of his popular vote loss kept growing. popular vote loss kept growing. it was 1.5ment. it was 1.7 million, it was 2 million.it ultimately, hillary clinton would win the popular vote by nearly 2.9 million votes. and the reason for this was california. you see california famously takes a very long time to tally all itsballs because there are a -- ballots because there are a lot of ballots there for one thing andlo as they counted the ballots, hillary clinton's popular voteot margin kept increasing and obviously this was incredibly annoying to

donald trump not content to have won thely election, he began claiming to have also won the popular vote. if you deducted the millions of people who he claimed illegally voted in california. and obviously millions of people did not vote illegally in california, trumpdi did not win the popular vote, but there is an in arguable logic to the whole claim, it looks like we lost, but if you throw out millions of votes from the opponent, i win and then took the logic to a more ridiculous direction, if you just didn't count california, trump would have won the popular vote. problem solved. in fact, one conservative talk show host and former republican congressman tweeted, quote, i know california's a state, and i know we have to count it. but if you remove california, trump won the popular vote by 1.4 million.

case closed. it's true. if you remove one eighth of the american population, then yes, trump definitely won the popular in 2016. throw enough out of your opponent's ballots and you win. than was wishful thinking of trump and his allies in 2016 but in 2020 they actually tries to do it. i know you remember this guy, his name is john eastman. this is him at president trump's rally on january 6th last year, the one where trufrl and his allies rallied up allies about the election being stolen and john eastman was a lawyer trump's plan to overturn joe biden's election win. he is the with that laid out this crazy memo with a step by step plan by which vice president pence could hand thes election to trump on january 6th. that plan in a nutshell was for

pence to declare that biden's win in seven swing states was disputed and therefore could not bete counted. emails just obtained by the denver post and published by "politico" show how john eastman was trying to lay the ground work for that plan and trying to create aan pretext for pence to reject biden's win in those seven states. what he did was he came up with a magic formula, by which those states would just not count a whole bunch of biden votes because whremember, if you just toss out a whole bunch of your opponent's voit, voila, you win. now, the reason these emails exist is actually kind of funny. in late november 20620, after the election, remember this, pennsylvania, republicans host trump lawyer rudy giuliani and his crack election fraud team, for a presentation on how the electionm, in pennsylvania had been stoetti stolen from trump. the trump team wanted ennsylvania republican legislatures to overturn their

stateur election results and ha the electoral votes to trump. butth a few days later, one of those republicans legislators writes to john eastman in frustration and says that he and his republican colleagues really, really want to overturn the election results, but giuliani's presentation was so bad, they don't know how to proceed. quote, honestly, the trump legal team was not exactly stellar at pennsylvania's hearing. and failed to provide the affidavits of their witnesses. it is for thisaf reason that i latched on to your comments that actual fraud is irrelevant when the election itself is unlawful. end quote. so this republican lawmaker in pennsylvania, writing to john eastman, saying, knowing our bones there was tons of frauds and illegal voting, but rudy can't provean it. so just tell us how we can still overturn the election. and john eastman, he writes back that the legislature could quote

simply affirm what appears to have been the results of the popular voteof untainted by the legal votes. says the republican legislators could cite their concernssl with pennsylvania's absentee ballot procedures and then use historical data to quote discount each candidate's totals by a pro rated amount based on the absentee percentages that those candidates otherwise referred. it continues. then, having done that math, you you'd be left with a significant trump lead that would bolster the argument for the legislature adopting a state of trump electors. that would help provide some cover. end quote. if the pennsylvania legislature would just create some new numbers showing that trump actually won, that would provide some cover for the plot to keep him in powerme illegally. it's magic. just toss out a bunch of your opponent's ballots and you win. just throw out the fraudulent

vote orsju the illegal votes or all the votes from california, it's foolproof. but it's worthvo remembering th john eastman was not the only member of team trump to try this neat trick. you may remember the infamous phoneyo call in which trump himself be rated georgia's secretary of state pushing him to find just the right number of votesto to make trump the winne in georgia but less well remembered is that republican senator lindsey graham also called georgia secretary of state after the election, and when he allegedly said on that call, it sounds awfully familiar in light of these new emails from john eastman. georgia secretary of state raffensperger told the "washington post" that lindsey graham had called him and asked him whether he could toss out all of the mail ballots in certain counties. quote, raffensperger said he was stunnedot that graham appeared suggest that he find a way to toss legally cast ballots. sure looked like he was wanting to go down that road,

raffensperger said. graham denied it at the time. you or did you not ask him>> to throw out votes? no, that's ridiculous. to him about how to verify -- >> why did the senator from south carolina call him, the secretary of state in raffensperger?se >> i talked to arizona, i talked to the people in nevada, weave its got contests all over the nation. >> yeah, really, nothing weird at all aboutna the chairman of senate w judiciary committee calling officials in swing statesca right after the electi asking them whether they are sure they counted allng the vot right. >> when asked if the ballots could be matched back to the voters, and i got the sense it implied that theni you could throw those out, if you look at the counties with the highest frequent error of signatures. so that's the impression that i

got. i just want to be clear on this, mr.i secretary. you say senator graham wanted to you find ways to get rid of legally-cast ballots because cnn askedle him about these allegations, and heas denied th, he says that's ridiculous. his words. that'sat ridiculous. >> well, it's just an implication that look hard and see how many ballots you can throw out. >> it wasn't the straightest answer in the world but an implication of look hard and see how manyim ballots you can thro out.ho could it maybe just be enough ballots for trump to win? i'm just asking for a friend. well, remember, that call from lindsey graham from the georgia secretary of state is part of the fulton county georgia district attorney's investigation into election tampering by trump and his allies. that georgia prosecutor just seated a grand jury for that investigation last week and today, our show confirmed that they, investigation has secured cooperation from multiple

georgia fake electors. and another key part of the john eastman scheme to overturn the election. vice president pence was supposed to be able to point to these slates of fake electors from the swing states as evidencef that the election results were in dispute and then toss outsu those state's votes because remember, if you cannot earn more votes than your opponent, you can always just toss out their votes until you win. as youus can see, we've got a l to get to tonight. joining us now is the former united states attorney for the eastern district of michigan,un barbara mcquade, barbara thank you for making time to be with tonight. look, this one shouldn't be complicated. i'm sure a lot of viewers watching us tonight say we already know what the end of this is. we'vead seen a federal judge weh in on illegality of john eastman's team, california federal judge david carter wrote back in march the illegality of the plan was obvious. dr. eastman and president trump launched adr campaign to overtu

ala democratic election, an actn unprecedented in american history. their campaign was not confined to the ivory tower. it was a coup in search of a legal theory, end quote. tell me what you make now, given that we've all seen that, what do you make of these new eastman emails? >> it is just more evidence that is taking what was once a fuzzy picture and bringing it into focus. what i was this plot? i think we are now seeing what it was. it was an effort to reach out ts some of these swing states, if you can knock off a couple of them, you can change the outcome of theth election, and flip the outcome. one of the things that is challenges to prove in any public corruption case isn't so much the what happened part of it, that part can be relatively easy, it is the intent. was there criminal intent to commit a crime here? and i think one of these text messages is sok powerful on th, the idea of needing cover, using it as cover, that to me is

really important piece of evidence to show that they knew what they were doing was fraudulent. and that's the key to a case like this. >> so i'm intrigued that you brought that up, because that's what i wanted tobr ask you abou we've got sort of two separate pieces of information here. we got new emails from john eastman, corresponding with a pennsylvania state legislature, in which he says,di if you do ts or this, you'll get some cover. and if the georgia secretary of state is to be believed, lindsey graham essentially pressured him to tossly out valid ballots in georgia ten days after the election. how from a legal perspective in your mind do those two things differ or compare? >> well, i think they suggest to me possibly all part of the same plot. this is again, as a fuzzy picture coming into focus, it seems to me the mostct logical charge here is a charge called conspiracy to defraud the united states, and it makes it a crime for two or more people to agree tofo try to interfere with the functioning of any agency of the government, and so if it

is interferoning with the election, we've got a number of different people workingel on different fronts to try to knock off a state here and a state there, and with these swing states if you could go from the bidenst column to the trump column, that could be the differenceou in victory on election day. and you can see the efforts of lindsey graham it reach out to georgia and to the secretary of state with the republican party, not doing any favors by making accusations against lindsey graham and it changes the correct when you have things like that. and some efforts in michigan, an pennsylvania, and thisn multi-state effort, if you can pick off a couple of them, you may recall there was a word from donald trump jr., we have many paths to victory and i think thesepa are the things that he s talking about. >>th we think those electoral college, what state, what county, what state might go a certain, way but this takes onn

entirely new meaning. >> barbara, good to see you. thanks for joining us. former united states attorney barbarafo mcquade. somethinges pretty remarkab happenedty today in the halls o congress, a group of protesters, demandedco the women's protecti rate to codify abortion rights and they weren't any regular group, you might recognize a few them. >> my decision? >> we can't hear you. >>on my decision. >> my body. >> my decision. >> mi body. >> my decision. >> my body. >> my decision. >> more on the outcome of that vote and if past is a guide, staunch republican messaging may backfire for republicans. that's next. sth republican messy backfire for republicans that's next. poise under pr and poise in her pants. it takes poise.

it's time for our memorial day sale on the sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your movement and automatically adjusts so you both stay comfortable,

and can help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, queen now only $1,999. only for a limited time. do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have $100,000 or more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without

finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.

xfinity mobile runs on america's most reliable 5g network, but for up to half the price of verizon, so you have more money for more stuff. this phone? fewer groceries. this phone? more groceries! this phone? fewer concert tickets. this phone? more concert tickets. and not just for my shows. get $400 off an eligible samsung device with xfinity mobile. take the savings challenge at xfinitymobile.com/mysavings or visit your xfinity store and talk to our switch squad today.

it was nearly ten years ago the 2012 election was just around the corner and two shocking words changed everything. >> if an abortion could be considered in the case of say a

tubal pregnancy or something like that, what about in the case of rape, should it be legal or not? >> well, you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question, and it seems to me first of all, from what i understand from doctors, that's really rare, if it is a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. >> 2012 missouri senate candidate todd aiken saying that survivors of rape don't need abortion not if it is a quote legitimate rape. it was an incredibly bad year for republicans trying to talk about women's rights a few months later, another republican senate candidate responded to a debate question about abortion by saying he thought rape was something god intended to happen. by the end of the year, none other than kellyanne conway was advising republicans to please stop talking about rape. saying this he should consider it is a four letter word.

that election did not turn out well for republicans, lost the presidential election and several senate races in conservative states like missouri, and indiana and north dakota. ten years later the right to a safe and legal abortion has been imperilled by the supreme court and republicans are on the verge of electing a new slate of candidates who will make the 2020, or make the 2012 election look downright quaint. in missouri, home of the legitimate red controversy, conservatives are rallying behind a trump candidate who had to resign from his last job for allegedly coercing a woman into self. and then blackmailing her about it. a candidate who was also facing brand new allegation, assault allegations, from his ex-wife. in indiana, the home of the rape is god's will fiasco, a man accused of killing his ex-wife just won a local republican primary, from jail. trump backed candidates in georgia and ohio are running for

national office trailed by assault allegations from ex-partners, and if you're wondering whether or not elected republicans have gotten better at talking about things like abortion rights over the last decade, well, take a look at this. >> the story of a sea turtle, and i say, the eggs, not the hatchling, that's also, but the egg, the criminal penalties are severe, up to 100,000 dollars fine and a year in prison. now why? why have laws in place that protect the eggs of a sea turtle or the eggs of eagles? because you destroy an egg, you are killing a pre-born baby sea turtle or a pre-born baby eagle. when it comes to a pre-born human being, rather than a sea turtle, that baby will be stripped of all protections, in all 50 states, under the democrat's bill. >> oh, you want to know what i think about abortion? well, let me tell you, you see,

women are like sea turtles. that was the montana republican senator steve danes on the floor of the actual united states senate. last night. with that picture of the sea turtles. the senator made those comments in anticipation of today's senate vote to codify roe v. wade into law and the bill needed 60 votes to become law and all a republicans in the senate voted against it and 49 of the 50 democrats voted in favor. you don't need to tell me which democrat voted against it, do you? right. the rest of the democrat's party is preparing to make that an issue in the november election but for many women november may toob late so what does everybody else do about this? joining us about this is alexis miguel johnson, president and ceo of planned parenthood action fund, alexis, good to see you, thanks for being here. neither you nor many people were surprised by the outcome of that vote. point there was to get everybody on record, and know how they

were going to vote again no surprises there. but what are you thinking now, after this vote, after the symbolic effort to kwoed codify abortion protections, what happens now? >> look, in a moment where we have been saying the sky is falling, that we thought the court was ready to overturn roe v. wade, and that the senate has an opportunity to act, not just once, but actually twice, to save access to abortion rights, you know, we got incredibly important to support the work here, of the senate, under leader schumer, to make sure that we've got every senator on record so that we can hold them to account, and explain to people why they can't have the rights that they want, the rights that they have been asking for, to be protected. so we thought it was incredibly important, and we're going to keep fighting, right? we're going to keep fighting at the national, state and local level, for access to safe and legal abortion, because what we

anticipate under this draft opinion is real, and it is what the opposition is already forecasting. either a full-on national six-week ban or further erosions to protecting access to roe not just in the 26 states that are poised to turn to stop access but essentially the entire country. >> so there are these 26 states, there are a fewer number of states that have a trigger law which means nothing would have to happen if row is overturned, there are a number of states that have protections in their state constitutions, protecting a woman's right to vote or a woman's right to have an abortion and the rights of people who assist in that abortion to not be sued. is that a direction that should be focused on or is that a long-term process? >> i think it is both hands, i think it it is incredibly

important to do everything not only to codify the rights in their state constitutions or their state legislation but to also create ways in which that care can be dorfed, within those states through their -- covered within those states through their budgets so i think that is incredibly important for a strategy as we need to expand access to care while we lose it and i think the people of texas and missouri and oklahoma will have to travel outside of their states, and part of what that looks like right now in terms of, which is effectively a post roe state with a six week ban. so when you have opposition, republicans talking about forecasting essentially, their playbook, which is a nationwide six-week ban, you have to consider the fact that, you know, essentially we know where they're going with this, they're not stopping with just the overturning of, and returning that to the states, they are trying to outlaw abortion all together, in as many states as

possible. >> let's just speak about that practically, there are a certain amount of logistics involved in any abortion service, and obviously planned parenthood and others try to reduce that, the obstacles and the logistics but there are some, and when you travel to another state, there are more and when you have six-week abortion bans, it becomes that much more complicated, because of the amount of time between when a woman finds out she's pregnant and then by which she has to have an abortion. >> yes, absolutely. a six-week abortion ban means you are finding out maybe two weeks after, so, so after a missed period, and that's when many find out they're pregnant and such a chilling effect on an abortion provision in the state, so we know what it looks like already, ali, right? we know what it means for someone who has to travel a thousand miles to get child care and take time off from work, you know, and you know, secure an

appointment, find a hotel room, you know, pay for six dollars gas to drive a thousand miles, like all of those things are additional burdens that add up and layer up to someone being able to get the care, you know, abortion is health care, right? so the idea that you can be in a state that you are, where you're free, essentially, in a state, where you're denied, some very basic equality that one would expect being free, is just unconscionable. >> basic equality. alexis, the president and ceo of planned parenthood action fund, we thank you for your time. >> thank you. well, up next, the latest leak from the supreme court. yes, another one. we will tell you what it's all about. constitutional scholar joins us after this. ll you what it's all about. constitutional scholar joins us after thissome new healthier habits, too. what changes are you making for your type 2 diabetes?

maybe it's time to try trulicity. it's proven to ower a1c. it can help you lose up to 10 pounds. and it's only taken once a week, so it can fit into your busy life. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. it's not approved for use in children. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, which can lead to dehydration, and may worsen kidney problems. the choices you make can help control your a1c. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

last week, the whole country was shaken by the unauthorized publication of justice alito's draft opinion signaling that five justices were prepared to overturn roe v. wade. but in the wake of that leak, many supreme court watchers noted that information had already started coming out of the court a week prior. specifically, they pointed to this piece, published by "the wall street journal" editorial board on april 26th, that seemed to foreshadow the direction in which the court was moving. quote, chief justice john roberts tried during the oral arguments to find a middle way. he appeared to want to sustain the mississippi law on grounds

that it doesn't violate casey's test of whether there is an undue burden on the ability to obtain an abortion. if he pulls another justice to his side, key write the plurality opinion that controls in a 6-3 decision. if he can't, then justice thomas could assign the opinion and the vote could be 5-4. our guess is that justice alito would then get the assignment. the justices can change their mind, that's what the chief did in the obama care case in 2012, much to the dismay of other conservatives. roberts may be trying to turn another justice now. end quote. now, that was written a week before the draft opinion leaked. then hours after the draft opinion leaked itself, cnn that very same night reported very specific details about john roberts' position. quote, chief justice john roberts did not want to completely overturn roe v. wade, meaning we have dissented from part of alito's draft opinion. roberts is willing, however, to uphold the mississippi law that

would ban abortion at 15 weeks of pregnancy. now, days later, we saw yet another leak, when the "washington post" reported information based on private discussions inside the court. quote, a person close to the most conservative members of the court said roberts told his fellow jurists in a private conference in early deser that he planned to uphold the state law, and write an opinion that left roe and casey in place for now. but the other conservatives were more interested in an opinion that overturned the precedent, the person said. now, today, "politico" reports that justice alito's leaked draft opinion from february is the only opinion that circulated inside the court so far. it reports the liberal justices have yet to circulate a dissent. and there's no new revised majority decision. what we have seen is it so far. and it is still the majority decision. quote, none of the conservative justices who initially sided with alito have to date switched their votes.

that is just the latest leak from the court, as it prepares to deliver its final opinion, that before the july summer break this succession of leaks combined with the substance of the opinion itself has created a fire storm of controversy around the court. physically embodies by the eight foot high nonscalable fence surrounding the building and the groups of protesters outside some justice's homes. tomorrow the nine justices will meet for the first time face to face since the majority opinion was leaked and what does it mean for the court and the legitimacy going forward. joining us now is ken gy yoshino at the yale university law school professor of law, and thanks for joining us tonight. weigh, this because some people are all about the leak, a and most people, especially lawyers, are all about the underlying law and what is going to happen to abortion rights and perhaps other rights going forward. what's the importance or connection between the two?

>> i think the latter is par more important and you're absolutely right to focus on it. they are just important. but to keep it out of the way, i want to suggest that the dropping of an opinion is one thing, but the steady kind of drip drip drip, that the justices have imbedded forces inside of the supreme court, is really, really troubling. i just want to remind everyone that we think of the supreme court as this invulnerable institution but that wasn't always the case, if we go back to the founding we see the court was in fact a very fragile institution and the supreme court justices would often leave the supreme court to be on state court or foreign diplomats and would be quite unimaginable today. over time, it has filled up its prestige and mystique and a lot of that has to do with the procedural regularity and the confidentiality and the more of that gets breached, as these leaks suggest that they are being breached, the more that

the legitimacy of the court is going to take a hit. so one thing that i want to look for, ali, is in the future case, are we to expect similar decisions dropped, draft opinions, prior to the issuance of the important itself. >>, of the opinion itself. >> it feels like the issuance of a regulation, where draft regulations are subjected to a notice period and comment procedure before they become final. that's not how the supreme court rolls. it's how my city council rolls. it's how a lot of states roll when they've got a new law to put out there. you suggest that that would be a sea change, that hey, they float something out there to see how it goes, and wait to get feedback before their final decision. >> absolutely. the supreme court has guarded confidentiality and those who know don't talk and those who talk don't know.

so looking at that article that was published a couple of hours ago in the "new york times," the supreme court is now starting to look like the other branches of government, and starting to look comparably leaky, in ways that can only damage its legitimacy going forward. >> so let's assume that there are a lot of americans who think the legitimacy is damaged. either because of the politicization of the court or the leaks or things like that. what's the fix? and in attempting to fix it, do you risk more damage? >> i think that the fix is really, first of all, to think about how to stop leaking, right? but i think more deeply, more importantly as you gestured at the top of the conversation it is to make sure we keep our eyes on the prize and what's important. because when i think about those two threats to the legitimacy of the court, there are really two of them. one is the leakiness, and the other one is the substance of the draft itself. and as threatening as these leaks are, they are nothing

compared to the tram bling of precedent and the trampling of rights that are embodies in the draft opinion. so my real concern about the leak is that i'm quite ambivalent about talking about them, even though they're important, i'm ambivalent about talking about them because every single minute we talk about the leak is not talking about the horror of the substance of the opinion itself. >> let's do that. one is reading the constitution, one comes away with two things. there is a lot of remarkably interesting stuff in the constitution, and it feels a little removed from our daily lives because it doesn't enumerate rights that we know to be ours and we know to be protected and not written in the constitution. alito made a reference to the fact that roe is not secure because abortion is not an enumerated right in the constitution. a lot of people have looked at that, a lot of smart people have looked at that and that argument doesn't hold a lot of water. >> right. so first of all, we all know that there are unenumerated

rights in the constitution. the right to marry, the right to vote, the right to travel across state line, none of these are enumerated in the constitution and in fact, the ninth amendment says the enumeration in the constitution, rights will not be construed to deny, by the people, so there are texts in the constitution that tells toss there are nontext ule rights in the constitution if you will. so the question is not whether there are unenumerated rights but which ones are going to be protected and the devastating impact of this opinion is that it articulates a task that endangers so many of the personal rights that have been assured over the past, you know, five decades or so, since the connecticut case of 1965. so i again want to focus us on the abortion right, the most thing that the opinion did, it went back to a 1970s vision of what women autonomy and equality

means. in this country. and that is a horrifying aspect of the opinion. and all of us who consider ourselves allies, to women, to actually be extremely concerned about that, to put it mildly. and i also want to say that the additional terrible part of this opinion is that it says the only unenumerated rights we will protect are those quote-unquote deeply rooted in the nase's history and tradition. if we apply that test, which the court to the contrary ignored prior precedent, what we would get rid of are things loo the right to same-sex marriage, the right to privacy and our sexual conduct, the right to contraception and the right to interracial marriage. we should all be sounding the alarm bell. you start to see, ali, why i'm a little less concerned about the league and more concerned about the substance of the opinion, because even if, in response to this leak, let's say best case scenario, they change the

opinion and water it down and they come up with a different version of what they wrote in the draft opinion, they still cannot sort of unring the bell, we now know there are five justices on the supreme court who are willing to completely trammell on the personal rights that we all depend on for a functioning modern society. >> you made your case well, professor yoshino, we appreciate, it kenji yoshino, a professor of constitutional law at new york university law school. we appreciate your time tonight. still ahead, senator chris murphy joins us next to talk about the war in ukraine. america's role in it. and today's vote on abortion rights. stay with us. on abortion rights stay with us

on a day without migraine my whole body feels free. because my eyes don't shy from the light. my head doesn't pound. and my stomach isn't nauseous. it's time for migraine prevention delivered differently, through an iv infusion. it's time for vyepti - a preventive treatment for migraine in adults. vyepti is designed to start working fast, and to last with a 30-minute iv infusion, 4 times a year delivering 100% of the medication directly into your bloodstream. the power of a vyepti infusion can help to reduce monthly migraine days. some had fewer migraine days with the very first treatment. don't take if allergic to vyepti. common side effects are allergic reactions, stuffy nose, and scratchy throat. allergic reactions include rash, swelling, trouble breathing, hives, and redness of the face.

choose to infuse with migraine prevention delivered differently. talk to a neurologist or migraine specialist about vyepti. learn how you could save. it's time for our memorial day sale on the sleep number 360 smart bed. why choose proven quality sleep from sleep number? about vyepti. because every green thumb, 5k, and all-day dance party starts the night before. the 360 smart bed senses your movement and automatically adjusts to help keep you both comfortable all night. and can help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. sleep number takes care of the science. all you have to do is sleep.

during our memorial day sale, save $1,000 on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, queen now only $1,999. only for a limited time. to learn more, go to sleepnumber.com. . today more than a dozen ukrainian soldiers reported to an artillery school in southwest germany to begin training on the howitzer 2,000, a great big gun that fires 155 millimeter rounds of targets that rup to 35 miles away. this marks the first time troops from ukraine's armed forces have received this kind of instruction in germany. and it comes less than a week after germany announced it would send seven of the self propelled long range artillery systems to ukraine, which is a reversal of german policy to not send heavy weaponry to war zones because of the nazi history.

u.s. has sent to ukraine 90 of our own howitzer system, along with 184,000 artillery rounds, and in addition to lots of other material. this is video of troops on an air reserve base in california, loading up some of those howitzer for shipment last month. last night the house voted overwhelmingly to pass a bill that would provide another $40 billion of military and humanitarian aid to ukraine. in addition to the nearly $14 billion that lawmakers approved in march. president biden asked congress to approve $33 billion but lawmakers increased that funding. now, it heads to the senate where democratic leader senator schumer has pledged swift action to pass it and that could happen as early as tomorrow. and the ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy released this message, thanking the united states, he said, the funds would be quote used quickly and without any red tape to strengthen the defenses of ukraine. and u.s. officials are keen to get aid to the country as soon as possible. here's the defense secretary lloyd austin and the house

appropriations subcommittee meeting today. >> our most urgent goal continues to be sending the ukrainians the capabilities they need most right now, as the war has shifted to the donbas and to the south of the coming weeks will be critical for ukraine. >> joinings now is the democratic senator chris murphy of connecticut, he's a member of the foreign relations committee, a part of the bipartisan delegation to travel to serbia last month, to urge them to join europe in imposing sanctions on russia. he is just the lawmaker we want to hear about on this issue. so senator murphy, thank you for being here tonight and i want to get your take on this. you've been to ukraine. you visited with president zelenskyy a few times now. you got a real sense of him and the country and the way the war is going. give me your 30,000 foot view to go alongside defense secretary austin's, that something about the next few weeks is going to be crucial for this war for ukraine.

>> yeah, you know, i probably have been to ukraine as many or more times than any other member of the senate. and listen, we are all absolutely blown away by the capacity, the heroism of the ukrainian people, and their armed forces, but you are right, we are entering a really critical moment in this war. ukraine has the opportunity to go on the offense in eastern ukraine to deliver a pretty crippling blow to russia. russia is certainly looking at the end of this year, knowing that they are soon going to run out of money to continue to fight this war, they are going to start running out of defense material, as are defense import sanctions start to take hold, and the next few weeks are critical. because as russia's objectives start to become more limited, we have the opportunity to push them back on their heels even as they seek to control only a

portion of ukraine, very different than their original goal to take over the entirety of the country. and listen, this matters because everybody's watching. the chinese are watching. they have ambitions to invade taiwan and as they watch russia fail, as they watch russia pay this enormous price for their invasion in ukraine, it re-sets their calculation about what they may do. and so we're trying to keep the post world war ii order vaguely intact in the next few weeks, and it will be critical whether we succeed or fail in that mission. >> you made an interesting point. i think in the last week, china sent 48 aircraft into taiwanese air space. joe biden has made a commitment at some point that if taiwan comes under some sort of attack, america will stand by it. but the american public is frustrated by war. and participation in war. and the american public like every republic everywhere in the world is frustrated by high gas prices. as the director of national

intelligence said today this could end up being a longer term war than expected, isn't that advantage russia? doesn't it make it harder for america to convince allies around the world and the american people that whatever pain everybody's putting up with is going to go on longer? >> well, as barack obama once famously said, i'm not against all war, i'm just against dumb wars. and the american public know dumb wars when they see them and they know wars of choice like the war in iraq and american people support american engagement in ukraine's war because they know ukraine doesn't ask for this war. this is fundamentally different than any other engagement and i think the american people do understand that this is a hinge moment in world history, and america needs to be present. i take your caution though, as this war drags on, there certainly is a potential that it fades from the news, and the american public will turn to other subjects, but as i stated earlier, russia has more to lose from a long war, because these

sanctions are crippling, they only have a certain amount of reserve, as europe and the united states start to ween ourselves off of russian oil and gas, they simply aren't going to have the money to pay for all of what they're trying to do in eastern ukraine. so yes, there's a risk that the world starts to lose focus, but there's a bigger risk that russia's just going to run out of cash. >> senator, i want to ask you, your republican colleagues and senator joe manchin voted to block an abortion rights bill from being considered in the senate. can i get your sense what has to happen next. >> we have to win elections. as you sought right now today, we have 49 votes maybe 50, 51 votes for bills that protect a woman's right to make decisions over their own body. and keep government out of those decisions. and well, we've got to keep the heat on, and the republicans, i don't think it is going to be the last vote we'll take on the issue of choice, between now and

the end of the year, and we just need to up our numbers, because we need to do two things, we need to get more pro-choice senators, more democrats and you can get more people in the senate who are not going to let the rules stand in the way of the majority of americans, 65% of which don't want the government to make decisions over women's health care, to be able to have bills passed that protect those rights. so let's just go out there and win election, get more pro-choice members of the house and the senate elected and maybe things will look different next january. >> democratic senator chris murphy of connecticut, a member of the foreign relations committee, we appreciate your time tonight, sir. >> thank you. we'll be right back. , sir. >> thank you. we'll be right back.

this? this is supersonic wifi from xfinity. it's fast. like, ready-for- major-gig-speeds fast. like riding-a-cheetah fast. isn't that right, girl? whoa! it can connect hundreds of devices at once. [ in unison ] that's powerful. couldn't have said it better myself. and with three times the bandwidth, the gaming never has to end. slaying is our business. and business is good. unbeatable internet from xfinity. made to do anything so you can do anything.

that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow here on msnbc prime. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is up next. the majority of the american people believe in defending a woman's right to choice, to decide what happens to her own body. and this vote clearly suggests that the senate is where the majority of americans are on this issue. >> we are going to focus on this issue again and again and again between now and november. we are going to keep fighting and keep fighting and keep fighting. until we win. >> reaction from democrats after a bid to