♪ ♪ bonnie boon i'm calling you out. everybody be cool, alright? we've got bonnie right here on a video call. we don't take kindly to video calls. oh, in that case just tap to send a message. we don't take kindly to messages neither. in that case how 'bout a ringcentral phone call. we don't take kindly to no... would you can it eugene! let's just hear her out. ha ha ha, i've been needing a new horse. we've got ourselves a deal. ♪ ♪ ♪ ringcentral ♪ this is not the stallion i was imagining. as we are coming on the air a former top aide to former president trump as we speak is in a federal courtroom facing new and serious charges. a live look on the one side of your screenout side the courthouse where peter navarro is in his first hearing after

being taken into custody earlier today. a law enforcement source familiar with the arrest confirms to nbc navarro did not surrender himself. the committee subpoenaed him back in september then, remember, he got another subpoena from the fbi to comply with their investigation just last week. you saw that live shot of the courthouse. those microphones set up. we are watching to see if he makes comments outside that building and will bring it to you. we know the january 6th select committee will hear its public hearing in prime time just six days from now on june 9th as today we're also learning new and important details about another big hearing set for next week. this one on gun violence. survivors and parents of victims of the uvalde and buffalo shootings set to testify in front of the house oversight committee. it's a very busy friday afternoon. i'm hallie jackson in washington and i want to bring in justice correspondent pete williams. capitol hill correspondent ali vitaly and msnbc contributor betsy woodruff-swan and senior

fbi official chuck rosenberg, also an msnbc contributor. so, pete, let me start with you. it's our understanding this court hearing related to these charges against peter navarro are happening as we speak taken into custody. what else do we know? >> taken into custody i think is interesting because he didn't turn himself in, normally in these sorts of cases these white collar cases, there's a negotiation of when they turn themselves in but apparently there wasn't. he's not been very cooperative with the authorities here on that count. so he's got an arraignment under way and will enter a plea because this is an indictment. it's two counts, both relating to his refusal to cooperate with the january 6 committee. one count is for failing to turn over documents the committee wanted, the second count is for failing to show up and answer questions in person. from the committee. according to the indictment he basically said to the committee, this is out of my hands. on february 27th he sent an email to the committee saying,

president trump has invoked executive privilege accordingly, my hands are tied and then the next day he said the privilege is not mine to waive. it would be incumbent on the committee to directly negotiate with president trump about this. the problem i think for peter navarro here, hallie, is that six days before he said the president has executive privilege, the supreme court rejected that claim from the president and a matter involving the documents that were in the possession of national archives that the committee wanted, president trump waived executive privilege. president biden rather, president trump went to court to say, hey, i've still got some residual executive privilege but the lower courts rejected that. they said you may have some, but it's outweighed by the need for this material. so in essence the legal argument he's making here has been a nonstarter in the courts here in washington and that may be one of the reasons why the justice department decided to go ahead and file charges.

>> to this point, chuck, let me go to you next, he was on the network on msnbc last night. starting, it seems pre-emptively to lay out his defense. >> so you're risking going potentially to jail not to talk to them but you're out here talking in public. you do realize these investigators can hear you when you talk on tv. >> well, we're talking about now, arism, the case law itself and the constitution constitutionality of executive privilege, testimony and immunity is -- >> so, chuck, is that defense going to hold up in court, do you think? >> no, i don't, hallie. here's why. pete's absolutely right. the question of executive privilege was resolved before navarro actually tried to invoke it but there is a second reason and it's also really important. let's say judge hallie jackson issued an order to me and i

wanted to invoke privilege so i didn't have to answer certain questions in front of you, your honor, judge jackson, i would have to do that in court on a question-by-question basis. i can't simply make a blanket statement that some privilege precludes me from answering anything that i may be asked. and so in order to comply or try to comply in good faith, you show up. you invoke privilege if there is a question that would elicit a privileged answer. but there's a whole bunch of other questions he could have answered if he had wanted to and a whole bunch of documents he could have produced if he wanted to. so simply stonewalling the committee and invoking a privilege nonexistent or otherwise doesn't fly. >> so then, ali, you're posted on capitol hill. any reaction from members of the january 6 select committee? >> look, hallie, i think the broader theme is congressional subpoenas aren't just polite suggestions, they are, in fact, something that is going to be

enforced by the department of justice in this case. we've seen them do it before with steve bannon and now see them doing it with peter navarro, the committee has been pretty quiet. we heard from someone specific committee member adam schiff and put out a tweet saying prosecution of those who refuse to comply is vital to ensuring congressional oversight has teeth. otherwise congress cannot function as the founders intended. the balance of power becomes unbalanced and a corrupt executive cannot be held to account. of course, timing on this, hallie, is everything. in part it's a good thing that the department of justice picked this up because of the reasons that schiff said. it shows subpoenas have teeth but, of course, the courts tend to be where things go even slower and this this case, the committee has always been on the clock. they've been on the clock in terms of wanting to get as much testimony as they possibly can before their hearings start next week but also because any testimony that they get wants to be wrapped into this final report and the ultimate clock that they're up against is the

midterm elections in november and then more presently in january because if republicans take the house as we've talked about before, this committee is likely to be dead in the water and not exist any further so they really do need to wrap things up as expeditiously as possible. what this shows they'll move forward with the narrative setting agenda in public hearings even as they work to get more testimony from key people like peter navarro. >> betsy, i'm going to you. chuck got me on this. even if let's say this court process plays out for navarro and hypothetically convicted on this he is still not compelled to speak with the january 6th committee, correct? >> that's right, hallie. this is not about compelling his testimony or compelling production of documents. this is about punishing him for noncompliance. >> so then given that, betsy, how do you see this if at all adding perhaps any additional pressure to some of the lawmakers who have been subpoenaed by the january 6th select committee or see it as a bridge too far for lawmakers to make any referrals to fellow lawmakers in this instance?

betsy's shot just froze. welcome to live television, folks. we'll get betsy back in a second but, ali, let me pose it to you and have pete do a follow-up. >> this is where the next question goes. when you think about the subpoenas still lingering out there, you've got one for dan scavino, half of one for john eastman because they never fully voted on that contempt referral through the full house floor but the open question of the five republican lawmakers who have now been subpoenaed by the committee and effectively said they're not going to comply with those. the difference, of course, is that they are sitting lawmakers. there are other questions about what you can do to compel them or punish them for not complying with congressional subpoenas and then, of course, in the case of someone like dan scavino who is when you consider claims of executive privilege on par with navarro because they were both in the white house serving as staffers to the president, their claims to executive privilege are the same which is to say they're neutered in the same way that pete and chuck have both

laid out which is that the supreme court has already said that that doesn't hold water here. but, yeah, there are clear questions about the subpoenas that are still lingering out there. i do think, though, that the larger point is that as much as the committee wants to hear from these people, they will still have enough information to tell the stories and the details around these folks even if they don't hear from them directly. >> we're getting our first note from inside the courtroom from our producer who is there that navarro is there, sworn in and spoke up to say he was not allowed to make a phone call when he was arrested. we'll watch what else happens from there but, pete, the doj front as we see folks walking out. we don't know who they are. we'll keep an eye on that, former chief of staff mark meadows has been referred to the department of justice. do you have any insight or any analysis perhaps on why the doj might move forward on a referral for navarro but not more mark meadows? >> insight, no. analysis, sure. i will ahe take a guess and by the way, i've counted it up.

it took the justice department 22 days to decide to indict steve bannon, 57 days onna var row and it's been 171 days and they still haven't made a decision on mark meadows and i think there are two factors at play. one is his case is unquestionably more complicated because he was the senior adviser to the president. he was the chief of staff and it's long been the position of the justice department that congress cannot compel the testimony of senior advisers to the president any more than they could compel the appearance of the president himself for separation of powers reasons. that's thing one, thing two is that he did cooperate some with the january 6th committee. unlike bannon and navarro he didn't just completely stiff them so that sort of clouds it up a little bit and the other possibility here is that perhaps he's cooperating with the government in some way that we don't know about on the larger investigation of what happened regarding january 6th. that could be another reason why

they haven't done anything on that case yet. >> chuck, lay out the difference here between civil contempt and the more serious charge of criminal contempt here. the distinction of why that's important. >> yeah, it's a great question, hallie. so it sounds like it's the same thing. contempt is contempt is contempt but not quite. in simple contempt a judge is trying to compel compliance. you'll recall that donald trump is involved in a lawsuit with new york state with the attorney general up there and the judge believed that the trump team, trump himself was not fully complying with the request for documents so trump was fined $10,000 a day until he complied. that's contempt. but it's civil contempt. it was to compel compliance. it wasn't a charge. it wouldn't result in a conviction and it wouldn't result in him going to jail. this, navarro, like bannon has ali and pete have described is criminal contempt. they are not seeking to compel

their attendance to testify. they're not seeking to compel the production of documents. bannon and navarro are being punished, at least the department of justice is attempting to have them punished for not complying. that's a crime that turns on their intent and willful conduct, it turns on their flouting of lawful orders and as pete pointed out, because bannon and navarre reboth stonewalled didn't attempt in any way to comply with the subpoena, it seems to me that criminal contempt is completely appropriate. >> ali, there's a new report out that broke from "the new york times," maggie haberman, in the last hour saying a staffer for mike pence, chief of staff, warned the secret service that former president trump was getting ready to turn on his vp. it could create a security risk to then vice president mike pence. it's particularly interesting in light of the speculation around which witnesses the january 6th select committee might call for their public hearings that will begin next with, i think

discussion about whether mark short will be on the list or not, presumably it would be something the committee would want to hear more about, the chief of staff to then vp and basically saying, hey, secret service, we think the boss is a security threat to the vp. >> right, and, again, as maggie points out in her reporting they don't know what the secret service did after that but, of course, the warning itself became prophetic because we know that then protesters and insurrectionists had the goal of hanging mike pence and warning was not unfounded nor did it not come true. the other important thing here, yes, there might be conversations around is he a witness, is he someone you hear from during public hearings, the reality is the committee has already heard from him. he did go and sit down and speak to them so they could already know this as well. this is from maggie haberman's upcoming book. that's not to say mark short didn't already tell it to the

committee and whether or not he's a witness during the public hearings, they still have all of that information at their disposal. it's also possible that he provide a document to back that up, maybe text messages at the time. there's all manner of ways that people communicate and document the things that they are telling other people. it's entirely possible that the committee already has their hands on that but certainly as we get closer to the public hearings reports like these are going to be things that are either being factored in in realtime because the committee is learning about them for the first time or alternatively they already know about them and it's an example of there are still things we don't know about january 6th they will present. >> ali, pete, chuck, thank you so much to the three of you. our thanks to betsy as well. we'll send her a new laptop for the skype link cyst we had those glitches. appreciate it. next up a lot more to get to as we monitor what's happening in the courtroom including new details on the uvalde school shooter. what investigators found when searching his home. our team digging into that has more. we'll also go inside gun

safety talks on capitol hill a little later talking with a democrat on the house judiciary committee after the house committee advanced a package of bills, plus, the republicans' midterm meltdown in michigan. why their leading candidates are getting kicked off the ballot. getting kicked off the ballot. later in the show. uh, how come we don't call ourselves bikers anymore? i mean, "riders" is cool, but "bikerly cool. -seriously? -denied. can we go back to meeting at the rec center? the commute here is brutal. denied. how do we feel about getting a quote to see if we can save with america's number one motorcycle insurer? should flo stop asking the same question every time? -approved! -[ altered voice ] denied! [ normal voice ] whoa.

nbc news is learning new details about the investigation into last week's massacre in uvalde, texas. search warrants unveiled by texas rangers reveal law enforcement obtained the shooter's phone, the iphone, they've completed a forensic download of that and also learned a lawyer who successfully sued remington after the sandy hook elementary school shooting rather is now representing the father of one of the 10-year-old victims in uvalde, amerie jo garza. that team of attorneys is looking for answers about the marketing practices of daniel defense, the maker of the assault rifle used in uvalde. all of it comes as the department of justice is reviewing what went wrong in the police response. i want to bring in tom winter

digging into all this. let me start with search warrants i know you've been looking through from the texas rangers, what they show, how they fit into the bigger picture here. >> so, hallie, a couple things. when we see these warrants return particularly in a case where the shooter is deceased so there's not going to be a prosecution against them, there's not going to be a court complaint or indictment and look to the search warrants to get a better understanding of the time line or at least the initial idea or review of the events that occurred on that particular day, that's exactly what we've done here so we're able to see kind of the first sequence of events and start to develop this was as far what was found at this individual's house, what may have been found in their car and i think it points to a couple of key findings. one, the tremendous amount of ammo this person had. now, we knew that, that it was over a thousand rounds that he possessed cumulatively, we knew that from police earlier, but what is interesting is that they found over 400 rounds at his

house, over 400 rounds in his car. now, the ammo was all strewn about. whether or not that was intentional or not, we don't know. but there were 30-round magazines found under essentially every single seat in between the center console and chairs, the seats, rather, in the car. there were also a number of magazines that were found in a duffel bag that he did not bring into school with him and according to the narrative that's included in the search warrant, these two gentlemen who work at a funeral home that was across the street from the school, they noticed the crash. they're walking over to the crash and they see him dressed in all black, ramos, the shooter dressed in all plaque loading a magazine into the gun and they start to return for obvious reasons. you see somebody loading a gun and then he starts firing at them and starts firing at the school. so it's apparent immediately that this person has some pretty bad intentions. they were able to get some dna from blood inside the car indicating that perhaps he was

injured in the course of the crashing that gray pickup truck that we've seen a couple of types here in the video that we've reviewed. on top of that they recovered an iphone pro max iphone 13 from him. that has since been downloaded and forensics are ongoing and have indication they have been able to get inside it and on top of that found clumps of hair, a texas i.d., not a driver's license but a state i.d. as well as other electronics at the home in a wendy's hat so just kind of a sampling of what they've been able to uncover so far in this investigation. >> tom, there's also this discussion and this spotlight on daniel defense, this gunmaker of the assault rifle used in the uvalde shooting. they had posted something on twitter back on may 16th. just about, what, eight days or so before the shooting showing a toddler basically a kid holding an assault rifle with train up a

child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it. now you have this company facing questions from attorneys including an attorney who successfully i think went after remington after sandy hook over marketing practices. >> josh koskoff was able to get a settlement, over $70 million for some of the families at sandy hook and publish some of the internal documents they were able to uncover in the course of their lawsuit so that was kind of a landmark case. now they're going after daniel's marketing practices, and particularly whether or not they actually go after young people in the course of their advertising so they're taking a peek at that. another thing i just wanted to briefly mention, hallie, we did make an inquiry, our colleague into the justice department's review of this which will be conducted by their community oriented policing office and still have not publicly named who will head up that inquiry which is not necessarily criminal in nature but just a review of what happened here in this police response which

remaining the overarching question as to the shooting at this point. >> tom winter, live for us, thank you very much. >> sure thing. next up we'll talk about president biden's response to elon musk's, quote, super bad feeling about the economy. we're going to talk to an expert about how he's feeling, plus, would house democrats get behind a slimmed down gun safety bill if it had a better chance in the senate? we'll ask congressman david cicilline first. as we talk about the youngest victims of that shooting there are five services today for those children, those little kids. for jayce luevanos, jailah silguero, makenna elrod and rojelio torres with jacklyn jaylen cazares, you see their pictures, lives stolen. three were funeral service, the last two, by the way, they're cousins, had a joint funeral.

horrific incomprehensible losses for one family and an entire community. we'll be back. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go. there's a monster problem and our hero needs solutions. so she starts a miro to brainstorm. “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!"

and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro. migraine attacks? you can't always avoid triggers like stress. qulipta™ can help prevent migraine attacks. you can't prevent what's going on outside that's why qulipta™ helps what's going on inside. qulipta™ is a pill. gets right to work to prevent migraine attacks and keeps them away over time. qulipta™ blocks cgrp, a protein believed to be a cause of migraine attacks. qulipta™ is a preventive treatment

for episodic migraine. most common side effects are nausea, constipation, and tiredness. learn how abbvie can help you save on qulipta™.

you're pretty particular about keeping a healthy body. what goes on it. usually. and in it. mostly. here to meet those high standards is the walgreens health and wellness brand. over 2000 high quality products. rigorously tested by us. real world tested by you. and delivered to your door in as little as one hour. so you've got president

biden pointing to today's better than expected jobs report as proof that the economy is getting into this period of sustained growth, right? a pretty healthy good period even as he continues to face criticism. the jobs report, 390,000 of them were added last month. a lot more than the 325,000 expected by economists. so good news on that front. unemployment held steady near historic low of 3.6%. the unemployment rate for men and women is at 3.4%. that good news is countered by yet another record high in gas prices. with the current average, 4.76. >> i'm doing everything i can on my own to help working families during this stretch of higher prices. i'm going to continue to do that but congress needs to act as well. we can do so much more if we come together to lower the cost for american families. >> nbc's josh lederman is with

the president and joined by ron insana. a strong jobs report is the experts saying for president biden here and he continues as we've seen in the past to be juggling this issue of nagging inflation too. >> that's right, hallie. that nagging feeling that polls show so many americans have that the economy is not quite as strong as the white house is making it seem. a sentiment perhaps best captured in that elon musk tweet you were just talking about where he said he has a really bad feeling about the economy, president biden dismissing that with a quip today about he hopes elon musk enjoys his trip to space but i think that the white house really is still pretty confident that the prospects for a recession are not quite as great as some of the outside skeptics or critics are making it seem and in part that is because of the jobs. what president biden was talking about, this historic growth in

jobs since the low point of the pandemic and part of it is because white house economic officials are still hearing from business owners that the demand for their product is very strong and so they think if they can get this inflation under control and address the cost issues that so many americans are feeling that will go a long way to change the sentiment that so many americans have but we heard this one new element that really jumped out to me today from president biden, hallie, which is the president warning people that we may not see these kinds of massive, you know, job reports month after month after month and that is in part because of the steps he expects the fed to take and the administration taking to ease a little bit to try to make sure the economy doesn't overheat and then inflation gets under control. the flip side of making sure the economy doesn't overheat you may see less impressive job growth over the next few months and something the president wants to

get out ahead of given the fact that the midterm elections are five months away and the economy is so central to so many voters' choices. >> josh, in rehoboth, a town i know well. thank you. let me pick up on what josh is talking about. this strong jobs report for president biden. on the other hand the continued issue of inflation and what this means for americans. you have this dichotomy where you have business leaders like josh mentioned elon musk saying in an internal email i have a super bad feeling about the economy. you have jamie dimon saying, brace yourself, that hurricane is right out there down the road coming our way. how are we to think about the messaging we're hearing on the one hand from the administration and on the other from some of these business leaders? >> i'm confused by the business leader commentary. jamie dimon a few months ago was suggesting that the economy was strong and consumers were doing quite well. now he's come out and said they have about six to nine months of excess savings at this juncture.

he may also be worried the federal reserve will raise interest rates too much and drive us into a recession in order to quell inflation. on elon musk's side, i mean, i don't know what he's talking about. and he may be high, you know, i just don't know. he tweets all the time. he says things that just pop into his mind whether -- >> i got to say. we don't know what he's doing in his spare time and what his mental state is to be clear on the liability. >> you know, okay, so i don't know what he's talking about. he's laying off 10% of the staff at tesla. that has nothing to do with car production. not sure where he's coming on this. jamie, i understand has more of his finger on the pulse of the retail consumer who is using credit cards now to extend income, some of that excess savings we've talked about over the last many months has been worked off and, again, there is a risk that the federal reserve goes too far in beating back inflation which in my mind is already starting to fall and then the risk is that the fed does too much too soon when they could maybe step back in

september and wait to see whether or not all these external factors that are driving inflation are beginning to wear off. >> so then, ron, is that your biggest takeaway from today's jobs report? >> it's fine. in fact it was a goldilocks report. job growth was fine. one of the problems that we're having right now we're running out of people to employ. we still have about 5 million more open jobs than we have unemployed workers in the united states. we are more short people than we are short jobs and so that's a different type of problem to have. and it's one in which that may actually cause job growth to stall out because we just can't employ any more people unless either we start importing some people or people develop the requisite skills to go after those jobs that are currently open. >> ron insana, great to see you and for breaking things down for us. >> to elon, i apologize but he does do that every once in a while.

>> ron, appreciate it. >> you're welcome. on capitol hill, turning now to the other news we're talking about because we are getting new details on what pay happen next week, not as it relates to these high-profile january 6th committee hearings with the first one we know six days from now in primetime obviously we'll have special coverage on msnbc of that, but of another high-profile hearing happening next week. this is the house oversight committee and this is on gun violence and gun safety. we know now, we are now learning some survivors, some victims' parents of the uvalde and buffalo shootings will be testifying but the committee chair carolyn maloney hopes the anger will turn to action whether it comes to changes. joining me is sal kapoor. talk to us about this oversight hearing. what the landscape is looking like congressionally on gun safety. i know ali was first to report some of these -- what is going to be an intense and emotional moment on capitol hill next week in this committee hearing.

>> that's right, hallie. the house oversight committee expects to hold a hearing next week to highlight the human toll of these mass shootings and it'll focus largely on the shooting in uvalde, texas. it will include testimony the committee says from parents of injured kids in the attack. and will include testimony from the pediatrician in the town of uvalde and it'll include, this one stopped moo he in my tracks, testimony from a fourth grader who covered the blood of a murdered classmate on her body and played dead to try to survive. she will give testimony as well. the chair of that panel, carolyn maloney hopes it will turn anger into action. now, as for that action, what are the prospects? the house judiciary committee mocked up and passed on party lines all the democrats voted yes, the republicans voted no a package of gun reforms including a ban on assault weapons and limbs on high-capacity ammunition headed to the house

for a vote next week that will not pass the senate after that. in the senate there is a bipartisan negotiation happening led by chris murphy, the democrat. the most outspoken supporter of gun violence prevention legislation over the last decade as well as the republican john cornyn, they are discussing things like red flag laws, money for mental health, safe storage law, things that president biden mentioned among other proposals in his prime time address last night. there's optimism buzzing all over the senate more so than we've seen at any point in many years over there still. the road is long. it's unclear they will get there. the republican red line on this speaking to sources is that they will not support anything that infringes on the gun rights of law-abiding americans and for democrats the red line is this has to be meaningful. it has to make an impact in denting these shootings going forward. they will not support something that simply checks a box and doesn't have any meaningful impact out of this, hallie. >> sahlil kapur, thank you.

i want to bring in david cicilline. thanks for coming back on the show. >> my pleasure. >> emotional day yesterday. we reported on this and played some of it. you and your colleagues talking in this meeting about what to do to make the nation's gun laws safer for people in this country. we know that you have been a key part of the group pushing this package through the house. i know you know the prospects look more dim in the senate. can you talk me through what you hope will be the most realistic ultimate outcome of this current push we're seeing on capitol hill? >> well, first of all, we should remind you that there are two bills that we've already passed that the house passed, one to strengthen criminal background checks to make sure criminals and violent people who aren't allowed to buy a gun don't get to buy one because they haven't gone through a background check and have a bill to close a loophole that allows gun sellers to sell a gun even if the

background check has not come back in three day, the charleston loophole supported by 90% of the american people including the vast majority of gun owners sitting in the united states senate so the first thing that should happen is those bills should be passed and sent to the president's desk. the republicans in the senate should stop obstructing their passage. they're really common sense. then last night we passed a suite of bills as part of the protecting american kids act which has in it, you know, prohibition on bump stocks, it attacks straw purchasing so people not allowed to buy a gun don't use a third party to buy a gun. has prohibitions on ghost guns which is a growing problem and outlaws high-capacity magazines and it raises the age to 21 for certain types of gun purchases. these are all again very much supported by the american people, very common sense. though it'll come to the floor next week and in addition to that we'll pass a red flag bill which is really common sense

that says if you're a person who is dangerous to yourself or others because you've done or said things which show you are a danger, that you shouldn't be able to buy a gun to execute horrific crimes. this is really common sense. it exists in many states and we'll pass that as well and we'll send them all to the senate and i hope senate republicans will agree to as many parts of these bills as they possibly can. we have good to do something. we have a gun violence epidemic in this country. we've had more than 200 mass shootings this year alone. 27 school shootings. you show pictures of these precious children, i mean, it is heartbreaking to hear the stories and the devastation and this time has to be different and we're going to continue to pass common sense bills out of the house and we expect our senate colleagues particularly the republicans to join us in this effort and help us get something done to protect americans from gun violence. >> you are also a co-sponsor i know of the assault weapons ban being proposed not part of the package you referenced a moment ago but did hear president biden

bring that up and know house speaker pelosi will have a hearing on it. that is almost certain. we know that is facing an uphill battle with republicans. le me ask because as we mentioned nbc was the first to report on this house oversight committee and some witnesses. survivors of the shooting in uvalde, victims' parents, et cetera, what do you hope your republican colleagues take away from hearing those stories and from that meeting that we'll see next week? >> you know, i hope what they take away from it a deeper understanding of what gun violence does to a community, to a family, to lose a loved one, to lose a child, to send your kids to school and have to worry are they actually going to come home alive? it's horrific. had should not be happening in this country and this is a peculiar american problem. we have a level of gun violence that just doesn't exist anywhere else in the world. i hope in a hearing where they hear directly from survivors of gun violence and people who have lost loved ones they will

understand the urgency of doing something. you know, yes, you heard in the hearing we can't do anything because of the second amendment which is baloney. the second amendment like all the constitution revisions is not an absolute. you can't yell fire in a theater. the supreme court of the united states has acknowledged the right of communities to limit guns in terms of not being in certain places, to limit, you can't own a machine gun. you can't own an assault weapon in some places so this idea that there's nothing we can do is just not true. it's that our republican colleagues don't want to do anything. if they hear from people who have been destroyed by gun violence they will understand they have the power to do something and to prevent other families from feeling that pain and will join us in this effort. >> congressman david cicilline, democrat from rhode island, thank you very much from being back on the show. i imagine we'll talk to you in the days ahead. breaking news in that senate race, that high-profile senate race in pennsylvania. and a new letter from the

lieutenant governor's doctor, remember, after he suffered a stroke and had a pacemaker implanted. wait till you hear what it says. we'll have that right after the break. stand by. right now, we're all feelin' the squeeze. we're having to get creative. find a new way. but birthdays still happen. fridays still call for s'mores. you have to make magic, and you're figuring out how to do that. what you don't have to figure out is where to shop. because while you're getting creative,

walmart is doing what we always do. keeping prices low for you every day. so you can save money and live better. ♪

so we have breaking news coming in to us from one of the most high-profile senate races in the country, the one going down in pennsylvania. this coming from the democratic candidate in the pennsylvania lieutenant governor john fetterman. we are just now, remember, he suffered a stroke essentially right before the primaries. his doctor, now hearing from his doctor saying that fetterman has had afib and cardiomyopathy, a heart disease that makes it harder for the heart to pump blood and says in 2017 he first checked out the lieutenant governor john fetterman, had prescribed medications along with improved diet and exercise and asked him to follow up again and then adds fetterman did not go to any doctor for five years and did not continue taking his

medication. we are also hearing from the lieutenant governor himself saying i didn't do what the doctor told me but i won't make that mistake again. he says i should have taken my health more seriously. i want to bring in now our nbcnews.com senior national digital report john allen along with mark murray. this is sort of a very interesting letter, john. being released from the campaign, we should say and fetterman is extremely candid about the fact that as he says he should have taken his health more seriously. as there are questions now. he's been off the campaign trail since right before the primary since he had that stroke. and what the prognosis is here, here's what his doctor said, if he takes his medications, eats healthy and exercise he'll be fine. he says if he does what i've told him to do and i think he's taking his recovery seriously this time he should be able to campaign and serve in the senate without any problem. it is a -- you couldn't go on a bill of good health but a caveated bill if he does x, he will be able to do x.

>> i mean, certainly you've got the doctor here saying if my patient does the thing he hasn't done for the last five years he should be able to serve. another interesting piece of this is that fetterman says in his press release that he's not going to be back on the campaign trail the way he was before the primary for some time. as he is focused on his recovery. earlier this week nbc reported myself sahlil kapur and democrats were nervous about a lack of transparency about his health care which, of course, now there is this transparency and whether he was going to be healthy going forward. >> mark, it's a candid assessment from fetterman on his own -- if you could call them shortcomings as it related to the way he was taking care of himself previously, he said it's frustrating. all the more so because this is my own fault. he says but bear with me, i feed a little more time. i'm not back to 100% yet but i'm getting closer every day.

>> and, hallie, he ended up saying he could have died too so there is a story in here on one of, hey, i ended up neglecting my health care like so many americans and i'm -- i am in shape, i'm watching what i eat. and exercising and taking things seriously that becomes incredibly relatable for a lot of americans. i actually remember when mike huckabee was running for president in the 2007/2008 cycle. he was always talking about that but on the other hand as john was talking about in the great article, the lack of transparency here about the severity of it, he ended up having a stroke, days ago. this has been a very long time and arguably the top senate contest that we are all going to be covering that could decide the control of the united states senate and, hallie, also as you do know very well covering campaigns as i do, you know, john, covering a campaign, running on a campaign is a very

stressful endeavor. >> it can be grueling for sure, particularly in the months leading up to the general election and this is an incredibly competitive race, obviously the health of the candidates comes first, john, and fetterman seems to acknowledge he avoided going to the acknowledge he avoided going to the doctor for so many years. heard it from his cardiologist. fib years, despite the recommendation for fetterman to follow-up on care he did not. he says avoiding the doctor because you might not like what they tell you could cost you. alludes to the reason he did not go back to the cardiologist. >> important message. not sure how it will play out politically. something relatable about that with a lot of americans. at the same time no one is waiting for john fetterman to get back on the campaign stray. by that i mean, opposition

running against candidates just started running against fetterman in pennsylvania. republicans have a mess on their side in terms of oz and a brutal recount. the race will pick up quickly. remains to be seen how fast or how much john fetterman will be on the campaign trail. >> thank you for this and the developing news. and organizers saying what's helped a number of classroom incidents. we'll talk about that, right after the break. after the break.

in the aftermath of the now two horrifically frequent school shootings we've seen, sometimes a lot of "what ifs?" what if somebody reached out, said something? focus of one program, "say something." a risk training program created by sandy hook promise, an organize led by some family members of those killed at that elementary school back in 2012. the goal? teach kids how to recognize the warning signs of somebody who could hurt themselves or others before it's too late. i want to bring in nbc news correspondent shaq brewster, got an inlook at the program talking to students and teachers taking part in the program. good to see you. >> reporter: hi there, hallie. when i sat in on this training program with students yesterday, and i was struck how weighty

these topics were. that he talk and bullying, violence and self-harm and on the other side you had these sixth and seventh graders on the receiving end and engaged. had personal experiences and felt they had a tool to help colleagues help themselves. that's the purpose of the entire program. teaching three key things. spotting warning signs. we know them. you see them on social media. threats or behavioral changes. tell a trusted adult, or report anonymously created on the app. you get a sense of security any a city about six hours away from uvalde. the security they felt after getting it. >> having this training makes me sleep easier at night making sure the resources is available to my students makes me feel

more secure at a principal. >> people aren't superman or superheros. they can't do everything but i feel they could have done more because he did show signs. i mean, it's -- every type of case like that they showed some kind of sirens in the beginning, at the middle, at the end and it led up to what they did. >> reporter: also i heard the instructor push back to these students on the idea of this snitching culture. the idea that, no. you're not telling on someone but helping someone get help. a lesson frankly not just the students but we all can learn from. >> looking forward to your reporting on nbc news "nightly news" 6:30 eastern on nbc. that does it for us at this hour. msnbc. "deadline: white house" starts rye after the break. "deadline: white house" starts rye after the break.

you're pretty particular about keeping a healthy body. what goes on it. usually. and in it. mostly. here to meet those high standards is the walgreens health and wellness brand. over 2000 high quality products. rigorously tested by us. real world tested by you. and delivered to your door in as little as one hour.

it is 4:00 p.m. here in gotham city on this friday. i'm john holman in for nicolle wallace. for the last time this week, at least. major development in the investigation into the january 6th insurrection. the justice department has issued a two-count indictment former trump adviser peter navarro making him the first administration official working in the white house on january 6th to be charged with a federal trial. two counts in the doj's indictment for contempt's congress. first refusing to testify to the house 1-6 select committee. second, refusing to produce documents demanded by that committee. each charge, if proven carries a maximum sentence of one year in the pokey. navarro appeared in court earlier today without a lawyer. also revealed he was arrested and taken into federal custody at the airport as he was about to leave on what he claimed was a trip. former trump adviser one of the biggest promoters of the big lying peddles