today on velshi, brand-new reporting on the events of january 5th paint a picture of a white house that was very much aware of donald trump's potential to unleash violence on his own vice president,

congress, and democracy itself. this is another member of the ex presidents inner circle. he was indicted, and republicans are caught on tape planning to dispatch an army of activists to polling sites to target and potentially overturn votes in democratic precincts. the reporter who understood those tapes joins me later in the show. plus, the lawyer who scored an unprecedented victory for sandy hook families against the gunmaker in that case has turned his attentions to the gun maker in the uvalde texas massacre. i will talk to him about that legal strategy that could be the turning point in the war over guns in america, and what you might not know about how the gun industry markets directly to young men. then, day 101 of the war that vladimir putin plans to wrap up in three days. i will talk to lieutenant colonel vindman about how russia's war of choice in ukraine has changed. what is likely to come next, and likely, today, by the way,

is the first day of the general election in one of the most pivotal bellwether senate races in the country. the field has narrowed. the -- steve kornacki joins me right here in the flash, to tell us how it will all play out, and why it is crucial to balance the power in washington and democracy in america. velshi starts now. good morning, today is saturday june 4th. former -- architect of the plot to overthrow the 2020 election results has been indicted. peter navarro was arrested at an airport yesterday. he has been charged by the department of justice with two counts of contempt of congress, for his refusal to comply with the january six committee subpoena. the first count was for failing to appear for a deposition. the second was for failing to produce documents that the committee requested.

navarro did not enter a plea during a court appearance on friday. earlier this friday, he filed suit against the january six committee in a attempt to block subpoenas, as well as separate criminal subpoenas he's received from the department of justice. all along, navarro has insisted, he is unable to cooperate because of issues of executive privilege. it is an argument that has already been shot down by the courts. navarro has refused to speak with the january six committee about the role in the scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election. he has certainly been open with almost everybody else about it. he really has not been shy about the plan that he and his fellow crony, steve bannon, cooked up. they called it the green bay sweep. bannon, has already been invited for contempt of congress. they have both made it clear that they knew that january six committee and its subpoenas were politically motivated. they do not feel compelled to cooperate. they do not need to. we know one navarro was up to.

he told us on television. here is how navarro posted on it right here, on msnbc, to my colleague ari, back in february. >> my focus, ari, was simply on the green bay sweep plan. it was, basically, to have, and it started flawlessly, the battleground states challenge the results. that would trigger 24 hours of hearings in the house and senate. and, by that, we could bypass the media and get out the truth of what probably happened in the battleground states. quarterback mike pence's job, at that point, was to take ten days and go back and give the state legislators, who are the ones who have the power, to determine whether an election is fraudulent, to give them a second look. >> and we of you who know peter navarro will know that he is quite expensive and quite willingly comes on tv to talk about these things. he said all of that to ari

without a subpoena. we do not subpoena here at and assembly see. we invite people to come on the show. he was saying the plan was to force then president, mike pence, to ignore results of a free, fair, and secure election in order to keep their dear leader in the oval office. that makes this latest january six development all the more interesting. the new york times reports, on january the 5th, the day before the insurrection, tension was pouring in the what house over mike pence's refusal to go along with navarro and bannon's plan. pence's chief of staff, a man named mark short, had a warning for the secret service. the president was going to turn publicly against the vice president and there could be a security risk to mr. pence. that is because of it. marc short, by the way, is cooperating with the select committees report. he already testified in january according to a reporting. that brings us back to people who are not cooperating, like navarro.

what is interesting is, while bannon and navarro have been indicted for refusing to comply with the committee subpoenas, it looks like two other key loyalists of the ex president will not face the same fate. justice department officials say the prosecutors will not file criminal contempt of congress charges against the former chief of staff, mark meadows. he was the chief of staff during trump president trump's last moments on our face. they also declined to go for dance could be no, who is the deputy chief of staff. despite that, navarro's indictment is important as the january six committee prepares for its first public hearing next week. as one of the cronies who was in the room where it happened, as this plot to overthrow the 2020 election results went down, navarro is the first white house staffer to face criminal charges stemming from the investigation into the january 6th insurrection. however, neither this indictment of navarro, or any action that has been undertaken

so far in response to the january 6th insurrection, amounts to an affective guardrail. this is that our highest levels of government to prevent a coup from happening again in 2024. in fact, we are more aware, with every passing day, and every new piece of reporting, how close donald trump and his cronies came. how hard he and his cronies worked to try and overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 election. awareness alone does not make our democracy and the more secure than it was in 2020. joining me now is my colleague, nbc news correspondent ali vitali. ali, let's talk about this. there are a lot of layers to this. the peter navarro indictment, what are you making of it? >> okay, there are a lot of layers to it. especially when you consider the fact that after his indictment, last night, you had the department of justice saying that while they were bringing and indictment against navarro, in the same way they take it against bannon, they were not doing the same for dan

scavino and mark meadows. the thing i have been wondering is why. one of the things we know from reading the footnotes, frankly, with these letters from the committee when they come out, is both scavino and meadows had periods, throughout their lawyers and another ways, of trying to work with the committee. ultimately, of course, they ended up defying the subpoena. it is possible that because they had that communication, it might be one of the reasons why the doj did not move forward. in the case of navarro, i think this is really going to be interesting as we move forward. he talks about plays of executive privilege. you mentioned, they do not necessarily exist. the supreme court adjudicated this in a much larger theoretical sense when it came to the national archives document. the committee has been receiving tons of those documents for months now because but supreme court decision. it is going to be interesting to see the way that holds up and navarro. i do think the broader theme here is, this comes a few days before the committee is supposed to start public

hearings. we have been looking ahead to this for a while. the open question has been, even as people defy subpoenas, it is not just these four guys who are allies of the president, it is also five republican lawmakers who the committee subpoenaed to come and talk to them. a huge escalation. the open question with all of the subpoenas, as they are defined, is because the committee really need them? i do think what we will hear in public hearings is the answer is, no. it would have been nice to have them but the committee is going to be able to draw some pretty big conclusions, even without them, ali. >> the committee seems to have connected the dots. i think they are hoping that if they subpoena or invite these people, they come in and put meat on the bones. they give them specifics. it seems like the committee has got at least half of any of the exchanges these people have been involved in. they know some things. now they're going to, say you are on the other side of this conversation. tell us what you know. here is what we believe we know, can you confirm that for us? >> yes, exactly. you have to keep in mind, they

have tens of thousands of documents. they have talked to 1000 people. including, and you mentioned this in your introduction, marc short. a lot of the things we may not have already known are things that the committee plans to tell us next week throughout the month of june. this will be during the public hearings. i think that is one of the big challenges for this committee. in covering it, and then talking to sources, the question has always been, how do you tell people something new about a day that almost every american, certainly a lot of people in washington, had firsthand experiences of? everyone knows what happened on january six. the stunning thing is the way those opinions of what happens can be so divergent, and along party lines. what's the committee's challenge has always been is to help people draw new conclusions about a day everyone experienced. i think the more reporting we see coming out, including in maggie haberman's report about marc short flagging secret service and saying hey, president trump could be posing a security threat to the vice

president, that ended up being a very prophetic warning for january six, as we now know. it does show us there is more to learn. the committee through those thousands of documents, and thousands of interviews. they are going to be able to potentially tell us something we already know. >> ali, it is such a treat to have you here on the weekend show, about the way. we do not get to spend as much time together. i am not sure, but i wonder, boss, are the bosses watching at this hour? this is the pilot for the alley show. right? what is wrong with that. ali, a colleague. >> saturday morning feels good. >> nice to have you here. nbc capitol hill correspondent, ali vitali. i want to bring in bruce, she's a professor of history at new york university. she writes an important newsletter that follows threats to democracy. the sort of which i would not fat necessary. she is also the offer of

strongman from mussolini to the present. i want to talk to you about this for a second. it is kind of important. the things people read on a daily basis, we always get these digest in the morning. i get a lot of them about economic news. and there are political news once. we need a threat to democracy thing. that is what you are doing. the threat to democracy is pervasive world wide. i am not entirely sure our fellow citizens in america recognize that they are pervasive right now, right here. there is a continued coup underway. people think of coups as binary. they either happen or didn't. they succeeded or failed. that is not what history indicates. >> now, the other thing is, what is going on in the u.s. connects to how the u.s. is learning from the global right. in fact, ali, it is no accident that mark meadows was recently in budapest, and cpac had its conference.

victor or fonts electoral -- he perfected the system where you do not get rid of elections. you engineer them. you gain the system. it is easier to get the results you need to stay in power. we just saw his reelection. it was a few months ago. so, these people are learning. they are also inter changing with brazil. it is interesting because both scenarios have loaded, and praised the crew, in the military that the brazilians had. there is a lot in the gop that is a far-right authoritarian party. it is inserted into these networks of learning and knowledge about how to wreck democracies. this is a story that i think we do not care about enough. in my rating in lucid i try to connect the dots for people. >> you have been two really good points here. one is increasingly authoritarian regimes to not get rid of elections. for those of us who think we have democracy and the vote

there are regularly occurring elections that do not have democracy. increasingly, peoples who do not not do well away from elections. they read a pamphlet that says, that does not go over very well. they engineer them so that they get the result that they want and remain in power. that is a description of what is happening by many people and members of the republican party. not all, there are good republicans out there who are not party to this. many are. we are breaking a system to have a predetermined outcome. >> that is right. the buzzword, the republicans are very good at having these propaganda slogans, it is election integrity. i call this part of the upside down world of authoritarianism. there is no integrity about their election integrity. it is a corruption. it is how to do away with fair and free elections. what is so disturbing is that all that's illegal and other

manipulations trump tried in those fateful months, after his loss in november 2020, have now become institutionalized in the republican party. election deniers are the way you have a future in the party. now it is like, that is the dogma. you have to be an election denier. the other part is the institutionalization of lawlessness. that is why so many people who participated in january six are being encouraged to run for election. many of them were trump's endorsement. election denial is now a foundation of the republican party. >> i talked to a lot of reasonable people who think we dodged a bullet on january six. it is over, and it will not happen again. we are very cleanly aware of what they tried to do. including getting mike pence to do something he was not lawfully entitled to. i want to read from lucid, your newsletter on january 25th. it is from 2022 of this year.

you say, the radicalization of the republican party has only accelerated post-january six, fueled by and all consuming quest to gain enough power to shut down any inconvenient inquiries into its criminal activities. for a century, getting away with it, has been the essence of authoritarianism. a political system and culture in which government becomes fused with self preservation for the leader and his enablers. silencing those who might expose wrongdoing, and put opposition politicians dissenters within the party, prosecutors, judges, researchers, and the press is essential. you wrote about this as a warning for how this is going to go down. we will have a midterm election in november. there are plenty of election deniers running for office in places that are of influence, including governor and secretary of state across this country. the big contest is in 2024. your warning is, once this starts, and the momentum begins, it starts to wrap a all into

it. >> it does. and, the logic of authoritarianism is it always involves more and more people as targets. it always becomes more radical. we are seeing this. january six, it is very interesting. it failed as a coup. but, it's succeeded as a way of introducing a lawless model of politics. that is election denial, and so many other themes. criminals welcomed into the party, and it reminds me of, unfortunately, in 100 years ago, fascist in italy, if you are in the march on rome, it was a badge of honor. he recalled a first hour fascist. unfortunately, january six is this foundational event. it revitalized the party. it was a radicalizing event. it brought all these extremists together. i hope it does not have the same outcome, but it cannot be

overstated. that is why there are so many movements, and so much hostility around the investigation of it. and garrett published a very scary op-ed in newsweek talking about how they can't wait for the wolves to become sheep, talking about the investigators. >> the idea it is a badge of honor, as opposed to an element of shame that you took part in an insurrection is remarkable. bruce, thank you so much for what you do. ruse ben-ghiat is an author from new york university, she wrote strong when mussolini in the present. sign up for it. you will know what is going on in the world of democracy versus authoritarianism. next, we will talk to the republican who on earth tapes that were planning to dispatch an army of athlete to this on polling sites in upcoming event look shunts. plus, joined by the director of a new documentary which tells a story of an underground network that helped women get safe,

illegal abortions in the days before roe. it is a story from the past that maybe a glimpse into our future. with crisis at the pumps giving us all vertigo, and amid renewed talk of recession, i will break down where the economy is and where it is possibly headed, next on velshi. on velshi yeah, let's redo the basement. hello home movie theater. (laughs) spare bedroom. why not both? use the u.s. bank mobile app to apply for a home improvement loan. it's easy! wonderful alex! hey, that's what u.s. bank is for. anything else? how about a loan for a bigger car? our family is growing. awe. yeah, my brother's moving in with his five dogs. oh... heyo! and we're expecting. ahh! (dog sound) expecting what? help for today, planning for tomorrow. u.s. bank. we'll get there together. it's still the eat fresh refresh, have you had a look at your

and now subway's refreshing their italians. like the new supreme meats, topped high with new italian-style capicola. that's one handsome italian. uh... thanks. not you, garoppolo! ♪♪ subway keeps refreshing and refreshing and refres- attorney's office to pursue justice for everyone. but like so many of my colleagues, i resigned in protest because chesa boudin interfered in every single case and failed to do his job. the office is absolutely in disarray right now. chesa dissolved my unit prosecuting car break-ins. now criminals flock to san francisco because there are no consequences. we can't wait. recall chesa boudin now.

401k recently? if you have not, don't. unless you are in a foul mood. in which case, knock yourself out. i want to walk you through where we are in the economy right now. yesterday the department of labor broke down u.s. employment growth for the month of may. it happens on the first friday of every month. 390,000 net new jobs were added across the country last month. that beat expectations. it is great news. the unemployment rate remains unchanged for the third month in a row. it stays flat at this

percentage. it is almost as low as it was before the start of the pandemic. as i always say, do not pay too much attention to the actual unemployment number. for reasons i can get into with you at another time. i want to turn to the stock market. that is where your 401k loves. there has been a lot of turbulence on wall street in the past several weeks. we have a break for a few days this week. last, with some positive games. all three major industries tumbled down yesterday by the close. if you have been looking at your retirement savings that are invested in the market, and are freaking out a little bit, know that you are not alone. all of us who are invested in the market are freaking out, just a little bit. if you want to know what is behind the market volatility, and the stress, it is something we have been talking about for several months on this program. it is inflation. inflation is to find as the general increase in the price of goods and services in the economy overtime that corresponds with a decrease in the value of money. the simple explanation is that inflation is what happens when the demand for goods exceeds

the supply of them. that makes prices go up. there are currently, three main reasons why inflation is occurring right now. number one is the supply chain. after all of these months, there is still ongoing supply chain issues. it makes certain imported goods very hard to get. like microchips, for example, but going to smartphones, cars, and other tech. number two, major food shortages. the country that produces one fifth of the world's high grade wheat for human consumption, ukraine, is that war and cannot properly export its products. particularly wheat. they are stuck at black sea ports unable to get out because of a russian blockade. by the way, ukraine produces a lot of other things including sunflowers for sunflower oil. there are a lot of things being held up there. number three, and probably the biggest, is oil. since the war started there has been a litany of sanctions on russian oil. russia is one of the biggest producers of oil. with rush out of the equation for much of the world there is simply less oil to go around.

it is why the prices soaring. the price of oil settled at $118.87 per barrel yesterday. it was trading above 120 bucks. so, how does inflation get solved? generally, by rating and raising interest rates. that discourages people from buying things. you do not want to run a balance on your credit card. interest rates make you slow things down. the problem is, if you cool down a very hot economy too aggressively using interest rates, you can overdo it. you can course correct too far. that leads to a recession. and that is the scoop. another day, another detail, showing the ineptitude of the uvalde police department. this small oversight might have monumental consequences. vitamins... ...and other key essential nutrients... ...it's a tasty way to conquer your day. try centrum multi gummies. now with a new look.

our students, they're our top priority. and students are job one for our superintendent of public instruction, tony thurmond. recruiting 15,000 new teachers, helping ensure all students can read by third grade. the same tony thurmond committed to hiring 10,000 new mental health counselors. as a respected former social worker, thurmond knows how important those mental health counselors are for our students today. vote for democrat tony thurmond. he's making our public schools work for all of us.

riders! let your queries be known. uh, how come we don't call ourselves bikers anymore? i mean, "riders" is cool, but "bikers"...is really 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. families of the victims and survivors of the massacre in buffalo, new york, and uvalde,

texas, are set to. -- this is where the gun control measures that is expected to pass the house and is expected to stall in the senate. new york representative, karen maloney, chairwoman of the over second, he hope is that people hearing the testimony will turn anger into action. democrats are trying to ramp up the pressure on republicans to stop blocking any sort of gun control. the pressure within the gop to hold fast against any significant gun control measures was laid bare yesterday when republican congressman, chris jacobs, who represents parts of buffalo, announced that he will no longer seek reelection. one week after he embraced a federal assault weapons ban and limits on high capacity magazines. the backlash from within his republican party was so swift and severe that one week is all he took for him to decide that it was best to end the

reelection bid. quote, we have a problem in our country in terms of both major parties. if you straight for my party position, you are annihilated. for the republicans, it became pretty apparent to me over the last week that this issue is gun control. and you can control, said congressman jacobs. he was endorsed by the nra in the last election cycle. in uvalde, texas, the moments leading up to the tragedy at the robb elementary school are still being pieced together. the texas state senator, gutierrez, who so serves uvalde, told nbc news that the head of the school district police department, pete arredondo, did not have his police radio on him during the shooting. the statesman news paper says that they confirmed this report. it was also reported by the new york times. quote, a chief arradondo did not have a police redo with him, according to a law enforcement officer official familiar with the investigation, which may have impeded his ability to communicate with police dispatchers. as two supervisors from the

police department were grazed by bullets fired by the gunman, he made a decision to fall back, the officials said. using a cell phone, the chief called a police landline with a message that stuck to stage for what would prove to be a disastrous delay in interrupting the attack. the gunman has a ar-15, he told them, but he is contained. we need more firepower and we need these building surrounded, rather than confront an active shooting gunman immediately since -- as they have been -- armed officers arrived at robb elementary and held back for more than an hour. more than an hour, despite the fact that the swat team, special weapons and tactics were on the scene. they train for these situations. my next guest believes that this waiting game played by police and the breakdown in communications and uvalde, is a microcosm of broader issues in

policing. joining me now is bolckow, a pingeon columnist for the washington post. he is the author of the book, the rise of the warrior cop, the militarization of americas police forces. bradley, you and i have talked for years about this issue of militarized cops. they use too much force, the act too quickly about things without thinking quickly. i've never heard of calling for more force for the police. in this case, it is not just the school board police force that arradondo was in charge of, but the locals. there was more than a dozen police forces involved in this. it feels like everyone did not get the memo about how to deal with an active shooter in a school shooting. >> these types of scenarios, where you have lives at immediate risk, is the entire reason we have swat teams. this is why swat teams are justified. when you have a town the size of uvalde, which is a small town, that has its own swat

team, a lot of us have criticize this. why does a town of less than 10,000 people need one of these paramilitary police forces. the answer is always, there are school shootings, virginia tech, our columbine, parkland. this is why we need one of these teams. what we have seen over the years in a studies and surveys, a 75 to 80% of swat appointment across the country, particularly in small towns, are used to serve warrants on people who are expected to be associated with low level drug crimes. this is how the teams are used. this is the type of situation where these towns say that we need a swat team and yet the swat team is deployed and they wait for over an hour until another swat two comes in and apprehend and kills the shooter. and like you said, it is a microcosm of the broader issues of policing, like communities wanting to pre-protected and feel safe. particularly, marginalized

communities, this is a primary latino town. they want more funding for policing, they want to feel protected, yet, would ends of happening, they get harassed and police to day-to-day police enforcement guard drug enforcement, but they don't actually protect them in the way that they want to be protected. we see clearance rates for murders among black and latino populations that are 15 to 20% lower than for white populations. if you are black, you are far less likely to have your murder solve than if you are a white person. these communities want protection. what they end up getting is a lot of harassment and not as much protection. that is what we saw in microcosm during the shooting. >> i gives food so institutional. and a lot of cases, they have

associated with the militarization that you have written about, a sum associated with a racism. in uvalde, the makeup of the local police force and the ethnic makeup and racial makeup of the police force is the same as the population. >> absolutely. i think it is institutionalized. i do not think -- people sat here the term in institutional racism and structural racialism and i think that everyone in that department or institution is racism. it is the opposite of what it means. what institutional racism means is that you have an institution that has been built to preserve the status quo. there is a time where it was coated in the law in for the segregation and other hierarchy policies that preserve the racial hierarchy. when you have this institutional racism in a police department, it means that the policies and the

structure within the department of how it serves the city are racist, not that every officer is. you can have majority black police departments where big still have policies that only address low-level times and not violent crimes. you still get this a racial disparity and outcomes even though you have minorities in the police department. >> you do not have to be a racist to be working in a racist system. bradley, thank you. bradley brock low is a calm is a commune -- he is the author of rise of the war rear cop. one often misquoted a sentence written 240 years ago has led to a deadly american obsession. erican obsession ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement.

♪♪ it's 5:00 a.m., and i feel like i can do anything. we've got apples and cabbage. 7,000 dahlias, vegetables, and brisket for dinner. this is my happy place. we've been coming here, since 1868. my grandmother used to say, don't call me, don't bother me. i'm going out to mow. there's a lot of cushy desk jobs out there, but i make the earth take the shape that i want it to take. there are millions of ways to make the most of your land. learn how to make the most of yours at deere.com

what do you think healthier looks like? cvs can help you support your nutrition, sleep, immune system, energy ...even skin. so healthier can look a lot like...you. cvs. healthier happens together. ♪♪ whenever heartburn strikes get fast relief with tums. it's time to love food back. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums ♪ the constitution is the supreme

law of the united states. it affords united american citizens their freedoms. it was written in the 18th century with feather pens on squirrels apartment by a group of men. the document has been debated, updated, an amended, as america has grown and faced challenges that were not addressed by the founding fathers. one of the most hotly debated of those amendments is the second amendment, it consists of one sentence. a well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. we've been condition to put the greatest weight on the second part of the sentence, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. on its own, it is convincing. the people of america have the right to bear arms. it is the thing that the gun lobby has pushed with unlimited success for decades. the constitution does not say whether you can owe the gun you

bear, where it is stored, how to store it, what constitutes arms which were different in the 18th century. never mind the single section -- single sentence that undermines the entire amendment. how about the first. part a well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state. when the second amendment was adopted in 1791, america was fresh out of the chaos of the revolution. the federalist and the anti federalists did not agree on much, but they eventually united in their desire to keep the federal government out of the military. instead, the founding fathers preferred the idea of a civilian militia. america operated in a system that is entirely alien to us today. ordinary citizens supplied their own weapons and acted as part time militia members, ready to answer the call to repel a government that could get too strong and threaten the freedom of the state. many believe that a standing army, like the one that we and

most countries have today, one that is professionally trained and controlled by the government was a threat to their freedom. they thought that they would use the soldiers to oppress the people, which just happen in countries. if the people were not armed or organized in the simplest of terms, the freedom itself that america had fought the british four could be lost. many constitutional experts believe that one of the most important goals of the second amendment was to prevent the united states from creating a professional army, and to arm and train citizens to defend their society. the amendment itself makes no mention of the individual, or the correctional right to bear arms. the founding fathers were most likely referring to militia activity in defense of the freedom of the state from the government. >> -- an institute points out that there is not a single word about an individual right to a gun for self-defense or recreation in madison's notes from the constitutional

convention. they also note that quote, four times between 1876 and 1939, the u.s. security supreme court denied gun ownership outside of the context of a militia. some might be surprised that it was not until 2008, only 14 years, ago that the supreme court guaranteed an individual right to own a gun in the landmark district of columbia, the hillard case. it struck down a law effectively banning handguns in the home, delivering gun rights advocates a major legal victory. by 2000, eight the conversation around guns and gun rights had already been saturated by the nra and the wider gun lobby. 18 years before that, the very conservative chief justice of the supreme court, lauren berke, or who was appointed by richard nixon, famously, said quote, the gun lobbyist interpretation of the second amendment was one of the greatest pieces of

fraud. i repeat the word fraud, on the american people. it is by special interest groups that i have ever seen. this is all in my lifetime. but's play devolve advocate for a second. let's just say that the founding fathers did write the second amendment exactly as it is being interpreted today. individual americans having in no relationship to a militia, have the absolute right to own a firearm. if that were the case, this is the gun that the founding fathers would have been talking about. this is what they had in. mine in 1790, one this is one of the only guns on the market. it is a typical, revolutionary, musket. here it is in comparison to the current mass shooting kind of choice, the ar-15. the musket had a capacity of a one round. it fired a three rounds permit knit if you were a skilled reload. or the muscle velocity, the speed at which the bullet goes to the gun, was 1000 feet per second and eight could shoot an

accurate range of about 164 feet. the typical modern ar-15 cell rifle has a magazine capacity of 30 versus one. it can fire 45 rounds per minute, depending on the shooter. and as a muscle velocity it three times of what the musket did it is 3260 feet per second. this is the speed at which the bullet comes out of the gun. it can accurately hit and kill a target with one shot at a target of more than 550 meters, which is 1800 feet. in their wildest dreams, the founding fathers never could have imagined that the second amendment would be used to put these type of weapons, the ar-15 weapons, in the hounds of 18 year olds, legally. if you're wondering what happened to those beloved well regulated militias of the 18th century, they are gone! they dissolve! all 50 states prohibit a private militia military like militias in the 20th century, in the 21st century.

the national guard and now exists as a form of militia, but not as the way the father founding's five founding fathers intended. the second amendment consists of one half of the sentence that has been modified and essentially eradicated. the other is used to justify un-american obsession with a deadly weapon. riddle me that. with thousands of rollbacks so you get everything you need to keep your summer rollin'. because when you save money, you can live better. 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.

♪♪ this... is the planning effect. this is how it feels to know you have a wealth plan that covers everything that's important to you. this is what it's like to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. making sure you have the right balance of risk and reward. and helping you plan for future generations.

this is "the planning effect" from fidelity. you know liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need? like how i customized this scarf? check out this backpack i made for marco. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ the supreme court is expected to got abortion rights in the coming weeks. until then, roe v. wade is still the lava land. abortion remains a constitutionally protected right. on wednesday, abortion has already been outlawed. ten days ago, oklahoma governor, kevin, signed a bill that bans abortion from the moment of realization. this law went into effect immediately. oklahoma's remaining clinics have stopped offering abortion

care completely. many conservative states like oklahoma have enacted a record number of draconian anti abortion bills, and as these restrictive laws have taken a effect across the country, women have been willing to make journeys across state lines, sometimes hundreds of miles from their home, for abortion care. when the six-week abortion care band effect, it took a spillover effect into neighboring states. before oklahoma's ban took effect, planned parenthood saw a rise in patients who were coming from texas. in 2020, one more than half of the patients were from texas compared to just 10% in 2020. similarly, as the states surrounding illinois have gone gone more hostile towards abortion and enacted new restrictions, illinois has seen an increase of patients coming from missouri, louisiana, and arizona. all the states are beginning to strain the illinois system. this is predicted to get worse if roe is overturned.

earlier this week, illinois governor, jay b can score, says that we will need more doctors and nurses to staff up the clinics to keep up with the demand. this is something that the abortion providers have been calling for as well. additionally, awareness and a demand for abortion pills online have surged. in the days after supreme court justice's family knows leaked, it spiked on sites like hey jane, which offered telehealth councils for abortion. care laws banning abortion will not keep people from getting an abortion, it just makes one getting one more cumbersome and dangerous. alternative options will come available. people will seek the mouth. this is already true now. it was true in the area before roe. this is when abortion was illegal across most of the country. for thousands of his chicago area, from 1968 to 1973, one is safe affordable and discreet option for those who needed an abortion was the jain that

collective. the jane collective was a group of young women who set up a system to help people obtain abortion cared during a time where abortion was still illegal in illinois and most of the country. in the five year that it was in operation, the chain collective helped thousands of women, and in the process learned about the many reasons that they were seeking this procedure. >> women would launch into these stories, i have three children, i have no more money, my husband is leaving, my husband is sick, i do not have the husband, and 17, i want to go to college. if i do not go now -- they were really cogent and important reasons. , we will try to make clear to them that they did not have to justify themselves. >> the reason for having an abortion was a very reason.

i was not there to pass a judgment. >> how novel. i was not there to pass judgment on someone else's decision about what they are going to do with their body. that is a clip from the new documentary, the jeans, which mirrors on hbo and hbo max on this wednesday on june 8th. when i come, back i will be joined by the directors of that documentary. documentary. covid-19 moves fast, and now you can too by asking your healthcare provider if an oral treatment is right for you. oral treatments can be taken at home and must be taken within 5 days

from when symptoms first appear. if you have symptoms of covid-19, even if they're mild don't wait, get tested quickly. if you test positive and are at high risk for severe disease, act fast ask if an oral treatment is right for you. covid-19 moves fast and now you can too. we were very aware of the fact attorney's office to pursue justice for everyone. but like so many of my colleagues, i resigned in protest because chesa boudin interfered in every single case and failed to do his job. the office is absolutely in disarray right now. chesa dissolved my unit prosecuting car break-ins. now criminals flock to san francisco because there are no consequences. we can't wait. recall chesa boudin now.

that women were suffering in a variety of ways because of abortion being against a law. women did awful things out of fear and desperation. we knew that someone be injured, some would die, many people around them, including the children they already had,

would suffer. we thought, we can be of use. you need an abortion, we can help. you call this number and ask for jane. >> it was a clip from the upcoming a documentary, the jeans, debuting on hbo and hbo max this wednesday june 8th. here are the film directors behind the documentary. thank you for being with us. thank you for making this. emma, let me ask you, what motivated this? it is coming out at a remarkable time. the release of this documentary is literally the same as when we will see national abortion protections and in this country. what's triggered this documentary? >> development started in 2016, when trump got into office, things started feeling a little less comfortable. we were concerned. daniel r. cannot started the development. he is another producer on the

film. he looked around and said that we are in trouble. now is the time to develop the story. daniel is my brother. we have this in our back pocket. he saw the value of giving a platform to these women to tell their story about the last time in this country when the women did not have the right to make this decision. and how grim the real realities of that are. >> women who are breaking a law by giving the abortion, providing the abortion, getting the abortion, we talk about the abortions in this country and make them illegal. what your filled does is it shines a light on the fact that some things will happen that are illegal if the laws are not just and we could be headed back to that role. >> we are headed to a worse place, i think. laws that are being placed right now are more harsh and more punitive than the years before roe.

back then, it was illegal to advertise abortion services. doctors were suffered to prosecution. but now, women could be in violation of laws and could be criminalized for passing state laws. people are being incentivized to turn in their neighbors if they suspect that an abortion is taking place. i think it is much more draconian now. i am worried. >> the video vigilantism, the violence that you show in this documentary of women covering their faces and a larger man escorting a woman in. we are seeing a lot of that. how did this work. the james set up a system that involved multiple houses apartments, and it was an entire covert way of getting an abortion. it was sophisticated. >> they are sophisticated women. they are very savvy. the film almost plays like a

1970s heist film. traditionally, it was a macho genre. we inverted that. these are smart, deeply moral human beings that put all of their smarts to the test here. they are organized. they also came out of the civil rights movement and the anti war movement and the women's room and. they have an organizing background. they are smart. they care. they want to save women's lives at any cost. >> in a place like chicago, a place that had a deep history for services of women, that said, before the james organized this, what was it like for women in chicago? must of been the same for all over america, for those who did not have an organized way to get a legal abortion. >> there were few options. there were septic words of abortions in hospitals. they were dumping grounds for those who sought illegal procedures, a back alley

abortions. some went to the mob into chicago. some who could not find other resources and boost their own abortions. >> when you say went to the mob, what do you mean? >> the mob was poor for providing abortions in the city of chicago. it was lucrative. they could charge thousands of thousands of dollars. it was illegal. that is what the forte was. women were going into hotel rooms, back alleyways, with a big men doing the procedures. they did not know if they were going to live or die. some of them did not make it. >> as we heard in the clip, women did die getting these procedures done. what do you hope to happen from this, emma? what impact, in this important time. the impact of releasing it now is greater than it would've been at any other time in the last 15 years. right now, people need to make a decision. a new poll this week indicates that more than half of all americans, about 53%, are about to pro-choice.

two thirds do not want to see the criminalization of abortion. what will the film too? >> we do not have to change hearts and minds with this a film. we just need to remind people that they need to speak up and they need to get involved. we have been enjoying the right of row for the last 15 years and resting on our morals for it. it has been chipped away at. it has been in place. now, this is not going to be the case. are their hearts and minds to be changed. if you do not want to change someone's mind, or you do not think that they could change their mind or believe in abortion, the criminalization of abortion, which is what your film brings to light, i think this feels like a bridge too far, probably even for people who have conservative views on things. some of them will see and say that they do not want to see that. they do not want to see women die. i don't to see septic wards in

hospitals. i do not want to see the mob involved in abortions. i do not like abortion but i don't want them to die or go to jail because of it. using this moves anyone? >> i certainly hope. so if they care about life, they should care about women's lives. if they do not like abortion, do not have one. there are people who need it choices and options in their lives. women who want to be able to decide when, whether, and with whom, to have a child. they will not stop getting abortions when it is criminalized. they are just going to have dangerous procedures. i think, hopefully, people will understand that. they will engage at the ballot box and in the streets as they need to from preventing us from going. back it is -- >> it is a remarkable film at a remarkable time. thank you both for making it and sharing it with us today. emma pildes and tia lessin, co-directors of the new documentary, the jeans, it premieres this wednesday on hbo and hbo max. you have more velshi this

morning. we are breaking down the latest in the fight for american democracy. with days to go until the much anticipated the january six committee, another hour of velshi begins now. lshi begins now. i am ali velshi, we are just days away from the january six highly anticipated public hearings dealing with the findings of its nearly yearlong investigation into the insurrection. the committee has officially scheduled the first of those hearings for thursday june six, beginning at 8 pm eastern. yet, as the committee prepares to present its findings, they're still there's still appears to be some distance in need to be tied up. yesterday another one of donald trump's cronies was indicted by the justice department. the police have arrested peter navarro, charged with two counts of criminal contempt of congress. once refusing to hand over documents can request about the

general six committee, another for refusing to appear for deposition. that is despite the fact that navarro never seems to stop talking. in every appearance, trump's former trade advisor is running his mouth a mile a minute, even though he can never seem to form a coherent thought. he is the second trump loyalist to be indicted for contempt of congress. earlier this year, stephen bannon surrendered when justice department the justice department brought similar charges against him. at this point it appears to be the only ones to face criminal contempt charges. the new york times is reporting that the justice department has declined to pursue charges against mark meadows and dan that's convene oh, two top trump officials. the response to that news, general six committee chair person thompson said in the statement, quote, we find the decision to reward mark meadows and dance given oh for the continued attacks on the rule of law puzzling. but it appears at least one key trump administration figure is cooperating with some capacity, or in some capacity, with the committee. on thursday,