory, leaving some to believe that the russian president is trying to get the boat out of nato controlled seas so that it cannot be seized as part of any u.s. and european sanctions following a russian incursion into ukraine.

now, we do not know for sure if this is vladimir putin's boat and whether he decided to move his big naught nautical nightclub. but as rachel would say, watch this space, or watch that boat. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is up next. >> it should be flushed one times, as opposed to ten times. >> enough with the toilets. toilets. >> sinks. showers. and what goes with a sink and a shower? >> ten times. ten times. >> you better say it. they only talk about that, because it's sort of gross to talk about, correct? so i won't talk about the fact that people have to flush their toilets 15