about it. so in one regard this is a national defense question. in the other regard, if it's something else, some other technology, people want to know who or what is flying these things, hallie. >> gadi schwartz, we look forward to seeing more of your reporting tonight. appreciate it. "deadline white house" starts right now. ♪♪ hi, everyone, it's 4:00 in new york. president joe biden today out with a call for all americans to reject the racist ideology that has time and time again led to deadly and delaware stating violence in communities all across the united states. afternoon meeting with the families of the victims of the mass shooting in buffalo that took place four days ago, visiting the memorial near the site of the shooting, president biden give a speech in which he commemorated each of the ten victims, and then he said this. >> white supremacy is a poison.

it's a poison. [ applause ] >> running through our -- it really is. running through our body politic. it's been allowed to fester and grow right in front of our eyes. no more. i mean, no more. we need to say as clearly and forcefully as we can that the ideology of white supremacy has no place in america. [ applause ] none. look, failure in saying that is going to complicity, silence is complicity. it's complicity. we cannot remain silent. i call all americans to reject the lie, and i condemn those who spread the lie for power, political gain, and for profit.

[ applause ] >> president joe biden's clear eyed denunciation there of white supremacy as a poison marks a return to an issue that animated and inspired his run for the presidency, what he described at the time as a battle for the soul of america. but now "the new york times" reports, quote, the challenge for a president who came to office preaching unity may be how to take on those preaching hate, and in the wake of the mass shooting in buffalo inspired by the racist great replacement theory conspiracy, the political party and the movement that has wielded the racist theory as a political tool shows no signs of remorse or retrospection today. nbc news caught up with several republican senators to ask them about replacement theory and its chief cheerleader tucker carlson, senator thom tillis claims that, quote, i've never had any fellow republican bring up or even allude to its merit,

referring to replacement theory. senator lindsey graham claimed that replacement theory is more liberal talking about republicans, and senator ron johnson doubled down saying he has no concerns about his comments back in april 2021 when he said on fox news that democrats are trying to, quote, remake the demographics of america. and from fox news, nothing short of flagrant disinformation in service of obscuring fox's own role in making replacement theory a mainstream rundown item. take a listen to what two of fox's most watched hosts had to say last night. >> yet, even the buffalo authorities confirmed that the buffalo killer was a lone wolf, the journalists at rolling stone say, no, no, no. there are accomplices here. the republicans. it's so weak. i don't even want to talk about it tonight because it's so predictable. it's so lame because the real

accomplices are in the media. >> what he wrote does not add up to a manifesto. it is not a blueprint for a new extremist political movement, much less the potential inspiration for a racist revolution. anyone who claims that it is is lying or hasn't read it. so because a mentally ill teenager murdered strangers you cannot be allowed to express your political views out loud. that's what they're telling you. >> so weak, we're going to lead with it. that's where we start today. one of our favorite reporters and friends, ere roll suthers is here director of home grown extremism studies at the university of southern california. and miles taylor, former chief of staff at the department of homeland security. carl cameron is here, he's the cofounder of front page live and the former chief political correspondent for fox news. he and i have spent many miles on the campaign trail together over the years. it's great to see you, and here at the table with me, donny deutsch, host of the podcast on

brand. carl, i want to start with you, i want to ask you what goz on? i mean, obviously a mass shooter is responsible for the violence and the heinous acts that the mass shooter committed. it is also true that the ideology left in the mass shooter's screen mirrors the ideology championed by tucker carlson. what happens at fox news when something like this happens? >> i can't even imagine. that's partly why i ended up getting out of there. >> yeah. it really is kind of horrible to think that journalists with national and international capacity are puting together this type of nonsense. i think the president did a great job. i wish he had done a lot of this a lot sooner, and we need a lot more from the left and the middle, and we got to watch out because the republicans have become the purveyors of misinformation, and when our two-party system is broken like

that, democracy is seriously in trouble. the president acknowledged that it's time to actually start doing things and maybe taking some names and putting people in jail. >> i mean, wow, carl. let me follow up with you. what you, i think just touched on maybe inadvertently is that where the mainstream of america is is frankly where president biden is today, saying the white supremacy is poison on our body politic. explain then how tucker carlson has so many viewers because he's not in the mainstream of the body politic. what he espouses is the fringe of the fringe. >> i really can't channel how tucker believes in any of this stuff and how the network can go through with it. i will say this, however, it is very clear that this type of lying and deception is catching on. there's racism across the borders, immigrants are being beaten up and being harassed

more than ever. judaism is constantly under fire, and all of this is essentially being accepted by a left -- excuse me, a far, far right community of people who have nothing but grievance based on lies. how a network -- and it's not just fox. social media in general is the biggest purveyor of all of this, and there's a couple of things about this that are really important. a lot of the immigrants who are coming over here use whatsapp instead of watching television or using other platforms, and if their aunt gets a piece of garbage and passes it on to the nephew, a lot of those immigrants are coming to the united states thinking that trumpism and the kind of nonsense that comes from fox news is an actual reality here. and again, it goes to all types of racism and hate, not just democrat versus republican or black versus white, asians, latinos, all of them are being

bombarded with this type of disinformation. >> yeah, errol, i want to get at something that carl's put his finger on, something john heilemann said yesterday. we focus sometimes to our detriment narrowly on the political debates in this country, but the culture has a problem when such a large audience can be assembled night after night for replacement theory conspiracy updates, which is, quite frankly, what is offered. i wonder who is at the table if we really want to deal with the whole of it and countering this domestic violent extremism. >> well, thank you, nicolle. there are three elements to -- and i'll just call them what they are, they're terrorists -- there are three elements that are important here, you need an alienaing individual, a legitimizing ideology and

enabling community. whether it's physical or virtual. so the first point about alienation that can be i'm not part of the mainstream. i don't fit in. it has nothing or little to do with mental illness. if you look at medical statistics, it will tell you that 80 to 90% of the shooters in america suffer from no mental illness. if you talk about a legitimizing ideology, that can be almost anything, usually based on race, religion, or some issue orientation. it's that enabling community, the fact that we now have a virtual community that you can find people who think like you, want to do what you do anytime you want and a physical community that won't speak up, so the president was right on point today when he said if you don't engage, you are complicit. he made a very good point in saying that. that enabling community is what we have to engage and have that conversation with. >> i want to play some more of the president's speech on this topic for all of you. >> now is the time for the people of all races from every

background to speak up as a majority in america and reject white supremacy. these actions we've seen in these hate-filled attacks represent the views of a hate-filled minority. we can't allow them to distort america, the real america. we can't allow them to destroy the soul of a nation. as president of the united states, i travel the world all the time, and other nations ask me, heads of state and other countries ask me what's going on? what in god's name happened on january 6th. what happened in buffalo. ask. we have to refuse to live in a country where black people going about a weekly grocery shopping can be gunned down by weapons of war, deployed in a racist cause. we have to refuse to live in a

country where fear and lies are packaged for power and for profit. we must all enlist in this great cause of america. >> i want to ask you, miles, and you have some news that you made yourself today, but i want to ask you if the toothpaste can be put back in the tube. i mean, i'm guessing that at least from mitch mcconnell's part, if he had to tell the truth, he probably sees this the same way joe biden does. it doesn't matter, though, because he won't say it. mitch mcconnell won't come close to delivering the condemnation of white supremacy that joe biden did today because why? because they make up part of the republican coalition. i mean, what is the explanation for why not? >> look, the why not, of course, is fear. they're afraid of alienating voters who now share these viewpoints, and it's ironic because they created this

situation. i mean, as we've talked about before, nicolle, we now see roughly half of the republican electorate endorse these conspiracy theories. so they have been mainstreamed so now the mitch mcconnells and others of the world may think are behind the scenes, but they're now beholden to this mob that they created. that's very alarming. to your question about whether we can put the toothpaste back in the tube, i say this as a counterterrorism professional, i don't think we can at this point, and i'm not trying to be dire. i'm not trying to be hyperbolic, but we've been talking about this now for well over a year and saying that the radicalization of millions of people towards these fringe viewpoints means that we are stuck with it. i mean, if i've learned one thing in the national security community is it is extremely difficult to deprogram people who have reached a radicalized viewpoint. it is extremely difficult to do. so, you know, i talked to one specialist the other day whose

comment was essentially, if you think the past ten years have been bad, you ain't seen nothing yet, and he said that because the underlying data here about the number of people who have been radicalized and could potentially take that next step to violent is extremely alarming. so i hate to say it, but at this point if mitch mcconnell and kevin mccarthy go to bed and grow a conscience and actually start to crack down on members of the republican party over this, it's already going to be too late. we have to start shifting into a response posture. president biden started off on the right foot at the beginning of his administration by issuing a robust strategy. now they need to start working on resourcing that strategy and operationalizing the efforts. we are going to be living with domestic terrorism for several years to come because the narrative has already been seeded. the troops, if you will, have already been radicalized on that side, and the threat is living with them. >> you know, carl cameron, you've covered all of these sort of figures at the center of these conversations, and we know

that kevin mccarthy, and we only know it because two investigate i reporters have the recording of it. kevin mccarthy was worried about his own caucus representing a threat of violence against other members of the house of representatives. what do you do if you can get to the first step of acknowledging the problem but you can't get those same people to say it out loud where it might reach some of the people who are still reachable? >> well, first of all, there's two things that kevin mccarthy cares about, keeping his leadership position and winning in his congressional district, and because he's been espousing all of this nonsense notwithstanding his complaints behind the as yet not released information, we've got a pretty good feel of it by now, that's what it comes down to. president biden said it, it's for power. it's for money, and it's

important for a politician to think of their election, and it's easier to fool people most of the time than by honest. that's the way the republicans have been playing this game for far too long, and unfortunately, occasionally, they win. >> you know, carl knew me when i worked in the republican party that has really turned into something that acts on antidemocratic impulses, that bolsters the lies of a president who they knew lost the last election, but on this question of acknowledging violence, i think the democrats have the republicans dead to rise. you've got a witness in the 1/6 congressional investigation, cassidy hutchins who has testified to mark meadows knowledge, warned that there could be violence around 1/6, and you've got kevin mccarthy on tape in his own voice worrying

about violence that could be created by the kinds of things his own members were saying. how do you not take republicans worried about violence being created by their own and take that to the country and say, don't believe me. believe them. >> first let me answer, you started off this premise with how does tucker carlson get 3 million viewers every night. a consult poll said 23% of republican males are okay with white nationals, white supremacist views. there's an audience out there. it's still a fringe, it's still a minority, but it's a fringe. what the democrats need to do, and it's so obvious at this point brand them with it. is basically take this replacement theory and now make it the republican racist replacement theory. make every republican answer, do you believe in it or not? brand every republican this is the party of the replacement theory. take what is a sliver or a real minority, but a minority, and make it the entire raise on dawn of the entire republican party.

it's the republican violence party. brand them, the very -- this is judo. the very, very heinous things that they stand for and are hiding behind, brand them with it. take a branding iron, put it on them so any mainstream republican has to wear that badge and go are you voting republican? do you understand you're voting for the replacement theory, do you believe in that? do you believe that immigrants are coming over to replace white people, and it's part of a jewish cabal, that's the republican platform. so make the republicans own it. >> miles, you've not some money in a political operation. you going to cut that ad? >> yeah, but look, we're going to be cutting that ad in spades, but i think even, you know, more importantly we need conservatives telling other conservatives to quit, and look, nicolle, as you hinted earlier, i've had enough. i've been a republican all of my life, like you i've wrestled

with what that means to stay a republican in a party that is mainstreaming not just conspiracy theories but violence. i tried and failed to save the party in my own little way. we tried to prevent trump from rising in 2016. some of us tried from within to contain his reckless impulses. we thought we beat him in 2020, but we didn't. trumpism is alive and it's well and it's fueling this so what conservatives need to do is convince other conservatives to quit the republican party. i'm quitting the republican party. i'm done. this is it, and other people need to quit too. that's how we send the message is we show that tribe that the tribe is going to shrink and it's going to go away if they keep behaving this way. >> if you look at counterextremism efforts that have gone well, what is your guidance for countering extremism and these radicalized views that donny said do represent a minority of modern

self-identifying republican white men, but a sizable number of them. what does -- i mean, does having prominent people quit help, or do they go underground? tell us what works. >> my guidance is that we have to treat it as the terrorist threat that it is. you know, we rallied on 9/11. there was no question about what the country was going to do. we are facing the same threat, and we need to go one step further. mr. deutsche on point. we should label them the domestic terrorist party. if we look at the last decade of data, and as you know, i teach, so i tell my students all the time in the words, without data you're just someone with an opinion. between 2010 and 2019 white supremacist were responsible for 78% of the murders in america. in 2018 we had 50 extremist murders in america, they were all committed by right wing extremists. it's time for the president to do when he was going to do when

he announced the plan for the counterterrorism efforts in the country if he got elected. put this to the director of national intelligence, make this a national security threat. vet our police departments and go back and then start to educate local, state, federal law enforcement on what this threat really is and start educating and make our communities aware of how vulnerable they are and how they are that enabling community ral threat. >> it's the data that clearly backed up fbi director christopher wray's testimony from a year and a half ago now in the fall or late summer of 2020. he testified to what you're articulating. i want to ask all of you about the role of social media and social media companies being part of the solution, what they are now, part of the problem, and i'll ask all of you to stick around through a break. much more on this conversation with our guests. plus, a number of significant questions remain for the january 6th committee investigating the insurrection.

new reporting on liz cheney's push to keep the focus on preserving american democracy and donald trump above everything else, and later in the program, a closer look at the cuckoo birds in pennsylvania. how wins by the two most extreme candidates there for both senate and governor could impact not just november but the country, making for some very nervous republicans and some cautiously optimistic democrats. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. ontinues after a quick break. after a quick break. don't go anywhere. my way out. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depressionoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke.

report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. 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.

(johnny cash) ♪ i've traveled every road in this here land! ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ crossed the desert's bare, man. ♪ ♪ i've breathed the mountain air, man. ♪ ♪ of travel i've had my share, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere. ♪ ♪ i've been to: pittsburgh, parkersburg, ♪ ♪ gravelbourg, colorado, ♪ ♪ ellensburg, cedar city, dodge city, what a pity. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere. ♪ erroll southers, miles

taylor, are all back. i want to show you how the new white house pres secretary dealt with where president biden would be explicit and where he wouldn't dignify some of the cheerleaders for replacement theory. >> the people who spread this filth know who they are, and they should be ashamed of themselves, but i'm not going to give them -- give them or their noxious ideas pushing the attention they desperately want. so the president has already called out this poisonous, false, hateful ideology including on saturday and sunday saying any act of domestic terrorism including an act perpetrated in the name of a repugnant white nationalist ideology is antithetical to everything we stand for in america, and that we must always work together to address the hate that remains a stain on the soul of america. >> carl cameron, what is more

uncomfortable? i mean, tucker carlson doesn't seem to like the coverage and the scrutiny. there's a real fixation, and i know this from my time in politics, there's a real fixation about the scrutiny. there's almost like an addiction to people's own followers, frankly, that happens on the right and the left, but especially with folks like tucker, it seems that the scrutiny really rubs them the wrong way. the voice gets real pitch, and there seems to be almost like letting them off the hook when they're not called out. what do you think bothers your former colleagues more, to be called out by name or to say i'm not going to dignify it and amplify it? >> i think to be called out. it has become an albatross. the way that these right wing organizations, fox and others make their grade is by getting more and more and more outrageous, and sooner or later

the rock falls on their heads. it can't continue like this. it really is preposterous to watch people who were -- put it this way, tucker carlson used to work at cnn. >> used to work here. he used to work here, carl. >> exactly. he is playing to a crowd he has created, and what he has created is a bunch of terrible, terribly lost potential voters. let's not forget, you know, only about a half of our country's population votes. we got a very, very important midterm and another presidential race coming up, and it's nonsense that's coming out of social media, cable, and your grandmother listening to the neighbor across the street and whistle down the lane and everybody's lying to each other because nobody knows what to believe. >> yeah, i mean, look, miles, we

focus on fox because in some ways it's the easiest to monitor. flip over at night and see what they're peddling, but the dangers that a lot of it does comes from the darkest corners of the internet. it gets platformed on fox and then disseminated more wildly. the social media piece, both the genesis of and disem nay tor of once elevated extremist ideology. how do you break the cycle? how do you get the social media companies at the table to do not just something different but everything different from what they're doing right now? >> well, i've got some thoughts on the social media side, but i do think that's the effect. you know, i'd go back to what carl just said. i think first and foremost, you do have to deal with the cause. i mean, leadership matters, and you've got these prominent republicans around the country who made excuses for trump and trumpism, then they made excuses

for the toxic discourse, and now they're making excuses for terrorism. is that worth it? is any job, nicolle, in politics worth that? is it worth a congressional salary to be defending not just trump and the toxic discourse but to be defending terrorism? i just can't imagine that that's worth it. that's why i would hope these people stand up and show a little bit of moral courage in the face of this. i mean, black americans are being shot walking through their everyday lives and the shooters are using the discourse that those republican politicians are peddling. it's time for a wake-up call. and to your point, yes, this is spreading in the same way we've seen other times of terrorism spread. it is the same because it is terrorism. we are seeing it spread online and across borders and across state borders, and when you go look at these plots, that's what you see. you see it disseminated on the internet. and social media companies, you know, they can't just say

whac-a-mole is hard, okay, because this isn't whac-a-mole. because in the game of whac-a-mole, the mole doesn't jump out and shoot black americans in grocery stores, okay? it's more serious than that. they need to be fully focused on this or they need to suffer the consequences, and i do think there is a role for congress here and that pressure needs to be on the companies to take that. >> erroll, what is your sort of -- if you had to create the architecture of social media at the table doing reforms sort of from least likely to most likely, what would you put those specific reforms out there to ask them to do? >> well, the first thing, nicolle, is we have the technology and we have the talent, and so there's a way to put guardrails up and constraints on these platforms and rein them in. i worked on the board for life after hate for many years, and as you probably know, they're a group of former extremists, largely right wing extremists who try to rein in people who want to get out of the movement,

and we partnered with the adl, moon shot and gennex foundation and we put a platform on google called redirect. and they would take people going there looking for some kind of extremist ideology. let's say you go and type in ku klux klan. it will take you to an alternative site saying why are you interested in the klan, what do you feel the klan is able to do for you. and put you through a series of off-ramps and offer alternatives. it's being done successfully. this is an international project. to miles' point, i still am just -- it comes as no surprise to me as an african american male, but i'm just -- that a person would get in a car and drive three hours because he feels endangered by 13% of the united states population just boggles the mind. by the way, on these platforms, 4chan, 8chan and

others, #whitegenocide is the most commonly used hashtag that's there, and they go there because they have people who think like them, act like them, and hopefully would like to engage like them. >> erroll, that's -- that's so horrific, i'm almost at a loss -- i am at a loss for words, but i wonder whether -- i mean, it sound like the numbers are too vast to have, you know, eyes on everybody, and we don't have a thought police in this country, but when you look back at the statistic that you cited -- and i want to put them up again, this is from adl, murders connected to political extremism from 2012 to 2021, white supremacy 55%, antigovernment 14%, those are usually the same. other right wing, so if you add all three together, they far outrank literally everything else, 75% of all murders. i mean, islam is 20%, left wing 4%, other 1%.

so when people like miles talk about being in the government and not being able to get donald trump to do anything about white supremacy inspired domestic violent extremism, when you see chris wray testify and i play it on this show all the time because it was so stunning that under oath he had to tell the truth. i have no reason to believe he didn't want to, but testifying under oath said this, what you just said, that by far the biggest threat is domestic violent extremism, and in that bucket, white supremacy inspired domestic violent extremism outnumbers everything else. when that is so clear, how do you -- how do you find the next mass shooter? >> well, rather than that question, again, it's about political will. we're stuck in this vortex of because we can't do everything we do nothing. so let me just pivot to california for a moment and why we don't have the threat of worrying about people carrying rifles and shotguns to the state capital. in 1967 when the black panther

party so incredibly armed themselves legally to police the police, governor reagan and assembly member mulfer decided to pass a law that we couldn't carry rifles and shotguns in public and it was supported by the nra because the black panthers were armed, so it's all about political will. that's where it's going to start, and we knew that when this happened in buffalo that he would be taken alive, we knew there would be a pivot to mental illness, and we know now they're going to pivot to blaming it on the president. this is so predictable. we need to get out of the vortex and decide to start to take one step forward before we decide we're going to sprint. this is a marathon, and we need to get started right now and we need to engage the community and the american public with what's really happening. >> so for that one step forward, what is your opening salvo? >> we're not going to win the next -- between now and the

midterms or between now and 2024 solve the social media problem. i want to go back to your question, do we call people out? you do call out tucker carlson. he is heinous, he is vulgar. make him the face of the republican party, the same way i said make replacement theory the brand image, the model of the matter. yes, he has 3 million viewers but to the mainstream republicans, to the independents, he's vulgar. he's atrocious. use him. give him more of a platform. say it is the party of tucker carlson. it is not the party of pat toomey, okay? it is not the party of mitch mcconnell. it is the party of tucker carlson. that's who you are voting for. use marjorie taylor greene, use cawthorn. use these people. you have a nugget of maga maniacs, not maga ultras. ultra is a good word. maga maniacs. they're racist and evil. make them the faces -- not even donald trump anymore, make them the faces of the republican party. >> the other side of it, having worked -- none of them have disavowed any of the people you named. it's not a stretch to say they

are the party these people. >> it's not a stretch at all. let's make that clear to both obviously all democrats and to the chunk of republicans, let's not forget, most republicans are decent, non-racist human beings, okay? we get caught up in this. almost guilt them. i can't wait to go to a dinner party this weekend and go hey, guys are you okay with this whole replacement theory thing? >> are you going to go to a dinner party -- >> that the party. that's what you're voting for. you don't get to pick and choose. you don't get to go i like their fiscal policy. the ten people who got killed in buffalo, you own that. >> come back on monday and let us know how those conversations go. most republicans tragically, i guess when i was on the other side, they vote their financial interests, and that's why we are where we are. erroll southers, miles taylor, carl cameron and donny

deutsch. on a day like this i really am grateful to all of you. thank you so much for starting us off. gearing up for public hearings on the 1/6 committee. we'll look at liz cheney's push to keep the january 6th committee laser focused on donald trump and his inner circle. that story's next. donald trump and his inner circle that story's next. the lows of bipolar depression can leave you down and in the dark. but what if you could begin to see the signs of hope all around you? what if you could let in the lyte? discover caplyta.

caplyta is a once-daily pill, proven to deliver significant relief from bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, caplyta treats both bipolar i and bipolar ii depression. and, in clinical trials, feelings of inner restlessness and weight gain were not common. caplyta can cause serious side effects. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts right away. antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may be life-threatening, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. in the darkness of bipolar i and ii depression, caplyta can help you let in the lyte. ask your doctor about caplyta, from intra-cellular therapies. >> tech: when you have auto glass damage, trust safelite. in one easy appointment... ask your doctor about caplyta, ♪ pop rock music ♪ >> tech: ...we can replace your windshield and recalibrate your advanced safety system. >> dad: looks great. thanks. >> tech: stay safe with safelite. schedule now.

>> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ what are you recommending for muscle pain? based on clinical data, i recommend salonpas. agreed... my patients like these patches because they work for up to 12 hours, even on moderate pain. salonpas. it's good medicine i'm dan o'dowd and i approved this message. tesla's full self- driving technology. the washington post reported on "owners of teslas fighting for control..." "i'm trying..." watch this tesla "slam into a bike lane bollard..." "oh [bleeped f***]" this one "fails to stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk." "experts see deep flaws." "that was the worst thing i've ever seen in my life." to stop tesla's full self-driving software... vote dan o'dowd for u.s. senate.

when traders tell us how to make thinkorswim® even better, we listen. like jack. he wanted a streamlined version he could access anywhere, no download necessary. and kim. she wanted to execute a pre-set trade strategy in seconds. so we gave 'em thinkorswim® web. because platforms this innovative aren't just made for traders -they're made by them. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade despite all of these

specific warnings, president trump and his team moved willfully to attempt to halt the peaceful transfer of power, to halt the constitutional process for counting votes. trump's stolen election campaign succeeded in provoking the violence on january 6th. on this point, there is no doubt. the committee has videos, interviews, and sworn statements from violent rioters demonstrating these facts. >> republican congresswoman and january 6th committee vice chair liz cheney has proven time and time again that she is unafraid to bring the conversation and the investigation back to its heart and its genesis. the republican party's leader and his potential criminality. today there is brand new reporting about her role as the driving force for keeping the focus on donald trump in those high stakes, upcoming public hearings. in a committee dominated by democrats it is still undecided

on whether and when to tell that side of the story, whether to make criminal referrals or even whether to subpoena donald trump and mike pence. "the washington post" is reporting that cheney, quote, has proved more aggressive than even some committee democrats in wanting to go directly after trump. she is supported subpoenaing members of her own party and aggressively pressuring former trump aides to cooperate and that chai knees has pushed tense debates among some members, some focused on security failures back to the ex-president because cheney believes that security in the capitol is a critical part of the investigation, but the capitol didn't attack itself. joining our conversation is former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, and former house impeachment inquiry majority counsel dan goldman, and national correspondent for "politico," betsy woodruff swan is here, both are msnbc contributors. so i know from watching liz cheney and frankly her father

talk about the threat of foreign extremism that liz cheney believes the threat of the extremism in the republican party cannot be dealt with without getting to the top of the organization. so i believe her focus on donald trump is not personal. it is not political. it doesn't benefit her personally or politically, be but it is all about the security threat. i wonder, betsy, when you look through at the kind of people that are being asked to come back, it strikes me that what we know about cassidy hutchinson as she spoke to the white house chief of staff's knowledge and warning of violence, she also name checked the republicans who were in the white house, tell me how much these final investigative weeks ahead of the public hearings represent that focus on trump. >> the final investigative weeks very much reflect congresswoman cheney's priorities as detailed in this "post" story in that it

shows the extent to which committee investigators are zeroing in on people with the closest access and the most detailed knowledge possible in regards to what the president himself was doing that day. of course we don't know what we don't know. we don't have a total complete list of everyone, who the committee has spoken to in the last week or two, but steps they've taken publicly and non-publicly very much reflect this laser like focus on trump himself and on the trump white house as an institution with responsibility for what happened on january 6th at the capitol building. the fact that the committee publicly issued these subpoenas going after multiple republican congressmen is one sign of that. the fact that the committee also issued a second subpoena for cassidy hutchinson who was a top aide to white house chief of staff mark meadows also shows

the extent to which this is what they're zeroing in on. this is what their focus is, and there's also no question in the case of cheney this is a pursuit that has both been driven by her deep convictions and that also, frankly, could be politically catastrophic for her. the likelihood that she wins a republican primary in the state of wyoming, it's not zero, but it's going to be way harder because of the work that she's done to drive this committee to focus on trump than it would have been if she'd spent the last year of her time in office, the prior year focused on different things. she's doing this because she is under the conviction that it's the important thing to do, it's the right thing to do, and frankly, it's unusual in american politics to see elected officials dedicate themselves so firmly to a cause that is so unlikely to help them politically. it really distinguishes her. >> well, i mean, the last thing you said is sort of an american tragedy, right? i mean, you could put her in a museum, no matter how this ends

because other than adam kinzinger, there's no one -- what the "times" reporters' tapes reveal is that everybody saw 1/6 the same way liz cheney did, kevin mccarthy did, steve scalise did, liz was the number three. they all saw it the same way. you've got one of the two major political parties who won't say it out loud because of what betsy just described. their political calculations, and i wonder, if you look at the impeachment case you presented to a rigged jury, frankly, the u.s. senate is what betsy just described. liz cheney is the only republican willing to put it all on the line because of conviction. you didn't have a jury that was willing to do that. when you look at this case and it's not a trial. it's public hearings for the purpose of educating the public, how do you sort of analyze this reporting on her focus on trump? >> i think in a lot of ways

donald trump is -- has to be the focus because he is both a cult leader and a bully, and i think that congressman cheney is exactly right. if you cut off the fish's head, then, you know, the rest of the fish just wastes away. and you know, you have all of those rioters who were saying on the day of on video that we are following donald trump's orders. you have all these witnesses. you have all these defendants whose defense is i was just following my dear leader, donald trump. so yes, in very many ways january 6th was all about donald trump, and i think what these hearings really need to focus on in my view is less about the security breaches. i think the quote that, you know, the capitol didn't attack itself is very well put. the security issues, intelligence sharing issues, those are all -- those are very important issues. the potential legislation that arises out of this is very, very

important. no one is discounting that. but what we really don't know is to what extent donald trump and those around him orchestrated, organized, galvanized, incited the events of january 6th, and then what happened on that day, and this is not a trial. i do not believe that they should be trying to prove the elements of a crime nor line up a criminal referral. their job is to share the highlights of an incredible investigation that they've conducted with over a thousand witnesses and 100,000 do you wants, and they should try to collate that and put it all together in a coherent story about what happened. it should be as nonpartisan and straightforward as possible because facts will speak for themselves.

you don't need a lot of editorializing when you have the witnesses there who will reveal what we expect to be some pretty damning evidence about mark meadows, donald trump, and those around him. >> how one subpoena trump ally in congress has changed his tune on whether or not to cooperate in the committee is something we want to show you after a quick break. don't go anywhere. you after a k break. don't go anywhere. # before i got aura, twenty-four of my online accounts were hacked! he uses the same password for everything. i didn't want to deal with it.

but aura digital security just dealt with it. what were we worried about again? shopping on public wifi is sketchy. but with aura digital security, my devices are protected in like 3 minutes. it's time to protect your life online with aura's all-in-one digital security. try for free today at aura.com what was that password anyway? ew. first psoriasis, then psoriatic arthritis. even walking was tough. i had to do something. i started cosentyx®. cosentyx can help you move, look, and feel better... by treating the multiple symptoms of psoriatic arthritis. 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. watch me. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. at adp, we use data-driven insights to design hr solutions to provide flexible pay options and greater workforce visibility today,

so you can have more success tomorrow. ♪ one thing leads to another, yeah, yeah ♪ [zoom call] ...pivot... work bye. vacation hi! book with priceline. 'cause when you save more, you can “no way!” more. no wayyyy. no waaayyy! no way! [phone ringing] hm. no way! no way! priceline. every trip is a big deal. it's time to get outdoorsy. it's hot! and wayfair has got just what you need. we need a rug.

that's the one. yeah. yeah we're getting outdoorsy. save on outdoorsy furniture, decor, and more. you're so outdoorsy honey. what are you... spend less on everything outdoorsy at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ introducing the all-new infiniti qx60. take on your wild world in style. ♪

if you end up being asked to come testify or subpoenaed before the select committee, will you agree to testify? >> i mean, look, i got nothing to hide. i got nothing to hide. >> if the committee does reach out and request anything, would you be open to providing it? >> it depends what it is. i'm not going to answer hypothetical questions but i think this is a complete sham, what these guys are doing. >> you've told me before that you have nothing to hide when it comes to your interactions with president trump on this topic, so why not automatically comply? >> we're taking a look at the subpoena. we just got it yesterday and we've already found that this committee has altered evidence and lied to the country. >> no, we haven't. our thanks to taylor from spectrum news in washington for those incredible interviews and answers from congressman jim jordan over a pretty short amount of time. in less than a year, his answer went from, yeah, throw open the door, i got nothing to hide, me and trump, we're good to, um, no, it's a sham.

this before and after, of course, he received a subpoena from the january 6th committee. he and four of his colleagues received those subpoenas because they refused the committee's question for voluntary testimony. don goldman and betsy woodruff swan are back. betsy, my question for you is, what are they navigating? i mean, these members have hired, in some cases, really good lawyers. why do they need lawyers? what's going on? >> essentially, it's a very high-stakes game of chicken between the select committee and this group of republican congressmen who now face subpoenas and the question for the republican members is just how far do they think the select committee is willing to go to enforce these subpoenas? did the committee issue these subpoenas just so they could say, look, we checked that box, it didn't work, but we did move it as far as we could, or did they issue these subpoenas because they were willing to take the further steps of actually trying to compel

republican members to comply, to share documents, to share information? one thing that's notable about the dynamic here is that there's been sort of a deafening silence in terms of republicans flamboyantly saying that they would not cooperate. what i would have expected would have been for all these republican members to say, no way, pound sand, take your subpoena and do something rude with it. we haven't heard that, though. instead, what we've heard is commentary like from the video you just played of members saying, we're taking a look at it, my lawyers are taking a look at it, i'm not sure what i'm going to tell you. that's the way this game of chicken works, and the question is, is the select committee willing to go any farther than they've actually gone? are they willing to try to impose fines? are they willing to try to remove members of congress from their committees? are they willing to go as far as to issue criminal referrals or to go to court and potentially create a really high-stakes

constitutional question that the supreme court would likely decide, whether or not a member of congress has to comply with this type of congressional subpoena? neither side knows what the other side is going to do next, and that's why we're in this really interesting and tense moment, and we don't know how long it's going to last. >> so, here's my question for you, dan goldman. if kevin mccarthy said on a conference call line with lots of people listening that donald trump would go and discuss the ways at which it would happen, resignation, which he deemed unlikely, impeachment, which he viewed as certain, and the 25th amendment, which the only thing he didn't like about was it was too slow, what was kevin mccarthy texting on signal to mark meadows or other people and how do any of these members know what the committee already has from the other 1,000 people they've talked to? >> well, that's exactly right, and that's why you need their testimony. sure, we know some things that they said. we have a couple of recordings of kevin mccarthy. but you know, his day is full of

conversations, i'm sure, that entire month of january, all about this. who did he talk to? what did they say? and the committee may have some of that information from the other side of those conversations. so, they have to be careful, and they also have to be wary of ethics investigations, of being pulled from their committees, but also just undermining their own authority in whether or not they want to comply with the subpoena from their own body of congress. >> let me interrupt you. >> so there's a lot at stake. >> with something that might change this entire conversation. this could be a game changer. "the new york times" has just broken the story that the justice department has requested transcripts from the january 6th committee. so, it may be, dan goldman, that it isn't just the 1/6 committee. it isn't just their own colleagues who want to know what they saw, what they did, what they texted, and what they knew about january 6th. it may be the united states department of justice. let me read from this new story from reporters glenn thrush and

luke broadwater. the justice department has asked the house committee for transcripts of interviews it is conducting, which have included discussions with associates of former president donald j. trump, according to people with knowledge of the situation. the move coming as attorney general merrick garland appears to be ramping up the pace of his painstaking investigation into the capitol riot is the clearest sign yet of a wide-ranging inquiry at the justice department. dan goldman, your quick reaction. i know we're just all seeing this. >> this is, i think, very good news for those who want accountability for what occurred on january 6th. this is exactly the type of coordination you and i have talked about, nicole, that doj should be taking a lot of the information that the january 6th committee has developed, and it's the clearest indication we have that this investigation that started with the actual events of january 6th is

expanding now into a potential conspiracy to overturn the election, which is a federal crime. >> let me read this to you, betsy woodruff swan. the "times" goes on to report that on april 20th, kenneth polite jr., the assistant attorney general for the criminal division, and matthew graves, the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia, wrote to tim, the lead investigator for the house panel, advising him that some committee interviews, quote, may contain information relevant to a criminal investigation we are conducting. "times" goes on to report that polite and graves did not indicate the number of transcripts they were requesting or whether any interviews were of particular interest. in their letter, they made a broad request, asking that the panel, quote, provide to us transcript of these interviews and any additional interviews you conduct in the future. as you've reported here and we've talked about, there have been a thousand people engaged. any theories on which transcripts are of particular or immediate interest?

>> this is a big deal, it's also consistent with what we've known, there's a ton of overlap between what the committee is interested in versus what doj is interested in. rioters and attackers, violent people who attacked the capitol cooperated with the select committee because the justice department and federal judges encouraged them to do so as part of an effort to receive leniency. we also know that a grand jury in d.c. has issued subpoenas related to the alternate elector scheme and also related to the organization of the rally at the ellipse that trump spoke at before and during the very start of the attack on the capitol building, so it would make sense that doj would want to just sort of hoover up all the transcripts that they can get. doj always moves more slowly than people want the department to move with perhaps the one exception of the indictment of

steve bannon. for the most part, though, it just -- they're not super nimble. they're not super speedy over there. but in this case, what we know is that they are progressing. they are pulling evidence together. it would frankly be weird if they didn't ask for these transcripts. the fact that they are asking for them is very much a sign that they're investigating a lot of what the select committee is investigating and that they're going to save some time by perhaps not repeating the select committee's work. >> for anyone just joining us, let me just bring you up to speed. we're covering the breaking news in "the new york times" from just a few moments ago that the department of justice, under attorney general merrick garland, has requested transcripts from the congressional select committee investigating the january 6th insurrection. we're here with dan goldman and betsy woodruff swan. let me read to you from this story, from reports glenn thrush and luke broadwater about what is an extraordinary development in terms of a near daily

cacophony of criticism that doj didn't appear to be moving quickly enough to look at the actual plot to overturn the investigation. ever since liz cheney, i think, back in january read from the criminal statute about the crime that it would be to obstruct an official proceeding, there seems to have been an accelerated exasperation is the best word i can come up with from claire mccaskill and others, publicly and privately, but "the new york times" breaking the story in just the last 30 minutes that the justice department has asked the house committee investigating the january 6th attack for transcripts of interviews it is conducting, which have included discussions with associates of former president donald j. trump, that's according to people with knowledge of the situation. let me read to you again when the "times" is reporting the request actually was made. "times" writes on april 20th, kenneth polite, the assistant attorney general for the criminal division and matthew

graves, the attorney for the u.s. district of columbia wrote to the lead investigator for the house panel advising him that some committee interviews may contain information relevant to a criminal investigation we are conducting. it does two things, dan. it confirms what they don't like to do, which is confirmation of an ongoing criminal investigation that, as betsy says, at least intersects with and overlaps with the work of the 1/6 select committee. but it suggests that, as betsy's also reported, even though it's going more slowly, it may not be going any less widely. is that a safe question or theory to have today? >> yeah, i think that's right. look, when the department of justice writes a letter to congress, they do so knowing that it will get out. so, my suspicion is that they have done everything that they can do quietly to gather whatever evidence they can get

without actually going to the committee. now, they are going to the committee. kenneth is the former colleague of mine in the southern district of new york as is his principal deputy, and they can and will move quickly when they want to, and once it gets open and confirmed as it is now, they will move quickly, and they can move quickly if they have the resources. but yes, i think what this is a clear indication, and by the way, i would expect them to ask for mark meadows' texts. i would expect them to ask for a lot of the documentary evidence that the january 6th committee has. there's no point in reinventing the wheel once you have gone overt and once you've confirmed that you are investigating this. but it does, as you pointed out, nicole, reflect that this is not a narrow investigation into, you know, the proud boys, the oath keepers, and whatever relationship donald trump may have with them. no, this is a wide-ranging investigation into what is and

was a massive, sprawling scheme to overturn the election. and while i know congressman cheney several months ago focused on obstructing congress, i think the more appropriate charge to look at is a broader conspiracy to overturn the election, which does not require as much direct proof about the intent of donald trump or others to actually obstruct congress on january 6th but backs it out a little bit at a higher level to talk about their effort to overturn the election. and what this letter seems to indicate is that they want access to all of these interviews beyond any potential obstruction of congress, because we know that the january 6th committee has looked into much more than just the actual events of january 6th and the planning, organizing, and lead-up to that. but they've looked at the broader effort to overturn the election. and so i do think you're right. it is an indication that the

scope of this investigation is as broad as it could be. >> so, let me ask you two questions, and then let me read some more from what has been happening at doj behind the scenes that we may not have focused on here but may, in hindsight, have actually been some more tea leaves. dan goldman, to your point, if they're investigating a conspiracy to overturn the election, it would seem cassidy hutchinson's testimony about the republicans who were in the white house planning to do just that would be a whole different thing from the calculation betsy's describing, which is under way right now, do we or don't we thumb our nose at a congressional committee? it seems like those lawyers may be earning whatever fees they are or are not charging those republicans. if they may now have to face scrutiny for potentially conspiring to overturn an election. >> nicole, we talked about this last week as a potential consideration for these members of congress. would they take the fifth? would they say that i am not going to testify because i'm

concerned that whatever i say could be used against me in a potential criminal prosecution? now, i would expect them to come up with some sort of sham reason, you know, that the committee is invalid, even though courts have determined it to be valid or it's partisan or whatever, before they would ever take the fifth. but that has to be a consideration, especially now that we know that the department of justice will want their transcripts. i mean, that -- what you're reporting says the transcripts of interviews you have conducted and you will conduct. so, they're in the crosshairs of the department of justice if they testify, and it has to be a consideration for them about whether or not their testimony would be used potentially against them by the department of justice. >> betsy, i'm concerned that perhaps you need to leave us to go do some more reporting. let me just read you a little bit more from this "times" story. the "times" is reporting that

several months ago, the department of justice quietly detailed a veteran federal prosecutor from maryland, thomas wyndham, to the department's headquarters. he's overseeing the politically fraught question of whether a case can be made related to other efforts to overturn the election aside from storming the capitol. that task could move the investigation closer to trump and his inner circle. this seems to be what the 1/6 committee has privately and publicly been suggesting should happen. any reaction from the committee yet about this news? >> i'm not aware of committee reaction yet, but i think we can very safely assume that they are more than delighted to share the investigative products that they have with the justice department, and of course, we've heard committee members suggest that they think -- that they thought doj was moving too slowly and needed to do more to deal with this. one challenge for the justice department that also has been a challenge for the select committee is just that this project is enormous. doj is a really big place. main justice, justice department

headquarters, is massive, but this investigation is arguably, i think, in fact, the biggest criminal investigation the justice department has ever had to deal with. hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of defendants. it's also one of the most legally and politically complex. no one wants to bring a charge against a former president or a former white house chief of staff or a former senior administration official and lose in court. justice department lawyers and prosecutors are going to be very, very cautious and circumspect as they figure out how to make next steps in this investigation. the other challenge for doj is not just factually figuring out the complex ins and out of what happened in the white house where we're already seeing stiff-arming from white house officials, including dan scavino and mark meadows. it's not just figuring out the facts. it's also figuring out a legal theory that may or may not work in court and part of the reason that that legal process is likely complex and time

consuming for doj, to state the obvious, is that this hasn't happened before. >> right. >> this is not -- these are not prosecutorial decisions. >> you can't call, like, your last coup prosecutors, right. no, it's a great point. >> there's not a memo in doj's office of legal counsel from the 1970s saying, hey, here's what we're going to do if the president kind of sics a mob on the capitol building. this is a big first. and it just means that the department is having to do a legally complex, politically complex, resource intensive project and it's going to take them some time. what we know now is that it's moving a little bit more quickly than we had previously realized. >> betsy woodruff swan, we want to thank you for staying over through the top of the hour to deal with this breaking news with us. we want to let you go with the promise that if you have anything in the next 50 minutes, you'll wave your arms and come back and join us to share with us. >> you got it, nicole. thank you. >> we are now joined by phone by one of the reporters bylined on this bombshell we've been covering for the last 20, 30

minutes, luke broadwater of the "new york times" is with us. luke, take us through what you're reporting. >> hi, nicole. yes. so, doj has issued a pretty broad request here to the january 6th committee. they want to look at a lot of the transcripts that this committee has been doing over the past several months. you know, we're talking about more than a thousand interviews that have been conducted. as of right now, discussions are ongoing between committee lawyers and the justice department about which transcripts will be turned over and how quickly, but it does show that the justice department has, you know, come to the realization that the january 6th committee has covered significant ground in their investigation, and rather than perhaps repeating some of these interviews or coming into them without knowing fully what has been told to this committee,

they want to have all this voluminous evidence in their arms before they take their next steps. as we know, a grand jury is investigating on behalf of the justice department and is looking at pretty broad range of aspects around january 6th. so, you know, this is a -- i think it's a pretty significant development in terms of the justice department now looking pretty much in sync with what the january 6th committee is looking at. >> yeah, and i just want to ask you to help us sort of understand the seismic nature of this development, because your story makes clear what we already knew, right? we already knew that prosecutors have already asked for records about anyone involved with the rallies. that was known. and we also know they're looking at the sort of vip rally planners and everything that happened before. this appears to indicate that they're looking for something

else. those subpoenas went out. they're asking for these transcripts. it seems to also coincide with the detailing of a veteran prosecutor. tell me what it looks like at doj is sort of on-boarded or prepared to start poring over what has to be, i don't know if you've got a thousand witnesses, you have to have hundreds of thousands of pages of testimony. >> right. yes. it's a huge, huge undertaking. >> right? >> but they've got it, i mean, very senior people in the justice department, senior people in the white house have come in. white house lawyers. you know, top aides to mark meadows. people involved with rudy giuliani's legal campaign throughout the states have all testified before this committee. we know that the justice department is interested in the fake elector scheme. we know this committee has evidence of that. we know that the committee has

sat down with the leaders of the proud boys and the leaders of the oath keepers. so, you know, there's no -- there's so much evidence that they could go through here, and you know, what it says to me is the justice department has taken january 6th very seriously, and in a way that people thought they weren't and now they're asking for everything that this committee has or perhaps post everything this committee has. so, again, this request did not name specific witnesses, and i think that's a matter of discussion that's going on right now about exactly what transcripts they want. so, they may well rule out some transcripts for some people, and request others, but it potentially could be almost any of the transcripts. >> let me read this from the story and ask you if there's anything else you can help us

understand about this. you write that on april 20th, so, what, about three weeks ago, not good at math as viewers of this program already know, kenneth and matthew, the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia, wrote to the lead investigator for the house panel advising him that some committee interviews, quote, may contain information relevant to a criminal investigation we are conducting. so, i guess i want to ask you, luke, it seems rather extraordinary for the justice department to confirm an ongoing and open criminal investigation. but two, explain these three individuals that are named here in this story, the lead investigator, plus the two doj officials, they all come from the same world, right? isn't he a former prosecutor himself? so, it would seem to me that this is content that's going to transfer pretty seamlessly. these were interviews and witness testimony that was

handled as though it were something undertaken by doj. >> absolutely. tim is a former u.s. attorney himself. he has more than a dozen former federal prosecutors working under him. i assume that these transcripts and these depositions have been done and in full compliance with sort of how doj would do them. so, i do think there's some -- there should be a seamless transfer here. that said, we're told justice department hasn't gotten these transcripts yet. they have been asking for them for a number of weeks, so you know, i'm not exactly sure what the hold-up is with that. but it potentially is just a matter of, you know, just so much -- so much voluminous paperwork to go through and transfer things over. but you know, from the start, these two committees have been working or these two investigations have been kept separate. >> right. >> the house has not been sharing their information with

the justice department and vice versa, so this is the first time we're seeing sort of a merging or at least a request for merging where, you know, this house committee could actually be providing evidence for the criminal case that so many people have been calling for that investigation. >> and luke, i believe it's your byline on a piece of reporting that offered sort of the clearest window into how the house committee was operating, very much like a criminal prosecution. just go over for us what that looked like, that the house committee had -- they had phone metadata, i think. they had subpoenas for other documents. they had thousands of mark meadows documents. i mean, just talk about how this house investigation has conducted itself. >> yeah, sure, absolutely. the, you know, they've requested not only phone records and text records but also bank records. they have been using the techniques that have been used against other -- against

criminal organizations in the past, where if you have one person who won't testify, you go down the line to a lower level person. if that person won't testify, go down the line to a lower level person and eventually you find someone who is not lawyered up, doesn't have the money for a high-priced attorney, isn't going to fight it and will come in and talk to you and we've seen some of that evidence come out in some of the court filings the committee has done where they have lower level aides talking about their boss's actions or things they've heard on calls or in rooms or in discussions. so, yeah, they are using some advanced techniques here to try to get to the bottom of what happened on january 6th. you know, the committee has a legislative purpose, and so they are not necessarily trying to charge anybody with a crime, but the justice department can do that, and many of the committee members have said from the start that if they do find evidence of a crime, they will send it over to justice so here now is justice coming and saying, we think you have some evidence

that's pertinent to our criminal investigations, please turn it over. >> it's an amazing sort of inflection point, dan goldman, and i wonder if you can come back for me to what we were talking about, the stakes or the calculations that the 1/6 committee has to make around the subpoenas for the five members of congress. it seems that luke and you have both talked about the fake elector scheme. you've got, i think, mr. perry involved in that. you've got donald trump jr. who was before the 1/6 committee who was texting a whole bunch of material to mark meadows in the meadows texts we've seen about that. you've got the sort of knowledge of the pressure campaign from mike pence. you have had marc short and mr. kellogg into the 1/6 of committee. that's under criminal scrutiny. they have high-level witnesses who would have been sitting in front row seats to those efforts. you've got the conspiracy so overturn the election, which involves all the government employees who have been in and out of the is 1/6 committee. just take me through the

different buckets of potential criminal conduct that could be under scrutiny by doj that 1/6 has touched. >> yeah, that's incredibly wide ranging and sprawling and this investigation will take a long time. if i could just take a step back and give a little insight into how i would expect this process to go. >> please. >> most likely, the department of justice sent the letter requesting everything but they're not expecting everything. it's just a blanket request that would cover any specific requests they have. then, they're going to get -- go into discussions with the committee and tim and his staff to figure out what they want first. the potential benefit of tim being a former u.s. attorney and a dozen other federal prosecutors is even though they are conducting this investigation for congress, they understand criminal law. they understand what potential

crimes are -- their investigation has revealed, and so, if there is true coordination, tim and his team can lead the team to the most relevant and important transcripts to give them a jump start and help to excise some of the fat that is potentially a side show or a side story. now, as to what they want, clearly, the department of justice is moving from january 6th backwards. so, they have the oath keepers. they have the proud boys. they have some of these violent domestic extremist groups, and a number of those defendants have cooperated. so, they've probably given them some information about who their conduits are to the organizers and potentially to the white house. they've also got the fake elector scheme, which is a separate tentacle. there's georgia. there's michigan. there's scott perry and his efforts to get involved with the

department of justice. so, i think what they probably will do is have teams that are focused on each of those different aspects of the effort to overturn the election and then they will sort of combine all the evidence that they gather and figure out how it all fits together. but my guess is that, you know, in short order, they're going to want everything that the january 6th committee has and they're at the point now where they're comfortable making that request public so that they have whatever information they needed in order to build the foundation for their investigation so they know where the transcripts and the witnesses and the potential mark meadows texts or other things might fit in to the foundation they've already built. >> dan goldman, tell me what they do and how they prioritize the transcripts that would be tangentially related to what a federal judge out in california

already said were likely felony crimes committed by donald trump and john eastman themselves. >> well, that may be a helpful road map, but i think it's, you know, it's all out in the public. at least what was in that court -- district court opinion. it's all public. it wasn't as if any of that stuff was other than, i guess, some of the transcripts that they excerpted, cassidy hutchison and others, which we have not yet seen, but you know, i think there's enough out in the public that is pretty damning and my guess is, you know, what we're going to see in june is going to be the stuff that's not in the public but that is really sensational and really damning evidence about, you know, senior level officials involvement in trying to install donald trump as president even though he lost the election. so, the department of justice

will probably use that as a starting point but again, just like we need kevin mccarthy's testimony to understand who else he spoke to, what else he said, his conversations with donald trump, i would need to interview brad raffensperger because i would want to know what other conversations he had with mark meadows or donald trump or any representative from the white house separate and apart from the one recording we have. all of these witnesses need to be extensively interviewed. the january 6th committee has done that, and that's a good start, but the justice department will have to weed through all of those transcripts and figure out which witnesses they want to interview themselves. they will have to interview any witnesses themselves that they are going to rely upon. >> luke broadwater, if you're still with us, i'd love to hear if you have had any reaction from any of the subpoenaed house republicans or any reaction from the committee since this story broke. >> no, not yet. it just posted. i was actually standing outside the house chamber, hoping to

talk to folks once i got the call to come on, so i haven't had a chance to follow up with anyone yet, but -- >> we're going to let you go to go do that as long as you promise if in the next 35 minutes, you have any more news, you'll wave your arms or give us a call back in and share it with us. >> sure, yeah, if i get anything exciting, i'll let you know. thanks, nicole. >> congratulations on the scoop. thank you for jumping on the line and sharing it with us. dan goldman, thank you. i know it wasn't what you were planning but thank you so much for helping us make sense of this really extraordinary development. we're grateful to you, my friend. >> thank you. we have much more on the breaking news that the department of justice has requested transcripts from the january 6th select committee. st requested trscanripts from the january 6th select committee

it's still the eat fresh refresh, which means subway's upping their bread game. we're talking artisan italian bread, made fresh daily! the only thing fresher than their bread is the guy reading this. subway keeps refreshing and refreshing and refreshing and re- at adp, we use data-driven insights

to design solutions to help you manage payroll, benefits, and hr today, so you can have more success tomorrow. ♪ one thing leads to another, yeah, yeah ♪ when traders tell us how to make thinkorswim® even better, we listen. because platforms this innovative aren't just made for traders —they're made by them. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade

joining our breaking news coverage of this real bombshell that the justice department has asked the january 6th select committee for transcripts is jason johnson, journalism and politics professor, also an msnbc contributor. also joining us, david jolly, the national chairman of the serve america movement, also an msnbc contributor. david jolly, i'll start with you. your reaction to something that i think some will say was a long time coming, but i think most will recognize as a pretty seismic development and/or both. >> it is a seismic development. i mean, the department of justice criminal division, the criminal division charged with investigating crimes, is asking for evidence related to their investigation, and importantly, we know from the "times" review of a subpoena that the criminal division is interested in the

organizers and planners and financers of the january 6th event as well as the events before that. and why that's important is it was people close to donald trump that were organizing these events. donald trump himself issuing the invitation, and i think what this is an indication of is there are now going to be household names under the scrutiny of the department of justice for their role in what led to the violent events of january 6th. recall on january 5th, sean hannity, one of the texts we've already seen, he texted mark meadows and says, i'm very worried about the next 48 hours. was there reason to believe that the events that the president -- the former president and his team has created, had helped organize, had helped finance through his new york, was there reason to believe that there would be violence, and was the former president okay with affirming that environment on january 6th? i think that's ultimately what we're going to see department of justice zero in on, and then

look, politically, i think this is a reminder that the effort to compel testimony from kevin mccarthy and jim jordan and others is not simply happening in a vacuum. we have no idea the environment that will be around those public hearings. what additional information will come out that further puts the scrutiny and spotlight on kevin mccarthy and others that really makes it untenable for them to take this position that they will not be responsive to this inquiry. because i think the department of justice affirms, this case is getting really close to the former president of the united states, and some of the people closest to him are kevin mccarthy, jim jordan, and others. >> let me just follow up with you, david jolly, because i think the testimony of cassidy hutchison, not a low-level aide, but a special assistant to the president, sort of the -- there's an assistant to the president, deputy assistant to the president, she's sort of the next highest level in charge of legislative affairs, her testimony is quoted in the meadows filing and the meadows

subpoena report that the committee did. and she testified to knowledge from mark meadows, at least, that he was warned of the potential for violence and then we also know for the whole duration that what the law enforcement officials defending the capitol described as medieval hand-to-hand combat, we know donald trump did nothing. we know that he laid eyes on or get ears on his own vice president and his family being evacuated from the capitol, running, not walking, from that office, we know he did nothing and we know when the calls from the national guard came in from democrats and republicans, house and the senate, he did nothing. so how much -- what do you think the burden of proof is on the knowledge of or awareness of violence on the president's part, david? >> i think donald trump knew that there would be actors embedded in the january 6th event that were prepared to commit violence. i really mean that. it is hard to suggest that all of trump's network was involved in planning the events of

january 6th as a culmination to the predicate, the big lie that had been set six weeks earlier, and that donald trump invited all these people to the event. it is nearly impossible to imagine an environment in which donald trump's inner circle did not know that the proud boys would be there. would be embedded in that situation. when you had the likes of roger stone and others that were descending on the capitol in preparation for this moment on january 6th, and to the point of a criminal investigation, somebody had to pay for it, somebody had to communicate about it. somebody had to prepare the plan, and that plan included donald trump ultimately standing up and saying, go to the capitol with strength, not with weakness. it is impossible, from a layperson's perspective, to imagine a scenario in which donald trump did not know that violence was a likely outcome, and fortunately, the criminal investigators and the work of the january 6th committee now in coordination, i think, are ultimately going to be able to deliver that indictment at the

shoes of the former president of the united states. >> wow. jason johnson, so much of what we think of when we think of donald trump is traumatic and it is wrapped in this sort of buffoonery, of his incompetence of running the government, especially in the time of a deadly pandemic. but when it came to the things that were about him and his presentation, his rallies, his song list, his hair, he was a micromanager. how do you think this investigation plays out? >> other, first off, nicole, i have to say, i'm incredibly happy. i'm incredibly -- i have been very critical of the department of justice for the last year, for appearing to move very slow, for not prioritizing the attack of the united states, for appearing to dawdle here and there. this is the best news that i have heard since the shaman was sent to jail so i'm very excited about this and i think this is a sign that not only the

department of justice obviously has evolved but that they have perhaps been taking this a lot more seriously than they have presented. we will see how this goes. i'm in complete agreement also about the guilt of donald trump. it is impossible to imagine that he not only didn't know that there was going to be violence, but that he didn't know who the violent actors were going to be. of course he knew. it's impossible to think that he didn't know. this is a guy who -- and what galls me about this and reminds us again of the danger not just of donald trump but the complicit of men and women who work with him is this is a guy who wouldn't read his daily national security briefings and yet he could be involved in trying to overthrow the country. he wasn't dumb. he wasn't crazy like a fox. he was just lazy and self-motivated so i'm excited to hear that this might eventually lead to his doorstep. here's the question. what finally happens and what enforcement mechanisms may occur when we finally get to the hearings? that's what i'm concerned about. will the republicans who have been subpoenaed still say, hey, make me, hey, i'm not going to show up, because if the doj is

involved in this process now, if they're asking for transcripts from these upcoming hearings, that's sort of the difference between, you get in trouble with the hr at the office versus, oh, by the way, we're also calling the cops. the cops are now coming to the office, and we'll have to see if people are willing to -- if they're going to ignore the office, at least listen to the cops who are coming outside the door. >> jason, when you start to ask the question of, well, who could testify to trump's role in this? you have to start with kevin mccarthy, who said on the tapes, yeah, he acknowledged his responsibility in the events of january 6th. >> kevin mccarthy, i mean, marjorie taylor greene, like, there are so many people. you can't imagine that in trump world, everybody wasn't excited about this. that's the thing, i think, that we also have to remember. this was not something that organically came together. do you know how hard it is to get a rally organized, even a regular political rally? it's not that easy to do. so this was something that people were talking about.

mike mccarthy knew. members of the members -- all the different members of congress. his staff, meadows, everybody knew. in fact, i think the only person who probably didn't know everything was mike pence. he might be the only person in trump world that didn't know the details because his life was going to be in danger if he didn't acquiesce, so there's no way that the trail doesn't go to the president. the question is, will the department of justice be quick and aggressive about laying this at the foot of the president, and will they have the integrity and the commitment to the sovereignty of the united states to hold him accountable? that is the only question that has stayed with me from the beginning, but this is at least a minor step in the right direction. >> for the record, jason johnson has never started an interview with the sentence, i am happy, so we've got that too. jason and david are sticking around with us because when we come back, it's primary day in the key battleground state of pennsylvania where the -- i don't know what to call them. maga on steroids crowd is being

challenged by someone who's maga on ten times more steroids like too much maga for maga. the latest on the race that could put an insurrectionist one step closer to the united states senate. nsurrectionist one step closer to the united states senate

insights illuminate better choices. allowing us to see differently and do more. with kpmg you have the people and technologies, to uncover insights and turn them into action. when we act on insight, with the right people by our side, opportunity is everywhere. let insights reveal new opportunities. the lows of bipolar depression can leave you down and in the dark. but what if you could begin to see the signs of hope all around you? what if you could let in the lyte? discover caplyta. caplyta is a once-daily pill, proven to deliver significant relief from bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i,

caplyta treats both bipolar i and bipolar ii depression. and, in clinical trials, feelings of inner restlessness and weight gain were not common. caplyta can cause serious side effects. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts right away. antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may be life-threatening, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. in the darkness of bipolar i and ii depression, caplyta can help you let in the lyte. ask your doctor about caplyta, from intra-cellular therapies. when it comes to tech, ask your doctor about caplyta, everyone wants the next best thing. now with xfi complete from xfinity, you can get updated wifi technology with the new tech upgrade program. plus, protection from cyber threats at home and now on the go. so staying up to date is easier than ever. you look great by the way. right? unbeatable internet.

made to do anything so you can do anything. only xfinity will upgrade your tech after 3 years for a more reliable connection. get that and more with xfi complete. upgrade today. the voters are asking to turn out for you today trust this process and trust in the result of this primary? >> you know what? we all have such a wonderful opportunity. only in america -- not only in america, but in america, we get

to decide and so for every single pennsylvanian, the way you can, you know, be a part of this process is make sure you're here, make sure you're coming out and voting. don't allow anything to discourage you. every single republican, you need to be at these polls today, and you need to make sure that your voice is heard, and i'm so excited. >> so, that's the candidate that took the maga from donald trump and is beating his hand-picked candidate in the tushy with it. that's the ultra-maga candidate in pennsylvania's republican senate primary race, her name is kathy barnette, she refused to concede her own loss two years ago due to claims of voter fraud. she was in attendance on january 6th. she's telling republican voters today, though, not to be discouraged as they cast their ballots in today's primary. it's an interesting comment as pennsylvania has been deeply entrenched in the ex-president's lies about the 2020 election results. barnette has garnered support as

she promotes the big lie about election fraud and the gop's current front runner in today's primary for governor, doug mastriano, was also a prominent if not the leading pennsylvania voice on overturning the election results in pennsylvania. mastriano and barnette have campaigned together. both of their rises have the republican party roiling, believing their extreme stances could cost the gop in november. we're back with jason johnson and david jolly. i want to come at it from the other way. what if they can be successful? that seems all the more alarming, no? >> yeah, look, alarming is a culture if they can be successful in a general but i think this gives us two narratives. one is, it is a realtime reflection of where the politics in today's gop sit. there is no post-trump chapter. it's just a continuation of it. >> right. >> that these voices are likely the nominees. but i would also suggest, in a general election, republicans are terribly off message. i mean, the way they lost the

two georgia runoffs was -- was by talking about the stolen election, and if you look at the virginia governor's election, that was largely on main street, economy issues, he threw in the culture wars around crt, but we all looked at glenn youngkin and said, this is the way republicans can get back on message. republicans have learned nothing. if these are their nominees, they're going to go down in pennsylvania, north carolina, georgia, and elsewhere come november. >> to that, jason johnson, i do say, good riddance, but i do harbor the fear that the disinformation and the propaganda machine is not being counterered by as aggressive or as emotionally powerful truth messages, and frankly, the truth about these candidates is they do legitimize something that is, today, we know, under criminal investigation by doj. i mean, it is sort of the worst strain of trumpism. it is -- and i said it glibly. i shouldn't have. barnette was too extreme for trump. he created this frankenstein but

he wasn't for her. he will be if she wins and he did the little hedge thing but i wonder what your concerns are on the day of the primary, the eve of the results being known. >> like, imagine if the proud boys had a baby with diamond and silk and that's how you get this lady, right? it's all of the sort of, you know, cultural performance of a lot of african american trump supporters mixed with this ridiculous extremism that the republican party or the republican organizations i tend to call them now, because they're not a party, has sort of mainstreamed. it is dangerous. it is problematic. and in a very cynical way, and cynical because i think that's how a lot of the republicans have operated lately, i think there are people who will kind of want her to be the candidate because it's likely that she'll go up against lieutenant governor fetterman, who has potentially some issues with african american support, and if she attacks him over and over and over, that may be a way to suppress the vote. do i ultimately think that she can win? no. because i don't think that the

people of pennsylvania, unlike perhaps in some other states like georgia and florida, i don't think the people of pennsylvania are that ideological. they want practical things done. fetterman can actually show -- any of the democrats can show they can get practical things done so i don't think she'll be successful. but the fact that people like this can advance throughout the republican ranks is indicative of the fact that it has not been a party of ideas for ten years now. and i think most voters have realized that and they can be sold on someone who has ideas with a sprinkling of crazy but not if you got crazy at the core. >> yeah, and you know, the -- and it may only be interesting to sort of exrepublicans, i guess, david jolly, but in some ways, the most interesting campaign is the failure of david mccormick. he did -- he's mitch mcconnell's, you know, sort of horse in the race. and he did represent a return to almost like rob portman-like republican. portman didn't stand up to trump, he voted with trump, but he wasn't trump-like in conduct or temperament so that was on the menu and it's very clear that the last sort of the

election day momentum is around barnette and the front runner in the polls has been trump's candidate, dr. oz. >> yeah, and look, the politics of today's gop are not where portman are or jeb bush or any of these others, mitch mcconnell, frankly, in many ways, that would represent that traditional almost chamber of commerce, main street republican lane. that's just not where they are, and i would suggest that if you take barnette and oz's numbers, oz also being a reflection of trump, you're well over 50% of republican voters who still believe that trumpism is the future. and you know, we discussed last week, i think barnette is on to a little something, it may not be her that actually captures this, but the notion that maga belongs to the people, not to donald trump, really provides a pathway for other national republicans, desantis and others, to figure out how to overcome donald trump's grip on the party. right now, it's his, and we're seeing that in his followers in pennsylvania.

>> it is something that we'll be unpacking for many, many days. it's also had some health stories. attorney general josh shapiro announced he tested positive for covid. the lieutenant governor is dealing with his own health issues, and so there's a paul revere sighting on the right-wing side of the race. i mean, it is sort of a -- it's sort of peak 2022. we'll keep talking about it. jason johnson, david jolly, thank you for spending time with us on both these big stories. thank you to both of you. ahead for us, today's visit to buffalo by president joe biden and first lady dr. jill biden included a meeting and bit of consoling of the families who are grieving the loss of their loved ones. the president's tribute to those who were lost after a quick break. t's tribute to those who were lost after a quick break.

entresto is the number one heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists and has helped over one million people. it was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto. [sfx: fighter jet flying] [tom cruise] tower this is ghost rider, requesting flyby. [control tower] negative ghost rider, the pattern is full. [sfx: fighter jet flying] ♪ ah, thunder, ah, thunder ♪ ♪ thunderstruck ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ thunderstruck ♪ ♪ yeah yeah yeah thunderstruck ♪ [waitress] maverick... [tom cruise] having any fun yet? ♪ thunderstruck yeah yeah yeah ♪ ♪ said yeah, it's alright. ♪ now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. you see, son, with a little elbow grease, you can do just about anything. thanks, dad. that's right, robert. and it's never too early to learn you could save with america's number one motorcycle insurer. that's right, jamie. but it's not just about savings. it's about the friends we make along the way. you said it, flo. and don't forget to floss before you brush. your gums will thank you. -that's right, dr. gary. -jamie? sorry, i had another thought so i got back in line. what was it? [ sighs ] i can't remember. i am robert strickler. i've been involved in communications in the media for 45 years. i've been taking prevagen on a regular basis for at least eight years.

for me, the greatest benefit over the years has been that prevagen seems to help me recall things and also think more clearly. and i enthusiastically recommend prevagen. it has helped me an awful lot. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. (johnny cash) ♪ i've traveled every road in this here land! ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ crossed the desert's bare, man. ♪ ♪ i've breathed the mountain air, man. ♪ ♪ of travel i've had my share, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere. ♪ ♪ i've been to: pittsburgh, parkersburg, ♪ ♪ gravelbourg, colorado, ♪ ♪ ellensburg, cedar city, dodge city, what a pity. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man. ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere. ♪ lemons. lemons. lemons. lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels.

so you can go and see all those, lovely, lemony, lemons. and never wonder if you got a good deal. because you did. they all had one thing in common -- they went to the grocery store on a saturday afternoon. those ten innocent people gunned down in buffalo. they all had lives, they had families. here's president joe biden remembering them this afternoon. >> el si cheney, 65 years old. brain cancer survivor, church goer, bingo player. went to buy strawberries to make her favorite shortcake. a loving mother and a

grandmother. roberta drurry, 32, beloved daughter and sister, moved back home to help take care of her brother after his bone marrow transplant. went to buy groceries for dinner. a center of attention who made everyone in the room laugh be smile. andre mcneil, 53. worked at a restaurant. went to buy his 3-year-old son a birthday cake. his son celebrating a birthday, asking, where's daddy. >> katherine massey, 72, a writer and an advocate, who dressed up in costumes at schools and cut the grass in the park and helped in local elections. the glue of the family and the community. marcus morrisson, 62, school bus

aide. went to buy snacks for movie night with the family. survived by his wife and three children and stepdaughter, the center of their world. heyward patterson, church father, deacon. gave rides to the grocery store for those who needed help. putting food in the trunk of others when he took his final breath. aaron salter, 55, retired buffalo police officer for three decades. three decades. loved the electric cars, a hero who gay his life to save others on a saturday afternoon, and had that man not be wearing that vest he purchased, bullet proof vest, a lot of lives would have been saved.

a beloved father and husband. geraldine tally, 62. banker known for her extra warm personality. devoted friend, mother, and grandmother. ruth whitfield, 88. beloved wife, mother, grandmother, great grandmother. sang in the church choir. care taker of her husband, bringing him clean clothes, cutting his hair, holding his hand every day she visit him in the nursing home. heart as big as her head. young, loved singing, dancing and her family. individual lives that loved service and community, that speakings to the bigger story of what her as americans.

a great nation because we're good people. jill and i bring you this message from deep in our nation's soul. in america, evil will not win, i promise you. hate will not prevail. and white supremacy will not have the last word. e supremacy t have the last word wooooo!!!!! woohooooo!!!! w-o-o-o-o-o... yeah, feel the savings. priceline. every trip is a big deal. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real bipolar depression. stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts.

antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription.

thanks so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. >> hi, nicole. we have a quick bit of humorous

business. i don't know how much you've covered the johnny depp amber heard trial, i haven't caught owe ton of that on your program, but i caught the "saturday night live" nicole wallace impersonation. did you think it was accurate? was it in the ballpark? >> i'm a groupie. i called everyone i've ever known and told them. i'm deeply flattered. the most i know about the amber haerld johnny depp trial i know from the "snl" cold open saturday night. >> now we know. somebody thinks everyone is coordinating. "snl" is in the building but at least on our side i've never known who in advance they're impersonating. >> i had no idea. i caught it and quickly turned it on. >> hopefully it will be a longer version. >> no, no, so nice, thank you. >> welcome to "the beat." i'm or ri