minutes. that's been washington all summer. >> yeah, certainly, we know, the world watching for the supreme court decision, expected soon, likely within the next two weeks. the exact date not yet known. mike allen, thank you for the reporting. >> happy father's day, jonathan. >> appreciate that, sir. happy father's day to all of you out there this weekend. thanks for getting up with us "way too early" today, friday, as well as all week long. "morning joe" starts right now. what was vice president pence's reaction when you showed him the email where dr. eastman, after the attack on the capitol, still asked that the vice president delay certification and send it back to the states? >> he said that's rubber room stuff. >> i'm sorry. he said it's rubber room stuff? >> yes, congressman. >> what did you interpret that to mean? >> that that was certifiably crazy. >> certifiably crazy.

that is testimony from mike pence's former adviser regarding former president donald trump's repeated efforts to get pence to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. we will hear much more of the key moments from yesterday's january 6th hearing, including the vice president's close call with the mob, very close call that day. and the pardon request from the architect of the president's election scheme. plus, new reporting that the house select committee now wants to talk to conservative activist ginni thomas. she is, of course, the wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas. good morning. welcome to "morning joe." it is friday, june 17th. along with joe and me, we have white house bureau chief at politico and the host of "way to too early," jonathan lemire. "washington post"'s jackie alemany. host of politicians nation and host of the national action network, reverend al sharpton. and nbc legal analyst joyce

vance. good morning to everybody. joe, another day of blockbuster revelations. they just keep coming from this committee. among them, how close that mob on january 6th was to mike pence as they were chanting outside, "hang mike pence." >> mike pence staying right in there. i will tell you, another week of this, and they're going to get a couple yards from the fdr memorial and just start, you know, mike pence's statue with dan quill handing him a copy of the constitution. no, you know, it's surreal, what's going on. but you stop, actually, and i saw somebody yesterday, i think he writes for the "la times," talking about how when you realize that donald trump, in effect, was trying to cause mike pence to be killed or injured in a serious way, swept up by the

mob, this one person came to the conclusion that it was really the worst thing that a sitting president has done in the history of this republic. think about that for a second, willie. donald trump knew mike pence's life was in danger. he knew that people were trying to get ahold of him, trying to find him. he'd been whipping hatred up against him all day. started with that rally. then when mike pence is chased and he's running around and they're trying to find a safe location for his family and himself, that's when donald trump sends the tweet that, as testimony suggested yesterday, just threw more gas on the fire. boy, willie, they were close to finding him and, as the testimony suggested yesterday, because the proud boys and i believe the oath keepers were some of the first people in

there, the threat to mike pence's life was real. if they'd found him, they likely would have killed him or caused him serious, serious harm, as well as his family. and, again, again, we're so shocked but not surprised by what donald trump does, that yesterday was just another day to stop and say, a president of the united states was working actively to cause bodily harm or death to the vice president of the united states. that's just, again, it's never happened before in the history of this country. >> yeah. i think that's what these hearings are. we feel like we know so much about january 6th. we expect and understand so much about donald trump. but these are moments, these hearings, to stop and appreciate in detail with evidence, video, and testimony, of how bad that day was and how yesterday, the committee said, donald trump put a target on the back of his vice

president. that third day of testimony did focus on donald trump's efforts to pressure mike pence into overturning the election. the committee presenting evidence that several of trump's advisers told him the vice president did not have that kind of power, just couldn't do it. when pence did not do what trump wanted, the president incited his mob of supporters against him. we will start with the committee demonstrating just how close that pro-trump mob came to finding mike pence after the capitol had been breached. >> by 2:24 p.m., the secret service had moved vice president pence from the senate chamber to his office across the hall. >> the noise from the rioters became audible, at which point we recognized maybe they had gotten into the building. >> then president trump tweeted, "mike pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and our constitution, giving states a chance to certify a

corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. usa demands the truth!" >> bring him out. >> bring mike pence. >> it was escalating and escalating quickly. >> we want pence! we want pence! >> then when that tweet, the mike pence tweet, was sent out, i remember us saying that that was the last thing that needed to be tweeted at that moment. the situation was already bad, and so it felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire by tweeting that. >> 30 seconds later, rioters already inside the capitol opened the east rotunda door just down the hall. 30 seconds after that, rioters breached the crypt, one floor below the vice president. >> the secret service couldn't control the situation and do their job of keeping him safe. >> secret service rushed vice president pence down the stairs. >> i think they'd been trying to

figure out whether they had a clear route to get us to whereit was they wanted us to go. >> upon arrarriving, there was further discussion whether or not we'd leave the capitol complex or stay where we were. >> vice president pence and his team ultimately were led to a secure location where they stayed for the next 4 1/2 hours. barely missing rioters a few feet away. >> make no mistake about the fact that the vice president's life was in danger. a recent court filing by the department of justice explains that a confidential informant in the proud boys told the fbi the proud boys would have killed mike pence if given a chance. this witness, whom the fbi avid affidavit refers to as w-1, said

anyone they got their hands on they would have killed, including nancy pelosi. w-1 further stated that members of the proud boys said they would have killed mike pence if given a chance. >> joe, a couple things. obviously, the vice president could have left the building quickly. that probably was the prudent thing to do, but he insisted they stay and certify the election. the other thing is, this "hang mike pence" chant and the gallows put up outside of the capitol, they've been dismissed as, oh, that was symbolic, just chants by some people. now you hear the evidence inside the hearing, and you go, oh, no, actually, these people were looking for mike pence, looking for nancy pelosi, and god knows what they would have done if they found them. >> they wanted to kill mike pence. they would have killed mike pence. they were searching for nancy pelosi. they wanted to decapitate the united states constitutional government. that's why when you have republican senators and republican house members trying to push this information away

from the american people, they're actually trying to brush aside a coup against the united states of america. rev, when you look at all this evidence, you see just how serious it was. you also see the very clear intent, these people were trying to decapitate our constitutional government, kill the number two highest ranking constitutional officer in the land, kill the number three highest ranking constitutional officer in the land, and basically leave donald trump to be able to do whatever he wants to do, to recertify an i election, to be a tyrant who doesn't have to leave office when the american voters vote him out. >> when you take a step back, which i did as i watched the hearings yesterday, and remove from it the personalities, whether you like donald trump or not or mike pence or not, and think about we're talking about the president of the united states. >> right. >> we were taught since grade school what that means. he did not in any way try to

help spare the life or harm of the vice president of the united states. >> right. >> this is as atrocious as it can be in a government. the head of state actually enflaming those that want to take the life of his second in command. this is unheard of. i think maybe, as anxious as some of us were to get this done quicker, maybe it did take this time for us to sit back and say, wait a minute, forget it is trump. the president is out there tweeting while people are talking about kill the vice president and are rumbling through the halls looking for him. and he's not on the phone or whatever mechanism he has to communicate, trying to make sure he's safe, get him out of there. i don't care whether i like the guy or not, he is tweeting something that would encourage them. this is totally unbelievable. criminals don't act like this. >> well -- >> well, i guess they are criminal. >> there is a question.

former u.s. prosecutor yesterday, larry -- harry litman said, not clear if you could convict him of attempted murder of the vice president but not clear if you couldn't. then this line, "this has to be the darkest moment in presidential history." you know, jackie, we found out from mark meadows' cell phone and from other evidence, we found out that while this was going on, while mike pence's life was in danger, while nancy pelosi's life was in danger, while members of congress' life, while they were in danger, donald trump was being begged by everyone around him, by all of his staff members, to call the mob off. his own son, don jr., was begging him the call the mob off. ivanka begging, call the mob off. sean hannity calling in, begging

them to stop this, to call the mob off. everybody -- this is why when trumpers look at this and try to make this some left wing conspiracy from nancy pelosi, aoc, and george soros, what they don't understand is everybody that's talking now is a republican. everybody that's testifying against donald trump is a trumper, people who signed up and supported him through two impeachments. i mean, yesterday, for you, you've been following this so closely, i'm curious, what did yesterday's testimony add to the story for you? >> yeah. joe, you just make such an important point. at this point, we have seen 6 hours of public hearings driven and led by a republican congresswoman featuring primarily the top republicans in the trump administration and trump's own blood. ivanka trump saying over and

over again that she was in and out of the oval office, trying to convince her father to do something. extensive testimony that's already been released stating as such. there's a few things that really stood out to me yesterday. first of all, john eastman has been introduced into the scheme. i think he has been named as a co-conspirator. that ruling we keep referencing from judge david carter, the california district judge who ultimately has ordered that john eastman turn over his emails to the select committee, which they've recently received and are now sort of recalibrating in order to feature that in their public hearings, but john eastman asked for a pardon via email. he was the person who was responsible for this legal theory, for exploiting the quote, unquote, ambiguity of the 12th amendment, and saying that the vice president could unilaterally -- had the power to

unilaterally halt or delay the electoral certification, send it back to the states. what you heard yesterday from judge luttig, in particular, is there is no ambiguity in the electoral count act. you know, trump was told time and time again that it was unconstitutional, not legally viable. you even had specific examples where john eastman ultimately came to the conclusion that maybe his plan, you know, wouldn't work anyway and that it wasn't viable, as well. which leads us back to where we started, joe, which is what you said, intent. this is what the committee keeps showing in each of these hearings, the intent here. there was -- the players here knew what they were doing was wrong but continued to do it in anyway. >> yeah. you know, joyce vance, um, even

doing what rev is saying we should do, take names out of this -- because we've all talked about trump so much the last several years -- if this was just president john doe, i think most americans would say, okay, this guy is at the center of a conspiracy. this guy needs to be charged with a crime. he's committing sedition against the united states government. i can tell you, if a lowly congressman, if a senator, if a governor had done this, they would be on their way to jail. no doubt about it. but i will say with eastman, it's just -- it seems like a slam dunk. this guy is directing people inside the white house to break the law. even after the riots, he's telling them to break the law. he is clearly working with donald trump to try to commit sedition against the united states of america.

i'm sorry, how hard of a call could this be for merrick garland by the time he gets all the evidence? >> well, eastman certainly thinks he was committing a crime. he tried to put himself back on the presidential pardon list at the close of the administration. he takes the fifth amendment more than 100 times when he is testifying in front of the january 6th committee. you know what they say about something that walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. and the evidence here really does become very compelling. of course, we don't know for certain how merrick garland will view this, but at least on january 5th of this year, he committed that he would follow the evidence wherever it led. it seems to lead right to john eastman's door. he's acting in these final days in this series of meetings that are being held in the vice president's office as president trump's representative. this is a lawyer who comes from out of nowhere and is suddenly

in the space, holding these meetings in this transitional period for a couple of hours at a time. you know, this is not just someone who wanders in off the streets. he gets to be in these meetings because everyone understands that he is speaking with trump's voice. he is the architect of this scheme, this notion that the breaking point in the process after americans have voted and have voted convincingly for joe biden, is to bypass the electoral college certification. that's why mike pence becomes an essential player. so it becomes clear that eastman and trump are working together to achieve this illegal objective. the evidence is pretty good in this regard. the justice department will have to engage in serious considerations involving whether the good evidence is all admissible. does it add up to proof beyond a reasonable doubt? does it make sense legally to bring the case, or are there some impediments? there may be first amendment considerations.

but, joe, when you look at the evidence, at some point, you have to amalgamate it all together and say it is overwhelming and it is important to americans there be some accountability here so this can never happen ben. >> interesting news yesterday on that front, by the way. we learned the doj requested transcripts of all the depositions conducted by this committee, showing their interest, perhaps, in some criminal prosecution here. john eastman was right at the center of yesterday's hearing. the committee acknowledging eastman acknowledged himself there was no legal basis for his theory to overturn the election. eastman argued that vice president pence had the power to throw out the electors from disputed states and declare trump the winner under the 12th amendment. the committee reviewed an intended letter from trump for eastman in october 2020, one month before the election, in which eastman acknowledged his own argument had no standing.

>> i appreciate that. in our investigation, the select committee obtained evidence suggesting dr. eastman never really believed his own theory. let me explain. on the screen, you can see a draft letter to the president from october 2020. in this letter, an idea was proposed that the vice president could determine which electors to count at the joint session of congress. but the person writing in blue eviscerates that argument. the person who wrote the comments in blue wrote, quote, the 12th amendment only says that the president of the senate opens the ballots in the joint session, and then, in the passive voice, the votes shall then be counted. the comments in blue further state, nowhere does it suggest that the president of the senate gets to make the determination on his own. did dr. eastman admit in front of the president his proposal would violate the electoral count act? >> he acknowledged that was the

face. even what he viewed as the more politically palaable option would violate options, but he thought the electoral count act was unconstitutional. >> that was former legal for mike pence, mr. jacob. the committee also played sound from former white house attorney eric hershman, who talked about hiss reaction to john eastman's scheme to overturn the election, and said eastman told him he did not care if that led to violence. >> i said, hold on a second. i want to understand what you're saying. you're saying that you believe the vice president, acting as president of the senate, can be the sole decision maker as to, under your theory, who becomes the next president of the united states? and he said yes. i said, are you out of your f-ing mind? i said, you're completely crazy. you're going to turn around and

tell 78 plus million people in this country that your theory is this is how you're going to invalidate their votes, because you think the election was stolen? i said, they're not going to tolerate that. i said, you're going to cause riots in the streets. and he said words to the effect of, there's been violence in the history of our country to protect the democracy. >> after all this, as joyce and jackie mentioned, that revelation that eastman sought a presidential pardon in the aftermath of january 6th. >> dr. eastman emailed rudy giuliani and requested he be included on a list of potential recipients of a presidential pardon. dr. eastman's email stated, quote, i've decided that i should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works. dr. eastman did not receive his

presidential pardon. >> so, jonathan lemire, add john eastman to the list with some republican congressmen the committee says sought pardons, as well, knowing they likely committed crimes in trying to overturn the 2020 election. >> i decided i should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works. that's the quote we're all going to remember. it launched a thousand pretty amusing memes yesterday, but it is a far more serious matter, of course. this is acknowledgment from eastman that he had done wrong. that he was in jeopardy, like so many others there. both after january 6th, but i think more damning is, yesterday, the revelations that eastman and so many others close to the president knew they were doing things wrong before january 6th. they knew that they had no legal standing for what they were doing. eastman admits in october 2020, before the election, as he was starting to cook up these schemes, that he didn't believe pence actually had the authority to not certify biden's win, were biden to win when january 6th

rolled around. he is also -- other trump aides quoted as saying, this is not the power al gore would have had. they wouldn't want kamala harris to have it while she is vice president, but they should think mike pence should do it anyway. pence, of course, denied that and would not do it. i do think we touched on it before, but perhaps the most striking moment from yesterday, there is one image in particular that was released. i believe it is a secret service photograph. it is pence in his secure location in the capitol as rioters breached the building. he is urged by agents to leave. he's saying no. he doesn't want to leave. he feels like that would be a bad sign. that'd hand the rioters a win. it'd show them they could disrupt the democratic process. he feels he needs to stay to certify the results, to certify biden's win at some point that day. there is a picture of pence on the phone in one hand. in the other hand, holding another phone, and he is being, on that one, played a clip of trump's message to rioters in which he is saying he loves

them. so this is the vice president of the united states being urged to leave the capitol for his own safety, for his own family's safety. he's saying he'll stay, and he is watching his boss, who he served so loyally for four years, encouraging those people who were trying to kill him. >> yeah. he said he was going to stay despite the fact, again, his life was in real danger. and, again, you talk about a guy who is being loyal to donald trump for four years. i mean, if donald trump puts a water bottle on the floor, mike pence puts a water bottle on the floor. i mean, he does whatever donald trump tells him to do. but i will say again, and there are a lot of people from my old tribe that i've been shocked and stunned with, just how much they sold out, sold their political souls to donald trump, but i will tell you, in that hour when american democracy was on the line, so many of them, rev,

stood up. i hear lot of progressives, democrats, liberals saying, yeah, you know what they did on -- i understand, and we've criticized it nonstop. but, again, this is sort of like, you know, we were at war that day. people wanted to tear the constitution to shreds. they wanted to kill the vice president of the united states. they wanted to kill the speaker of the house. and you have people from mike pence to nancy pelosi to mitch mcconnell who, on that day, we're talking that day, january 6th, stood in the gap and protected and defended democracy. you know what? we should be able to sit back and look at that and say, job well done. because that was a day our democracy really was on the line. >> no, i think there comes moments when we step past our agreements, disagreements,

partisan or whatever there may be, and have to take a stand for what we really believe in. what i think we saw that day, and no one has been more critical of mike pence than i have, and still do disagreement with him on nine out of ten things, but he chose the country over his own life. i mean, this guy -- imagine you're in a building, seeing these kind of mobs coming through wanting to kill you, and your boss you're hearing by phone is instigating them, and he still chose to do the right thing for the country. >> and stay there, when he could have easily escaped and been safe. >> easily escaped. he had secret service, all kinds of security that could have gotten him out on any number of routes. he stood there which, in any ways, kept the country from falling into whatever it could have fell into. so at that moment, i've got to give a lot of respect to mike pence. now, we're going to fight on everything else -- >> sure. >> -- but at that moment, i think he did something that was

absolutely heroic. and i think that he should be given credit for that. i think had he not done that -- the reason i can give credit is suppose he hadn't done that. suppose if he'd gone to the well and tried not to certify the election. suppose if he had done what donald trump wanted to do. who knows how that would have ended up with that violent mob and people around the country thatto coupeduplicate the violence. what could have happened had he not stood up, i have to give respect. >> really quickly, we talked yesterday about bennie thompson. you know, a lot of us, myself included, early on was saying the january 6th committee weren't doing enough. they weren't being aggressive enough. they certainly have laid this out remarkably well. bennie thompson gone out of his way to keep his head down, do his job, no showboating by any members of the committee. they've all done an

extraordinary job, haven't they? >> i think so. i think bennie thompson has really become the personification of what you do as a chairman and statesman. he had a lot of pressure, what are you doing? why are you dragging your feet? he kept going, methodical, not listening to the noise. i think that he has reached real heights as a stateman in this country. he and liz cheney. i mean, i never thought i'd respect -- i must be having -- >> i'll tell you what, it is upside down here. >> for me to be praising a cheney and a pence, ought to be a great juneteenth for me. >> we are in paradoxical terrain, as british writer said it. paradoxical terrain. it is remarkable what this committee has done.

committees, again, time and time again, we seem to be pulling our hair out going, well, why didn't this committee do this? why didn't -- and why are they showboating? why is everybody showboating for five minutes and yelling and not listening to the witnesses? in this case, they have set this up perfectly. nobody can say it is just showbiz. it's trump people being given the space to take down donald trump, to show what an anti-democratic, authoritarian, and on january 6th, fascist leader he was. the testimony is damning. again, what do your friends, what do my friends say with all their conspiracy theories? what do they say? they can't blame it on nancy pelosi. they can't blame it on aoc. can't blame it on george soros. can't game it on chuck schumer

or the people they always blame it on. because these were the republicans who fought for trump, backs to the wall through two impeachment, through one scandal after another. they stayed there until the end, when everybody else left. they were that the dedicated to donald trump. then they saw what happened on january 6th, and they real iesz realized this guy was an american fascist. >> that was by design from the committee. they couldn't have a bunch of anti-trump or democrats come in there and criticize donald trump. it had to be voices from his own white house. it had to be his own adviser. it had to be members of his family. it had to be his attorney general, all who, as you said, stood with him for four years, but knew at least on that one day, or the couple days leading up to it, something terrible, something unpatriotic, something un-american was happening. we've got much more from yesterday's house select committee hearing this morning, including the moment john eastman argued mike pence could overturn the 2020 results. but he said democrats should not be able to do the same thing in

future elections. should just be about trump. plus, the house select committee now wants to speak to ginni thomas, the wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas, who we've been talking about a bit the last couple days. what she's saying about that request from the committee. also this morning, senators trying to clear one last hurdle when it comes to new gun safety legislation. we'll take a look at the last sticking point and the timeline for getting something passed in congress. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke.

report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. since i left for college, my dad has gotten back into some of his old hobbies. and now he's taking trulicity, and it looks like he's gotten into some new healthier habits, too. what changes are you making for your type 2 diabetes? maybe it's time to try trulicity. it's proven to help lower a1c. it can help you lose up to 10 pounds. and it's only taken once a week, so it can fit into your busy life. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. it's not approved for use in children. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis.

taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, which can lead to dehydration, and may worsen kidney problems. the choices you make can help control your a1c. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. only at vanguard you're more than just an investor you're an owner. that means that your priorities are ours too. our interactive tools and advice can help you build a future for the ones you love. that's the value of ownership.

in the book "peril," bob woodward and robert costa write, quote, if these people say you have the power, wouldn't you want to? the vice president said, quote, i wouldn't want any one person to have that authority. the president responds, wouldn't it almost be cool to have that power? vice president is reported to have said, no, look, i've read

this, and i don't see a way to do it. we've exhausted every option. i've done everything i could and then some to find a way around this. it's simply not possible. my interpretation is no, to which the president says, no, no, no, you don't understand, mike. you can do this. i don't want to be your friend anymore if you don't do this. [ laughter ] >> my god, joe. >> i don't want to be your friend anymore. oh, my god. >> that's the president of the united states. his air-tight argument to mike pence is, if you don't to this, i won't be your friend anymore. >> willie -- >> mike pence, they're slowly walking him through the law here. >> yeah. i was going to say, willie, just even in congress, if i were talking to somebody and they said, "you do this or i won't want to be your friend anymore," oh, my god. i mean, i'd start dying laughing. i'd call him a name, and i'd say, you know, you don't really

belong here, clown. turn in your -- i wouldn't call him clown. turn in your voting card. but what a child donald trump is. what a dangerous, dangerous bloated, trust fund baby, who actually starts playing the role of a fascist who wants to stay in power, and really just doesn't care who gets hurt, who gets killed, as long as he gets to stay in power. but he's not alone. >> wouldn't it be cool? >> willie, he's not alone in this. we talked about ginni thomas. we have other people who, you're right, think it'd be cool if they could just shred the constitution and stay in power. >> i mean, that's explicitly what the president said, "wouldn't it be cool if you could take the unilateral power to overturn the will of the people and reverse a presidential election?" ginni thomas, a conserative

activist and the wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas, saying she is willing to testify in front of the january 6th committee. thomas said, quote, i can't wait to clear up misconceptions. i look forward to talking to them. the committee is looking to talk with thomas about emails exchanged with lawyer john eastman. here is committee chair, congressman bennie thompson, responding to the news yesterday. >> well, look, we have sent ms. thomas a letter, asking us to come and talk to the committee. what you -- >> sent it already? >> listen to me. what you said, if she responded while the hearing was going on, that she wants to come, we look forward to her coming. >> joyce vance, i don't know how you don't call ginni thomas at this point, given the email exchanges we have seen with john eastman. let's not forget, the text exchanges reported between ginni thomas and mark meadows, the

chief of staff to the president of the united states, saying the president has to -- you have to help the president overturn the election. encouraging a plan to do so. she's very influential in conservative circles. she had the ear of some very important people throughout this. >> well, the first thing you want to do is make sure that she's going to follow through on that offer. we've heard other people make offers like this and then not show up with the committee. assuming she is willing to do this, the right process is to do what's been done with every other witness. sit her down with committee staff for a thorough interview, and then to determine whether any portion of her testimony should be presented to the american people in the public hearings. it's too unwieldly when you're first hearing everything a witness has to say to do the data dump on television format. there are parallel inquiries that have to go on here. it is very clear at this point that her husband needs to recuse

from any further matters that involve her work as an activist. john roberts, the chief justice, needs to, based on the evidence that's come forward, conduct an inquiry into the integrity of the court's security. of course, we have reporting that john eastman at least claims that he had insider knowledge about the court's deliberations around cases following the 2020 election. whether that was puffery or whether he actually did have sources inside of the court is something that the court that's already dealing with the leak of an opinion in dobbs, the abortion case, needs to consider seriously. those inquiries go along on a parallel track with ginni thomas' testimony, which could be very illuminating. if she has explanations, she should have an offer to the explanations. right now, she looks to be a very important witness. >> at the center of many things, pushing, again, an effort to overthrow american democracy.

encouraging john eastman, encouraging mark meadows, encouraging state legislators to overthrow american democracy, to throw out the 78 million votes and allow someone who lost a presidential election to stay in power. i'm wondering, jackie, what does next week look like? this has been laid out extraordinarily well so far. we keep learning things that add another piece to a puzzle. well, quite frankly, in cases that the justice department should be very interested in. but what does the future hold for this committee? >> yeah. joe, i just want to say quickly, though, on this ginni thomas, john eastman actually confirmed he was in communication with ginni yesterday and sought to downplay the communications with her. but essentially, what he put

out, one email correspondence with thomas confirming she wanted him to come speak to a group of people correlates with what judge david carter had outlined in his court ruling last week. that emails he described as potentially troubling and newsworthy. i think that the issue here, and what we're going to see going forward about this ongoing threat, something that -- a thread that pete aguilar really pushed yesterday, is people like ginni thomas actually truly believe that there is some way in the constitution to interpret it as ambiguous. again, we talked about this very quickly yesterday. this election nullification theory, as laurence tribe referred to it. i think conseratives might refer to it as something else. basically, state legislatures have the power to override the will of the electorate and the electoral college, and could essentially, rightfully, send back alternate slate of

electors. ginni thomas, in her emails to arizona state lawmakers that my colleague, emma brown, uncovered, she pushed that theory. by all accounts, it seems like truly believed it. that has picked up steam. that is, i think, what people are so worried about going into 2024. that is what i think we'll see more of next week. adam schiff is hosting a hearing on tuesday. the alternate slate of electors. it is about the way john eastman and trump and others in the trump campaign directly pushed and organized this scheme to get pro-trump electors to submit phony, alternate slates. later in the week, i think we'll be hearing about extremism and sort of the modern day radicalization of people in these right-wing groups like the proud boys, et cetera. how that is also a growing threat. and the way all of these things are intertwined. >> the "washington post"'s jackie alemany and former u.s. attorney joyce vance, great to have your reporting and

insights, as always, this morning. talk to you next week. historian gordon reed talking about the newest holiday, juneteenth, coming up this sunday. the history and the future of that holiday. "morning joe" will be right back. a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose.

or... his nose. ♪ we could walk forever ♪ ( ♪♪ ) ♪ walking on ♪ ♪ walking on the moon ♪ ♪ some ♪ ♪ may say ♪ ♪ i'm wishing my days away ♪ ♪ no way ♪ ♪ walking on the moon ♪ lemons. lemons, lemons, lemons. look how nice they are. the moment you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels. so you can go and see all those, lovely, lemony, lemons. ♪ and never wonder if you got a good deal.

because you did. ♪ ♪♪ making friends again, billy? i like to keep my enemies close. guys, excuse me. i didn't quite get that. i'm hard of hearing. ♪♪ oh hey, don't forget about the tense music too. would you say tense? i'd say suspenseful. aren't they the same thing? can we move on guys, please? alexa, turn on the subtitles. and dim the lights. ok, dimming the lights. before discovering nexium 24hr to treat her frequent heartburn... alexa, turn on the subtitles. and dim the lights. claire could only imagine enjoying chocolate cake. now, she can have her cake and eat it too. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? when that car hit my motorcycle, can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? insurance wasn't fair. so i called the barnes firm, it was the best call i could've made. call the barnes firm now, and find out what your case could be worth.

♪ call one eight hundred, eight million

and i d d so my y quesonons coueouout hicacase.y y son, ♪ call one eight hundred, cacalledhehe bars s filion and i d d soit was the best call coueouout hii could've made. call the barnes firm aand find out what your case all ccould be worth.uld've made. ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪ this weekend, americans across the country are going to celebrate juneteenth. the holiday celebrates the true moment all slaves across the country were freed. two years after then president abraham lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation. the new federal holiday was signed into law last year by president biden. he called the moment one of the greatest honors he would have as president. with us now, let's bring in professor at harvard university and pulitzer prize winning author, annette gordon-reed.

her book, "on juneteenth." is this out in paperback? >> not yet. >> still selling like hotcakes. i loved your book because i loved -- i loved you describing your relationship with the state of texas. it reminded me what faulkner said about the south. i love the south. i hate the south. you never really got to the i hate texas, but you identify yourself as a texan. this was a texas holiday. when other states tried to take your holiday, you felt a little possessive, didn't you? >> at first. at first, it was a juvenile response. no, my family's roots go back very, very far in texas on my mother's side, to 1820s. my father's, the 1850s. most of my family is in texas. we didn't sort of join the great migration and move to other parts of the country. they moved to little towns in texas and big towns in texas.

>> right. >> i feel very, very connected to the place. problems and all. >> yeah, problems and all. so explain about juneteenth and how, for those that don't know, and a lot of people don't know the whole story, explain how texas plays such a big role in juneteenth. >> well, juneteenth commemorates the day that the united states army general, gordon granger, comes to galveston with black troops to announce that slavery is over in texas. the confederate army had kept fighting, even though lee surrendered in april. they were fighting well into may. the last battle of the civil war was in texas, and they won. but they knew the whole war was lost, so they surrendered. that's when granger can go in with the army and say slavery is over. >> i think that one of the things that is important about what you bring forth in the book, and we deal with juneteenth, is it puts in perspective why we save our union. even with the discussion going

on with the january 6th committee, the reason that slavery continued in the emancipation of the slaves in texas being delayed, is there was no concentration of union soldiers to protect the union, what the united states was doing against what texas confederate soldiers were doing. i think if we look at juneteenth in the perspective of what we're fighting for right now, it's to preserve one union that would be able to protect all citizens. i think that is why all americans can celebrate juneteenth. >> uh-huh. and granger in his general order also says that after slavery was over, people of african decent would be in the state of absolute equality with other americans. now, he couldn't say those words and make it happen, and it didn't happen. but the idea, the aspirational notion of that is something that we are still fighting for. that links the holiday to some of the stuff that's going on today. >> which is why we fought then

states rights, the whole era, on and on and on, which ended up with the civil rights movement. the '60s was about states right. then the country said, emancipation proclamation. texas said, not here. >> until you force us to, which is what the troops were able to do. imagine the time when enslaved people saw black soldiers in uniform coming as liberators, to sort of change the world for them. >> wow. >> didn't change completely. they knew they were in for a struggle because they knew who they were dealing with, right, but they were hopeful. i think commemorating juneteenth commemorates that joy, the hope they felt, that the day was going to be different. that's why we have to keep carrying that forward. >> how difficult was reconstruction in texas? how did texas compare to the deep south? i mean, that's actually a leading question. >> a leading question. a leading question, joe. >> what lawyers call leading

questions. >> yes. it was tough. people who came to texas during the war, many people from georgia and alabama and mississippi rushed into texas to try to get one step ahead of emancipation. so these are really hard doctor -- core people. they'd had their own country. they won the last battle. they thought they'd never been defeated. the people who ran the freedoms bureau there said that texas was particularly difficult place. >> yeah. what have within by talking through the past five, six years? why was it important for the president to sign the juneteenth bill and what can we learn? >> i think we're walking through a time when people realize we are still living with the legacy of slavery. i think the murder of george floyd 2020, in may, and then juneteenth afterwards, people were asking, how did we get

here? what is this all about? people see the legacy of slavery affects us in lots of different ways. they fashioned, i think, on juneteenth, as a way for us to talk about that. so i think that's what's been really going on, is this sense that we're at a reckoning, a turning point in this country. we're trying to decide what kind of people we actually are. the question the black citizenship has always been up for grabs and it's still up for grabs. >> we saw it happen in buffalo, and we hear and talk about the great replacement theory. it's so ironic, people who is maybe from eastern europe, talk talking about the great replacement theory, maybe they got here in 1810. maybe they were treated back in the 1900s. maybe irish immigrants treated badly in the 1850s. they just don't realize that, actually, they came -- >> people didn't like them either. >> they came about two, three

centuries after black americans came here involuntarily. again, great replacement theory, it is preposterous. >> it is preposterous. most african-american people, descendents, came from people here in the 1700s. around 1 million people, africans brought to the united states. 1865, 4 million. these people were in place for a long time. james baldwin said if the american negro is not an american, there is no american. >> there is no american. yeah, all right. professor at harvard university, annette gordon-reed, thank you so much. >> thank you for having me. >> juneteenth is on sunday. the federal holiday is on monday. >> yup. >> yeah. >> alex, does that mean we get off monday, we can sleep in monday? >> you can, but the rest of us can't. >> oh, okay, good. still ahead, we're going to talk about the significance of john eastman asking for a

presidential pardon. how fascinating. plus, we dig into the idea of, quote, constitutional mischief. that's what one of yesterday's witnesses called eastman's theory that pence could have rejected the electoral 2020 vote count. "morning joe" coming right back. , we use data-driven insights to design hr solutions to provide flexible pay options and greater workforce visibility today, so you can have more success tomorrow. ♪ one thing leads to another, yeah, yeah ♪ from prom dresses to workouts so you can have more success tomorrow. and new adventures you hope the more you give the less they'll miss. but even if your teen was vaccinated against meningitis in the past they may be missing vaccination for meningitis b. although uncommon, up to 1 in 5 survivors of meningitis will have long term consequences. now as you're thinking about all the vaccines your teen might need make sure you ask your doctor if your teen is missing meningitis b vaccination.

first psoriasis, then psoriatic arthritis. even walking was tough. i had to do something. i started cosentyx®. cosentyx can help you move, look, and feel better... by treating the multiple symptoms of psoriatic arthritis. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting...get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections some serious... and the lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms... or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms... develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. watch me. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! (sighs wearily) here i'll take that! (excited yell) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health. it's still the eat fresh® refresh, and now subway® is refreshing their classics, like the sweet onion teriyaki sauce, topped on tender shaved steak. it's a real slam dunk. right, derek? wrong sport, chuck. just hold the sub, man! subway keeps refreshing and refreshing

and refreshi- thinkorswim® equips you with customizable tools, dedicated trade desk pros, and a passionate trader community sharing strategies right on the platform. because we take trading as seriously as you do. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade only at vanguard, you're more than just an investor you're an owner. that means that your goals are ours too. and vanguard retirement tools and advice can help you get there. that's the value of ownership.

waxed. natural. sensitive. new dove ultimate antiperspirant. our unique water based formula and 6x more glycerin. helps restore skin to its best condition. new dove ultimate.

the noise from the rioters became audible, at which point we recognized maybe they had gotten into the building. >> then president trump tweeted, "mike pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and our constitution." >> bring mike pence. >> it was clear that it was escalating and escalating quickly. >> hang mike pence. hang mike pence! >> then when that tweet, the mike pence tweet, was sent out, i remember us saying that that was the last thing that needed to be tweeted at that moment.

the situation was already bad, and so it felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire by tweeting that. >> the secret service couldn't control the situation and do their job of keeping him safe. >> 2:26 p.m., secret service rushed vice president pence down the stairs. >> approximately 40 feet, that's all there was, 40 feet between the vice president and the mob. make no mistake about the fact that the vice president's life was in danger. a recent court filing by the department of justice explains that a confidential informant of the proud boys told the fbi the proud boys would have killed mike pence if given a chance. >> some of what we heard at yesterday's hearing into the attack on the capitol on january 6th. the committee detailed the extreme close call for the vice president. welcome back to "morning joe." friday, june 17th. jonathan lemire and the reverend al sharpton still with us. joining the conversation, bbc's

katty kay. pulitzer prize winning columnist and associate editor of the "washington post" gene robinson. and former official chuck rosenberg. we'll say it again, every piece of testimony we heard this morning and again yesterday, reveals how close a call it really was for mike pence, as you had rioters within feet of where he was hiding in a severe location, refusing to leave the building, waiting for this to pass so he could go back into the chamber and certify the 2020 presidential election. >> katty, let's be clear, the president of the united states knew the vice president of the united states' life was in danger. the president of the united states at that point then decided to tweet, attacking mike pence, to put the vice president of the united states and his family in even more danger. we heard from testimony yesterday, the only thing that was separating mike pence from

being assassinated that day was 40 feet. if you don't believe the committee, i'm sure you can ask mike pence. you can ask the security people. that's donald trump and his pushing of the mob to get after mike pence, both when he gave the speech earlier in the day, january 6th speech, but then with that tweet and other pronouncements, he pushed the mob to mike pence. we heard testimony yesterday, they actually would have killed him if they'd gotten their hands on him. donald trump would have been the person responsible for that killing. >> yeah, it's pretty clear from the video we just saw there of them being ushered down the stairs. the secret service took the threat to mike pence's life very seriously indeed. i guess you could always wonder, was it just tough talk from the proud boys? was it just bragging, that they

were saying they were going to do something but never were actually going to do it? but that's a heck of a risk to take if you are the secret service and you're hearing that mob 40 feet away. you're not going to think to yourself, well, maybe they're just being tough guys. they clearly thought this was serious. the moment at which we heard yesterday in that testimony, i thought it was one of the most chilling moments, when they can hear the rioters from inside that room where mike pence's wife is pulling back the curtains to try to make them more secure so people couldn't see into the room. it's at that very moment where the rioters are getting revved up or getting inside the building that president trump sends that tweet criticizing mike pence. as if sort of deliberately pouring fuel on the flames of their anger. i mean, if anything was going to rev that crowd up, it was more words from donald trump saying that mike pence had been a coward, in his words, or not

courageous and hadn't done the right thing. it is pretty clear from the secret service images that they believed that this was a potential threat on the vice president's life, and president trump did nothing to call him to see how he was doing. >> well, and, willie, if we want to know what they would have done if they'd gotten their hands on the vice president of the united states, who they were blaming for all of this, who caused the riots according to them, just see what they did to cops that were trying to protect the capitol and keep them away from mike pence. >> yup. >> they beat the hell out of them. one died the next day of a stroke that, again, you can debate medically whether it was related to the riots or not, but, my god, you look and see what they all went through. just being battered, most of them thinking they were going to be killed. several of them, i think a couple committing suicide afterwards because of ptsd.

>> yes. >> it was so, so intense. but, yeah, if they're going to beat the hell out of cops to get to mike pence, then when they get to mike pence, i think we can take the proud boys testimony at face value. if they'd found him, they would have killed him. donald trump knew that. that's why he was trying so hard to have him found. he wanted our constitutional government, the head of our constitutional government, decapitated. he wanted the number two and the number three people in the constitutional line of succession to the president murdered. that's -- i mean, look at the testimony. again, i would just say, if anybody out there is still skeptical about that, just ask mike pence and his bodyguards. >> and that room where vice president pence was being held has been described as a secure location. it was just an office. as you listen to the testimony yesterday, it's clear that they just got lucky. that the rioters, the people attacking the capitol, the

people looking for mike pence didn't find him there. we have to again stop and praise the capitol police officers, like eugene goodman, who directed that mob away from the leadership of our country. he literally stood in the door and directed them to a different place so they wouldn't go and kill the leadership of the united states government. what was the intent of that crowd? well, we say it. in more new footage from the committee presented at yesterday's hearing, trump's supporters outside the capitol threatening vice president mike pence for refusing to do president trump's bidding. >> mike pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he doesn't, that will be a sad day for our country. and mike pence, i hope you're going to stand up for the good of our constitution and for the good of our country. and if you're not, i'm going to be very disappointed in you. i will tell you right now. >> i'm telling you what, i'm hearing that pence, hearing that pence just caved. >> no. >> is that true?

i'm hearing reports that pence caved. i'm telling you, if pence caved, we're going do drag [ bleep ] through the streets. you [ bleep ] politicians are going to get [ bleep ] drug through the streets. >> yes. >> i guess the hope is there is such a show of force here that pence will decide to do the right thing, according to trump. >> bring him out. >> bring out pence! >> bring him out. >> bring out pence! >> hang mike pence! hang mike pence! hang mike pence! hang mike pence! hang mike pence! hang mike pence! >> a traitor and he deserves to burn with the rest of them. >> it's all escalated after pence -- what happened to pence? >> pence didn't do what we wanted. >> pence voted against trump. >> okay. that's when all this started? >> yup. that's when we marched on the capitol.

we've been shot at with rubber bullets, teargassed. >> we just heard that mike pence is not going to reject any fraudulent elector votes. [ crowd booing ] >> traitor! >> boo. >> that's right. you heard it here first. mike pence has betrayed the united states of america. mike pence has betrayed this president, and he has betrayed the people of the united states. we will never, ever forget! >> it's real simple. pence betrayed us. which apparently everybody knew he was going to, and the president mentioned it like five times when he talked. you can go back and watch the president's video. >> this is our capitol. let's be respectful to it.

4 million people coming in so -- >> we love the cops. >> it's only a matter of time. justice is coming. >> gene robinson, you hear those words from the rioters on the steps of the capitol. >> yeah. >> they are donald trump's words. >> yeah. >> donald trump moved the rioters up to the capitol. six months of lies about stolen elections, even before people cast the first vote, got them inspired to come up. his words on january 6th where he told them to march up there and that they had to be tough, they couldn't be weak, and it was all mike pence's fault, pushed them up there. then we heard the words on the capitol steps. they were just parroting everything donald trump had said. this is all on one man's shoulders. i always say, in law school, our

torts professor would have the "but for" test. but for the actions of a, b would not have happened. remove a from the scene. if b would not have happened, if the accident would not have happened, well, then that's where the negligence is. remove donald trump from this equation, remove his words from this equation, remove his speech from this equation, remove the lies from the equation, none of this would happen. this is -- what was the kennedy quote? success has many fathers but failure is an orphan? well, this riot, this insurrection has one father, and his name is donald trump. >> yeah. i think that the january 6th committee has done an excellent job of drawing that direct line from donald trump to those people who invaded and sacked the capitol and tried to find mike pence so they could hang him. it's not a dotted line.

it's a solid line. it's a thick, solid, one of the sharpie lines that trump used to draw. i think it's very clear. i think they made a compelling case. again, he is the author of the insurrection. it's not just his words right then. it's his words leading up to the day. it's his repeated hectoring of mike pence publicly and, we know, privately, as well, to essentially violate the constitution, to violate the law, and to discard the votes of 81 million americans so that donald trump could remain in power. it is just astounding. i think the committee has really illustrated this in the most sort of chilling way imaginable. because you just think, if

things had tipped the other direction, if they had found pence, if the secret service had taken pence away from the building, you know, on and on and on, what if? in the end, mike pence did the heroic thing that day. he did the right thing that day. >> yup. >> you know, i'm like reverend al, i never thought i would be praising mike pence. i certainly praise his actions that day. i actually wish we were hearing from him testifying before the committee. i think that would have been fascinating. but you have to praise what he did that day. >> yeah. rev, i mean, not only would mike pence have been caught and killed, nancy pelosi. we heard they were going after nancy pelosi. on video tape, they were saying they were going to scalp her. they're coming after her.

you know, even don jr. said, we're coming after you. ghoul ghoul rudy giuliani talket combat justice. they were going to kill them. >> what came into focus to me watching the tape again this morning and watching it during the hearings is people need to remember, when donald trump is making these comments at the rally, he is still the president of the united states. he is the commander in chief. people out there saying, "we want to hang mike pence. we want to get pelosi," they feel they are covered by the head of state. >> right. >> isn't that just -- >> what'd they say, rev? he sent us. i'm here because donald trump sent us. >> the president. >> we're here because a president told us to come here. we are here on orders from the president. they all said that. when they go before judges before they get sent to jail, they said, we were only doing what we thought the president wanted us to do.

>> exactly. >> we were following the president's instructions. >> what gives you the impression you're not really breaking the law because the head of government, the commander in chief of the military forces, has said that i should and could do this. because i think sometimes we look at him now at former president and whatever thing and forget, he was speaking as the president that day. >> right. yeah, he was, willie. again, the words that they're screaming about mike pence come straight from donald trump. straight from donald trump. >> yeah. >> and to rev's point, he was commander in chief that day. go back to the first night of the hearings. the committee said they had evidence the president did nothing to stop the violence. he watched in the dining room. didn't call the national guard. didn't call his attorney general. didn't lift a finger to stop what was happening. the committee linked the danger pence was in with president trump's anger at his vice president.

the committee revealed new photos and testimony of a phone call between the president and vice president on the morning of january 6th. what those inside the oval office at the time say they heard. >> could you hear the vice president or only hear the president's end? >> only the president's end. >> some point, it started off as a calmer tone, then it became heated. >> the conversation was pretty heated. >> i think until it became somewhat, you know, louder tone, i don't think anyone was paying attention to it initially. >> did you hear any part of the phone call, if even the end the president was speaking from? >> i did, yes. >> all right. what'd you hear? >> so as i was dropping off the note, my memory, i remember hearing the word "whim." he either called him a whim, i don't remember if he said you are a whim, you are acting like a whim. whim is the word i remember. >> it was reported the president said to the vice president that, something to the effect of, you don't have the courage to make a hard decision.

>> i don't remember exactly either, but something like that, yeah. like you're not tough tough to make the daul. >> it was a different tone than i'd heard him take with the vice president before. >> did ms. trump share more details about what happened or any details about what happened in the oval office that morning? >> that her dad had just had an upsetting conversation with the vice president. >> do you recall anything about her demeanor, during the meeting or when you encountered her in the office? >> i don't remember specifically. i mean, i think she was uncomfortable over the fact that there was obviously that type of interaction between the two of them. >> something to the effect, the wording is wrong, i made the wrong decision four, five years ago. >> and the word she related to that the president called the vice president -- i apologize

for being impolite -- but do you remember what she said her father called him? >> the p-word. >> that's an adviser to ivanka trump, saying she recalled hearing president trump called his vice president the p-word on the morning of january 6th, before president trump headed to the ellipse to lead the rally. followed, of course, by the attack on the capitol. former counsel to mike pence, greg jacob testified, pence stepped out of the room to take the call with no staff. jacob was asked about the vice president's demeanor once the call was over. he described pence as, quote, steely, determined, and grim. chuck rosenberg, you've been watching these hearings with your legal mind. we did get the interesting note yesterday that the justice department has requested the transcripts of all depositions given and taken by this committee. what does that tell you about what may happen here once doj gets its hands on this case? >> it is not a surprising request, willie. there's a couple reasons why the department of justice would want

that. one, it has its own investigation. so you want to know what all the witnesses said on all the occasions that they were interviewed. if i were to interview you three times, you said things that were slightly inconsistent, it'd be my obligation to tell the other side, that if we charge the case using you as a witness. you need to know what your witnesses have said. but as the department of justice noted in the letter, they also have ongoing cases. some of the witnesses that the committee has interviewed might be relevant to that. so the department of justice has enormous investigative resources. it's not that they can't do the investigation without the help of the committee. it's that they need to know what the committee has already done because they have obligations and ongoing cases, and they want to make sure witnesses have been consistent. it's a very logical request. i am disappointed that the committee has not yet met the request. >> chuck, good morning. jonathan lemire. let's get your assessment from a slightly broader viewpoint here,

just of the hearings so far as they build this damning case against the former president, how he inspired and incited the violence in the building behind me on january 6th. do you feel like it is heading in the direction where, and joe quoted a tweet earlier from a former attorney, an attempted murder charge could be assessed to donald trump, if he were not donald trump and not in this setting, but at minimum, some criminal referral could be produced at the end of this? >> jonathan, i think they're getting closer all the time, right? the more you talk to people who are around the former president, like eastman, the more you know about what the president intended. you don't know it perfectly, right? let's take eastman as an example. this man gave horrible legal advice. being a bad lawyer is not a crime. i mean, thank goodness for that, right? i'm grateful for that every day. but being an unprincipled or unscrupulous lawyer gets you much closer to a crime. eastman knew, and we learned

this yesterday, that his theory that pence could reject electors was unfounded. he said he'd lose 9-0 in the supreme court. he said that this recourse was not available to al gore as vice president in 2000, and he said it wouldn't be available to kamala harris in 2024. he also said he knew his theory violated the electoral count act of 1887. yet, he urged this on the president of the united states. while he was doing that, other people told the president that what eastman was advocating was unfounded, illegal, improper, and the president went ahead and pressed it anyway. what you tell someone is evidence of what they knew. it's not -- jonathan, you can tell me about quantum physics, but i couldn't understand it. you could honestly say you told me. but you're getting closer and closer to what the president knew and, therefore, what he

intended. whether or not there is a criminal referral at the end of the day, i think you're beginning to see a very compelling case that the president of the united states, with others, conspired to obstruct congress, to thwart the count of electoral votes, to interfere in this work. if you can tie them to the use of force, to a seditious conspiracy. >> i was just going to ask, chuck, what does one have to do, i mean, to have the justice department charge you with a seditious conspiracy? i mean, the morning after on january 7th, i think i read it on the show, code section 2384, seditious conspiracy. if two or more persons in any state or territory, any place subjected to the jurisdiction of the united states, conspired to overthrow, put down, or destroy by force the united states or levy a war against it or to oppose by force the authority

thereof, which they were trying to do, or, or to delay the execution of any law of the united states. let me say that again. or if their intent is to delay the execution of any law of the united states or by force to seize, take, possess any property, they'll be guilty of a conspiracy to commit sedition. this is -- i mean, my god, if any of us were given this fact pattern, in criminal law, our first year in law school, and if any of us wrote, oh, no, no, this doesn't fit the four corners of this statute, our criminal law professor would give us an f. this is basic stuff. from there, let's move on to john eastman. what in the world does john eastman have to do to be charged? like, it is really -- this is --

what he is doing is not just beyond the pale, not just un-american, it's illegal. >> joe, let me tell you the only caveat, right? so the statute you read from, 18 us-c 2384, the seditious conspiracy statute, requires that somebody who thwarts congress or attempts to hinder the -- hinder a law or delay the vote intended, intended the use of force. now, we saw what the president did, we know what he said. you're getting close and close er, as jonathan and i discussed, but you have to intend force. that's hard to show. it's not hard to show that eastman's advice was idiotic or the president pressured mike pence. >> what about eastman when confronted about violence. yeah, violence happens in the

united states. what happens donald trump saying you ve to be tough, not soft. what about don jr. saying, we're coming to get you? what about rudy giuliani talking about combat justice? what about evidence time and time again that these people were over at a hotel right by the white house conspiring, and you have steve bannon talking about how all hell is going to break loose tomorrow? they are saying, it's coming. the storm is coming. eastman is even saying, yeah, i know this could lead to vie violence just happens. shit happens. violence happens. what are you going to do about it? >> i don't disagree with you about that, joe. i'm just telling you the hard part of the statute is showing someone intended the use of force. you talked about donald trump jr., rudy giuliani, john eastman, all these characters. what teach of them says, right, implicates what they knew and intended. when you're talking about what the president intended, you have

to individually show his intent. i think you're getting closer and closer. i don't know that that statute in the end, seditious conspiracy, is the one. look, if they charge him at all, i think there are easier ways to charge him. for instance, a conspiracy to impede and impair the lawful functioning of the congress and the government of the united states. for example, an obstruction of congress. neither of those two statutes require proof of intent of force. you're right in the way you characterize the evidence. you're right in the way that you remember it. all those things are important, and all of those things get you closer. but we talk as former federal prosecutors with each other, and the thing that many of us get hung up on is whether or not you can show that the president intended force. i think you're getting closer. i don't think it is depositive yesterday. we don't know 99% of what the committee collected, and we don't know what the department

of justice collected. i often tell people, be patient. there's more. we have a lot to learn. >> gene robinson, i don't expect donald trump to be charged with anything. wasn't charged with anything in new york. despite the fact everybody knows he's been lying through his teeth about his net worth for years, lied through his teeth. it's always been the opinion of people in new york, lying through his teeth to banks, to other people, his businesses. you know, he escaped it there because the d.a. got scared. you look at the mueller investigation. mueller basically said, yeah, here are these ten times where i think he obstructed justice. asked would the president have been charged if he weren't president. yeah, i think so, yeah. again, you just -- you read through everything that happened in that mueller report. you read through the russian part, where people actually have

the balls to write today, still write "russian hoax," when all they have to do is look at what happened and read the mueller report. and i have to say, there are a lot of people, a lot of former republicans like me, a lot of democrats who say, you know what, let's stop saying no man is above the law. let's just stop saying it. >> yeah. >> because it's been proven over the past five years that donald trump is above the law. donald trump is never going to be charged. the justice department is never going to charge him. he tried to take down the united states government. they're not going to do anything to him. they're not doing anything to other people who should be sent to jail right now because it might not look right. well, didn't know that that's why lady justice had the blindfold on, because she didn't want to see things that were unpleasant while she was holding the scales of justice. this guy is above the law.

prosecutors still scared of him. they won't do the right thing, and they're sending a very clear message. that in america, not everybody is exempt -- i mean, that justice doesn't apply to everybody. people like donald trump just keep getting away with things. >> well, yeah. i mean, that is a line that i think prosecutors, the attorney general, obviously, have been -- he hasn't told me how he is watching the hearings, what he is thinking about in terms of charging or not charging the former president. you understand, i think it's clear that prosecutors in general and people in general have a squeamishness about charging a former president.

what does that set? does it begin a tit for tat? does that really show our decent into banana republic land? are we not above that? however, this is a one-off. this had never happened before. this is a special case. donald trump is a special case. and i think that question is going to be put in stark terms, not just to tempt attorney general garland but to the country. i do think the committee -- again, i'm not a lawyer, but i think the committee had made a good case that donald trump committed crimes and, in many way, the crime of the century. i mean, he tried to wreck u.s.

democracy, which is -- which should not go unpunished. it simply should not go unpunished. that's the question we're all going to have to deal with, especially attorney general garland is going to have to deal with. >> yeah. >> you know, yes, there are implications and possible, you know, bad outcomes if you charge him, but what does it mean if you don't? i mean, what does it say, not just about whether the law applies to everybody, but what is excusable? this was inexcusable. if the law means anything, it certainly should mean that you can't attempt and almost succeed in destroying our democracy. >> well, that's the thing that merrick garland needs to understand. he's so worried about precedent. he needs to understand the precedent he is setting, rev, if he lets this go. he tells every president in the

future, you can try to subvert the constitution of the united states. you can inspire riots against the capitol, against other federal buildings. you can engage in fascist behavior if you want to. you won't be charged. don't worry about it. same with the manhattan d.a., telling businessmen, you can lie all you want about how much you're worth. lie through your teeth about your value. you can lie to banks, lie to everybody. if you're powerful enough, we're scared of you. you have the manhattan d.a. you have merrick garland. they're all sending a very clear message. the whole thing we grew up believing, that no man was above the law, not true. certainly not true when you deal with donald trump. >> i think that what you and gene robinson is saying is exactly the point people need to understand. they are establishing a precedent. >> yeah. >> they're establishing a precedent, as you say, that people are above the law. and that we're going to now decide whether we prosecute and enforce the law based on how it is going to look rather than we

are dealing with the enforcement of the law. which, in effect, means that donald trump succeeded in terms of going around all the structures and the legal process of the united states. i think in order to preserve the constitution, in order to preserve what we see as the presidency and the electoral process, you've got to move forward and prosecute those, including the former president, if the law applies. clearly, it appears that it does. that violates this. i think that protects american democracy. anything short of that, you have now set a precedent that is different strokes for different folks. >> exactly. willie, the manhattan d.a. needs to stop playing politics, and he needs to just start enforcing the law. merrick garland needs to stop worrying about, like, politics, and he just needs to look at the statute. he needs to apply the law and

apply it equally to everyone. he's not doing that right now. >> joe, we talked about this. it's the number one question people ask when they come up to you in the airport or on the street. why does this guy, donald trump, get away with everything legally? yes, he's been impeached twice. yes, he lost his presidential election. he's been held accountable politically. but legally, why does he get away with everything? we'll see if that continues in this case, as he led a coup against the united states government. chuck rosenberg, thanks so much for your insights. we'll talk to you soon. ahead, a third american appears to be missing after traveling to ukraine to help the fight against russia there. we'll have new details. plus, senate negotiators have yet to reach a final agreement on a bipartisan gun safety bill. the biggest sticking point right now, what counts as a boyfriend? we'll discuss that. also ahead -- >> a man arrested trying to bug

the offices of the democratic national committee in washington turns out to be an employee of president richard nixon's re-election campaign committee. >> 50 years ago today, police officers responded to reports of a break-in at the dnc offices, kicking off the watergate scandal. that pivotal moment in history ahead on "morning joe." we'll be right back. stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion,

stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. ♪ i want to rock and roll all night ♪ ♪ and party every day. ♪ ♪ i want to rock and roll all night ♪ applebee's late night. because half off is just more fun. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. my sister's managing a lot, now that's eatin' good including her type 2 diabetes. but she's found new ways to stay on top of it all. once-weekly trulicity is proven to help lower a1c and it can help you lose up to 10 pounds. trulicity is for type 2 diabetes. it isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. it's not approved for use in children. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, changes in vision, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis.

taking trulicity with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, which can lead to dehydration, and may worsen kidney problems. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. fishing helps ease my mind. it's kinda like having liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. woah! look out! [submarine rising out of water] [minions making noise]

minions are bitin' today. (sung) liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. minions: the rise of gru, in theaters july 1st. a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose. or... his nose.

oh yeah, it was great. a new documentary film based on the life of our friend reverend al sharpton is premiering tomorrow at the tribeca film festival. called "loud mouth." sure this isn't about me? it'll close the festival. talk about it, rev. >> well, i'm honored the festival is going to close, because it is a big deal, the tribeca film festival, on this. it goes back to the '80s when i

became known in new york for activism. all the way to being nationally known now. it talks about not only me but the growth of how race as an issue had to come to terms nationally, and look at race in the north. a lot of people don't understand, by my growing up, born and raised in brooklyn, it was a different landscape than the southern civil rights area. you had to be loud to get attention on an issue. i'm competing with times square, broadway lights, and all of that. it goes into why we did what we did, how we did it. made mistakes. used language we shouldn't have. we're honest about all of that in the film. but at the same time, we were able to help get the issues front and center. it talks about not only my personal revolution but the evolving of that kind of movement. you know, i had nothing to do with the editing. it's good and bad.

but i think it was honest. i'm looking forward to the premiere. john legend's company, the great john legend, is the executive producer. i'm looking forward to it. >> you talk an awful lot, and we've talked a lot personally, about, you know, you made mistakes, i've made mistakes, we all make mistakes. there are some people who still cling to the mistakes you made, despite the fact, you admit, i made these mistakes and moved on. i'm fascinated by the moment when scott king pulled you to the side and said, come here. you want to lead a movement? you have to start acting like you're worthy to lead a movement. talk about that, if you will. >> coretta scott king, the widow of martin luther king, jr., and i got into a friendship because of her son, martin luther king iii, we were three, four years apart. he told his mother, no, al is sincere. i got stabbed and forgave the guy. she spent time talking to me.

she said to me, and it's in the film, she said to me that she had a very imperial manner, so she never would beat you down. she'd say, reverend al, you understand words have power? i said, yes, ma'am. this is martin luther king's wife. >> right. >> she says, don't you think if you're going to lead a movement, all these people are listening to you, that you ought to weigh what you say? are you just playing to the cheap seats? you go home at night and are thinking, this is martin luther king's partner telling you this. you have to examine that. i talk about that, where you start taking yourself more seriously in what you're doing more seriously. coretta scott king had a tremendous impact. i'll always love martin iii, and he and i are getting ready to do a project now, for having that relationship with his mother. i don't think many other people could have gotten through to me. because your out there with your ego, your rah-rah, but mrs. king talking to you, saying, wait a

minute, this is history talking to you. it caused a whole transition. >> it has a way of slowing things down. >> exactly. >> rev, i can't wait to see it. we'll be looking out for the documentary "loud mouth" and watching "politics nation" this weekend, like we do every weekend. reverend al, thank you. appreciate it. >> thank you. coming up, january 6th committee hearings have a lot of political historians making comparisons to the watergate hearings. turns out, the events that led to that scandal happened exactly 50 years ago today. the break-in that led to president nixon's resignation from office. we're looking back at this moment straight ahead with presidential historians on "morning joe." it was time for a nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once monthly add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma that can mean less oral steroids. not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face,

mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. ask your asthma specialist about a nunormal with nucala. ♪ ♪ entresto is the number one heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists. it was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure. meet ron. that man is always on. and he's on it with jardiance for type 2 diabetes. his underhand sky serve? on fire. his grilling game? on point. and his a1c? ron is on it. with the once-daily pill, jardiance.

jardiance not only lowers a1c... it goes beyond to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults with type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. and jardiance may help you lose some weight. jardiance may cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration that can lead to sudden worsening of kidney function, and genital yeast or urinary tract infections. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction, and don't take it if you're on dialysis. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. a once-daily pill that goes beyond lowering a1c? on it with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose. or... his nose.

♪ baby got back by sir mix-a-lot ♪ unlimited cashback match... only from discover.

this is a police photograph of james w. mccord. he is one of five persons surprised and arrested yesterday inside the headquarters of the

democratic national committee in washington. mccord is a former cia employee, now runs his own privacy service. he is also a consultant to president nixon's re-election committee, hired to install its security. they brought electronic listening devices with them and removed two ceiling panels from the office of democratic chairman lawrence o'brien when they were caught. they're obviously trying to bug the democrat's office. today, former attorney general john mitchell, chairman of president nixon's re-election committee, denied any connection with the incident. he said mccord and the others were neither acting on behalf of the campaign committee, nor with its consent. mccord and accomplices have been charged with burglary and released on bail. i don't think that's the last we're going to hear of that story. >> nbc reporting the day after news that happened 50 years ago today. the arrest of five burglars inside the democratic national

headquarters in washington's watergate complex. nbc news justice correspondent pete williams looks back at what happened that day with two men who were there. >> reporter: early in the morning, 50 years ago, these two men were washington, d.c., police officers responding to the report of a break-in at the headquarters of the democratic national committee. walking through these very same halls, they didn't know what to expect. >> i think they were on to something? yes. i had no idea how big it'd be. >> reporter: no idea the arrest they made that night would lead to the discovery of a political scandal that ended with richard nixon becoming the only american president ever to leave office in the middle of his term. >> therefore, i shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. >> reporter: watergate changed the american political system and the very language of scandal. at first, it looked like a petty crime. five men arrested june 17th,

1972, after breaking into the national democratic party headquarters. paul lieber and george barrett responded to the radio call while on radio duty as part of a plain clothes detail. a security guard at the watergate building at the water watergate office called police after someone prevented the stairwell doors by locking. with guns drawn they searched room by room now occupied by a publishing company until they came to a room of cubicles. officer barrett suddenly saw an arm. >> i yelled something to the effect of get your hands up, expletive deleted, i'm sure and five hands go up here. ? this photo shows the actual desk the watergate burglar hid behind. one of them was holding a raincoat and wouldn't drop it. barrett feared it was hiding a gun. >> he dropped the coat and didn't have a gun in his hand

and it was precarious at that point and it was bad and i was almost getting ready to let a round go. >> you're thinking this might be a burglary and what do you think five guys stand up in suits. >> they look like business people. i'm thinking is this kind of international thing? >> you mean like spies? >> i don't know what it meant, but i knew it meant something big. >> the white house called it a third-rate burglary and something much bigger was involved each all these years later it's never been firmly established who ordered the break-in or what the purpose was, but from the beginning a big question was how high up did it go as the scandal went to nixon's aides he claimed he knew nothing and it began to unravel by bob woodward and carl bernstein. >> a year later the senate opened its marathon watergate hearings. >> john dean, the white house counsel said nixon knew about

efforts to cover up the break-in. >> i began by telling the president that there was a cancer growing on the presidency and if the cancer was not removed the president himself would be killed by it. >> then a spectacular discovery, virtually all important conversations were recorded on audiotape because president nixon had ordered the installation of recorders. >> good evening. the country tonight is in the midst of what may be the most serious constitutional crisis in its history. >> when a special prosecutor archibald cox pushed to get the tapes, nixon wanted cox fired. both the attorney general and deputy attorney general refused to do it and quit in what became known as the saturday night massacre. under an order from the supreme court the white house eventually turned over the tapes in july 1974 after a house committee voted to impeach and key republicans told nixon they'd lost faith in him, the 37th president of the united states resigned and did a tearful

good-bye to his staff. >> always remember, others may hate you, those who hate you don't win unless you hate them. >> many of the president's top aides were convicted for their roles in the scandal. nixon's successor, gerald ford gave him a full pardon. it all started with a routine police radio call and two very surprised policemen. >> the thing just kept growing. you know, in my mind i'm thinking about every hour so my god, what are we involved with here. >> pete williams, msnbc news, washington. >> all right. >> i'm sorry, willie. i thought you were going to talk. pete's package was so fascinating. >> i know. i was leaning in. there's so much there. in the context of what we talked about this morning and you listen to the details it sounds almost quaint by comparison as important as it was and there's

the moment where pete talked about where senator goldwater goes down to the white house and says effectively it's over, mr. president. you're going to get impeached and we'll run you out of office unless you resign. haven't seen those voices with president trump, obviously. >> we sure haven't. let's bring in michael besheloff. >> and she was one of three a sftant special prosecutors in the obstruction of justice trial against president nixon's top aides. great to have both of you here. >> as i look back at that pete williams package and i was transfixed and i was younger while was happening, but i remember it happening, and i'm just struck by the arrogance, of course, the corruption, but also just the idiocy of it all and nixon would win 49 states and

there's nothing that they would have ever found in there that would have helped him. it was just -- what a lesson. it should have been a lesson for all politicians, but it really did. it changed the way washington worked. >> it did, and one way it changed it, i loved what you said a few minutes earlier, joe, about the fact that if a president misbehaves everyone has to see that he's held to account by the legal system and goes to court and maybe goes on jail if necessary. that was true with nixon, you know, with the watergate hearings were not just let's find out some stuff about watergate. that led to a number of indictments. a lot of nixon's people went to prison if nixon had not been pardoned by gerald ford, nixon might have gone to gerald ford and that was throughout the political system and throughout our society. you cross a line, you cross a

legal line and you pay for it. contrast with that now. >> looking at pete's package, you see a young woodward and bernstein, you see the democratic committees and there's a part of me that the denial the morning after it said, you know, it wasn't a foregone conclusion that these people were going to be brought to justice. talk about that process if you had doubt nixon would be brought down and brought to justice. >> let me answer your second question first. i did not doubt that there would be justice done because we had a team of people that were morally committed to make sure that justice was done and we had the investigative tools we needed and we were independent of the department of justice, the rule that we were operating under in terms of the special prosecutor

were different than current ones and we did have much more independence so that we could pursue things, and once we found out that it would corroborate our chief witness who was john dean with the tapes, we knew that we could commit. the question was we had enough evidence to indict the president, but should we do it? i thought we should even when he was sitting president. lianne jawarski said no, impeachment is the only proper solution and i wonder if we had indicted him instead of naming him an unindicted co-conspirator that maybe donald trump would have seen the accountability that would have stopped him from taking the steps that he is taking now that are more serious that was covering a break-in. he was abusing his power, richard nixon and he was

definitely obstructing justice and no question, and he knew about the burglary and the connection to the committee to reelect known as crete and to the white house as early as june 19th. we know that because the tape of june 20th which got erased we now have the voice of halderman describing what is missing from that recording, and he says, and i talked to the president on the plane back yesterday. so that means that on the 19th they had a conversation and the president knew as early as then anden said use the cia to stop the fbi from following the money. >> yeah. i'm wondering, though, without those tapes, katty kay, it's a never answer we'll know completely, but it certainly

went a long way in defining richard nixon's political career. >> yeah. we're all wondering how we can draw conclusions from what we're hearing from the january 6th committee based on what happened with nixon and what the lessons are for us. michael beschloss when we look at the conversation with chuck rosenberg earlier on the program, when you look at what happened on the january 6th committee hearings and the possibility of some kind of statute having been breached by president trump, what do you see? do you see evidence coming out of what is being found by the january 6th committee that points to intent on the part of president trump? because that seems to be what chuck was saying is the missing element of the movie. >> remember when people were saying this was a spontaneous uprise against the capitol and

no one planned it and maybe it was visiting tourists? what the committee has done step by step is to show that this is a diabolical plot to fix the 2020 election, use violence to do it and attack the congress and the capitol and perhaps it would have had the effect of destroying our democracy by destroying the tradition of peaceful transfer of power and look at earlier in 2020. trump, for instance in september 2020 was asked by a reporter would you commit to peaceful transfer of power, whatever happens in the election and trump refused. he says we'll see what happens. that was a very big red flag. so at the end of these hearings it's very likely that what we're going to see is this was a coup d'etat and an insurrection planned by the president of the united states that could have ended our democratic system. if a president does that and gets away with it then we are living in a country that's

anarchy. >> and that's what we're looking at with these hearings right now. michael beschloss and kim wine-banks assistant to the president during watergate. let's get more on the testimony from the hearing on the attack of the united states capitol. joining me now senior capitol hill correspondent garrett haake. >> willie, good morning. this was the centerpiece of the case the committee is trying to make about a vast conspiracy to overturn the election results. yesterday we heard from witness after witness who described this public and private pressure campaign which was really setting up donald trump and mike pence on the other side with a constitutional crisis right there in the middle. in its most explosive hearing yet, the january 6th committee zeroed in on former president trump's extraordinary pressure campaign against his own vice president to overturn the 2020 election. >> what the president wanted the vice president to do was not

just wrong. it was illegal and unconstitutional. >> in newly revealed testimony close aides and advisors detailing a private phone call between the president and vice president the morning of the 6th. >> the conversation was -- was pretty heated. >> remember hearing the word "wimp." either he called him a wimp. >> it was a different tone than i'd heard him take with the vice president before. >> do you remember what he said, your father called him? >> the "p" word? >> the vice president pence relying on his legal team and faith stayed firm even after coming within feet of the rioters. >> approximately 40 feet. that's all that was. 40 feet between the vice president and the mob. >> the committee says members of the proud boys were targeting pence. >> confidential informant and the proud boys told the fbi the proud boys would have killed mike pence if given a chance.

>> pence evacuated to a safe location deep beneethd the capitol. >> these never before seen pictures showed the vice president working through the attack and refusing to leave the capitol and looking at a video president trump released that day saying he knew protesters' pain, but telling them to go home. the committee says the pressure campaign against pence originated with conservative lawyer john eastman who according to a pence aide knew he was asking pence to vile violate the law and asked rudy giuliani for a presidential pardon. dr. eastman said i've decided that i should be on the pardon list if that is still in the works. >> good john, now i'll give you the best free legal advice you've gotten in your life. get a great criminal defense lawyer. you're going to need it. >> as for mr. trump he responded in real time tall are calling it a partisan witch hunt. >> trump who has worked to block

many of his top aides from testifying also said he wanted equal time to talk about his ideas of a stolen election. >> all right. nbc's garrett haake at the capitol this morning. thanks so much. joining us is msnbc chief correspondent, host, ari melber. you've been watching this closely and covering these hearings. what do you see from a legal standpoint that the department of justice may be watching, as well? >> i think basically we're seeing the legal case. you have to have more than just bad thoughts, bad plans and bad acts. you have to prove each one of those elements and this has been laid out in the criminal conspiracy in the first three hearings and that seems to be a message to the justice department which just yesterday in formal language pursuant to court filings is requesting all of the evidence the committee's gathered. >> let's talk about john eastman. this is a guy who actually was warned that what you're doing now could lead to violence, and

he's, like, okay. it's fine. this has happened throughout the country. talk about all of the things that eastman's done including asking pence's people to do things that he knew, things were illegal. >> john eastman, like other people around trump has put some of the most incriminating evidence in writing against himself. so as you say, joe, he was talking to them, well if it leads to the streets, so be it. if we go to the court we'll lose. our plan for the 6th which was basically not law, it was coup, i thought part of yesterday's evidence and testimony showed that because there were conclusions drawn, but part of it at times, joe, felt like the parts of law school that you and i wanted to skip because it muddied -- it almost sounded like, if you're debating, then there might be another side and there are many other sides to issues in american life, i think we can agree, but there's not another side to whether you can cancel an election and that's where eastman said and they have

the evidence, he admitted this violated several provisions of law so his plan was will legal. >> here's more sound about john eastman. >> mr. jacob, did dr. eastman say whether he would want other vice presidents such as al gore or kamala harris to have the power to decide the outcome of the election? >> so this was one of the many points that we discussed on january 5th. he had come into that meeting trying to persuade us as validity to the theory and i acknowledged he was just wrong and this had to be one of the most powerful arguments. john back in 2000, you weren't jumping up and saying al gore had this authority to do that. you would not want kamala harris to exercise that authority in 2024 when i hope republicans win

the election and i know you hope that, too. absolutely al gore did not have the basis to do in 2000. kamala harris shouldn't be able to do it in 2024, but i think you should do it today. >> that's just nonsensical. we're in power right now, we can make the laws and throw out 80 million votes. so eastman, if merrick garland actually decides to pursue a case do you think john eastman is in legal trouble? >> yes. john eastman has some of the most exposure out of this cadre of aides and lawyers. the pence folks, some of them testified about trying to be on team, quote, normal. i would call that team lawful and eastman is part of team coup, and he was told he needed a good f-ing criminal lawyer and that combined with him seeking a pardon does raise the obvious conclusion that he himself thought he had criminal

exposure. pardons are for criminals. >> so let's talk about ginni thomas in the news again yesterday, now there's talks she may come testify before the committee. she talked to eastman about this conspiracy, this coup attempt. she talked to mark meadows, of course, we knew about that. she reached out to state legislators asking them to do something that would also be illegal which is ignore what the voters in your state did. instead, send an alternate group of delegates that would undermine the election's integrity. ginni thomas, if she weren't a supreme court justice's wife would she be in legal trouble? >> i don't know that we know enough to answer that yet. she certainly would be on this witness list. she now says she looks forward to cooperating and trump said that about mueller and never did

an interview, but we'll see if she cooperates. people are trying to make this legally and bureaucratically an inside job. if they were incompetent and sloppy that's not a good legal defense, that makes it attempted and effectuated. were there people trying to engineer the conditions to get things that were not otherwise valid in front of the supreme court to then turn around and self-deal back to what they claim was a case of controversy that would instill doubt on the 6th, the 7th and the 8th. >> they were shut out -- shut out by every federal court. every legal venue that they went to said no. it made no sense. even the supreme court when you had thomas and alito writing language saying there's not in pennsylvania to turn the election around, but we should listen to this case anyway just for future elections.

so no evidence whatsoever so by january 6th you have eastman and other people inside the white house saying the white house is not on our side so we're going to intimidate the courts. we're going to intimidate everybody else, maybe kill mike pence, kill nancy pelosi, install donald trump as president even though the voters voted him out. >> mob violence was the last solution they could come up with after they lost 62 times in court. they had one victory on a procedural matter that didn't impact any votes in any states. 62 losses in court and yet they proceeded with something they knew was completely invented and illegal. yesterday at that hearing we saw new footage from the committee of trump supporters outside the capitol threatening vice president mike pence because he had refused to do what trump demanded that day. >> mike pence is going to have to come through for us, and if

he doesn't that will be a sad day for our country, mike pence, i hope you're going to stand up for the good of our constitution and for the good of our country, and if you're not i'm going to be very disappointed in you, i will tell you right now. >> i'm telling you what i'm hearing that pence just caved. >> no. is that true? >> i'm hearing reports that pence caved. i'm telling you, if pence caved we're going to drag the [ bleep ] through the streets. you politicians are going to get [ bleep ] through the streets! >> i guess the hope there's such a show of force here that pence will decide to do the right thing according to trump. >> bring out pence! >> bring him out! >> bring out pence! >> bring him out! >> bring out pence! [ crowd chants "hang mike pence" ]

>> let's bring into the conversation former senior operations officer with the cia mike polymoropoulis. you've been watching the hearings with the rest of the country, from your point of view, as a guy from the cia, and you look at the schematic that the committee laid out yesterday, you showed 40 feet of distance between the people who were seeking mike pence perhaps to kill him and where he actually was, it was beyond a close call that day. >> well, you know, it certainly was, and i think if we take a look at forensically what has happened and this is what you do in a post-event analysis and that's what i did running counter terrorism at cia, and i think it was a very close call on january 6th and let's go back to the video that we've seen from senator loudermilk's office. you can see there was a strong

case, we call it casing. in the media the term used is reconnaissance. in my old word it's casing. they're trying to find vulnerabilities, security vulnerabilities and that video is damning and it led the hair on the back of my neck to go up. perhaps it's nothing and perhaps it's casuals and benign and coincidence, but i tell you what, there has to be further investigations of this because things do look premeditated and that video footage particularly from loudermilk's, the tour that he gave is pretty suspect to me. >> mark, i gave countless tours in my years on capitol hill, and never in all my tours did anybody ever turn around and take pictures of staircases and never did they break away from the group and take pictures of entrances of metal detectors. if this isn't casing the joint, i don't know what is casing the

joint. what do you take about -- if you were investigating this for the cia, and it was in your -- in your jurisdiction and you had a guy who lied about giving a tour in the first place on january the 5th and he got caught in his lie and he said, oh, yeah, i did do a tour, but it was harmless and then these tapes come out and he's still lying about it, what would your impression be? what direction would you take? >> well, certainly, it's very suspect, and look, the individuals on that tour would be in my old world would have cover for action for being there and this is when a terrorist operative goes under the guise of something that case a site. if you take a look at the video and particularly more that has come out and there was a gold sconce in the background, that's nonsensical. it would be the cover for operatives to use.

they could be casuals and they could be nothing, but ultimately when you kind of go through this it warrants further investigation. when people start lying, in any kind of investigation that certainly raises the stakes. there's no reason anyone should lie or disemble this and if there's nothing there i would be surprised if the fbi were sht all over this. this is in the fbi wheel house and they do counter terrorism investigations and i don't expect the capitol police absolving the representative in the whole video on this. i don't understand that. it's too early to do that. >> yeah. >> particularly the location the house office building and that's a perfect location in order to access the capitol, as you know, joe, via the underground mechanisms there. to me it just warrants further investigation, and i really hope that's where we're going to go. >> hey, ari, it's jonathan. compelling stuff from the committee so far. we've got at least two hearings

to go. the focus of one will be on the department of justice and another on the former president's actions and whereabouts on the 6th. then there's potential for another hearing beyond that yet to be scheduled and they've done a great job so far laying this case out in painstaking and yet absorbable detail. as we head toward the final stretch here, you're a lawyer, what should the closing argument that the committee should be making? ? it's a great question. now that we know that tens of millions of people are watching this and it breaks beyond those of us who watched the news. when people watch "morning joe," we welcome that and they're an informed populous and people are living their lives and inflation and post-covid and we have the data on that. when 30 million tune into the first hearing and plus yesterday that's a larger audience. the closing argument has to say to them in plain english and not in 12th amendment-related footnotes what the exact responsibility was, and so i

think as far as that goes up to donald trump, was there a violent plank of this at the capitol. there was a coup plank which means abusing incumbent government power to try to hold on to power and then there's this wider set of what i would call other miscellaneous potential crimes and a strong closing argument would say are you saying he's guilty out of zero out of three, one, two, or three? whether you send a letter or not and just as in watergate and you were discussing with that the expert moments ago, a clear ending matters and so it would be to me, as an observer i would say odd if they don't land it by explaining whether or not they think there were crimes. >> and liz cheney is starting to go that way. i'm curious, ari, just your thoughts, why are so many people watching? why is this committee so compelling to so many more americans than just about every other congressional hearing

since watergate. >> great question. you and i know that while we all may have interest of this, there are interests in all things, steroids and baseball and benghazi that has not summoned the interest that this has. honestly, it's like an episode of "24." i think when you actually run the video and you hear vice president pence at least questioned who would be honest and loyal on the security detail or who was calling in the play, when you look at how close we came, i think americans know that the 6th was close to the 20th. i think people at a gut level understand that, so that breaks through number one. number two, many hearings evolved into partisan gains and people want to make it that and ruin it, if you will. kevin mccarthy made a strategic legislative choice, joe. he could have been on this committee and he could have put his smartest aces on the committee. he decided to, we talked about

the cancel culture and kevin mccarthy decided to cancel himself and it's bipartisan when people do it in fact finding and that's much more watchable than if it had a ton of sniping. >> i agree. and so, i'm curious, gene robinson. we talked about watergate and this hearing being so compelling. i'm just going back through my memory, i can't think of another hearing that's really grabbed the american public's attention since watergate or the oliver north hearings and i think it was '87 or so? >> yeah. maybe those hearings, i can't really think of anything comparable because like in watergate, we're talking about the president of the united states and his responsibility for criminal acts. in this case, much worse criminal acts than were

committed in watergate. and so i think, you know, donald trump is, and i say this neutrally not as praise, but is a compelling character, and hearing just how this unfolded in such detail, even the legal seminar yesterday was in its way gripping opinion when you heard judge luttig who is a revered figure among conservative legal scholars and just conservative, really, being so strong in his way in warning that not only was there an attempted coup in 2021, not only have they tried to

overturn that election, but they're planning to do it again in 2024 and we better be ready for it, i mean, i thought that was gripping i thought the committee is delivering the goods and i think that's why people are watching. >> an inference for what this means for 2024 is striking. mark, as we look ahead to the next hearings, what are the pieces that you feel are still missing? what more do you want to hear from the january the 6th committee? >> so i think it's the concept of how this was premeditated and that's really important. as i take a look again back at analyzing attacks over the years. this would be terrorist attacks on americans overseas tragically happened in our country, but the premeditation part is critical to make that case, that it was not just a spontaneous act and the more that build, the more the evidence is there and the more compelling is that this was really a tragic event in our

history and january 6th again, i take a look at this as someone who analyzes these events overseas and how we go through these hearings and what happens after wards is really important. the u.s. is a bastion of democracy and january 6th was an attack on this and this is going to define how the world views america for decades to come. an important couple of weeks ahead. >> we already have seen overwhelming evidence. >> ari melber, thank you, as well and we'll see you on "the beat" at 6:00 p.m. right here on msnbc. still ahead on "morning joe." certifiably crazy, that is how one witness described mike pence's reaction when he heard john eastman wanted to throw out the election results even after the attack on the capitol. we'll have more on that. more worries on wall street after major losses today and

yesterday. the s&p now poised for the worst week since the start of the pandemic as the fed's largest rate hike in three decades is hitting homebuyers. we'll have a live report from cnbc. as we go to a break, we'll discuss what we spoke about on yesterday's show. new york and new jersey are among the 16 sites across north america selected to host the world cup with metlife stadium in east rutherford, new jersey, chosen for the 2026 tournament. clearly it was our interview that pushed them over the top. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. joe." we'll be right back. we've still got the best moves you've ever seen good for you, but shingles doesn't care. because 1 in 3 people will get shingles, you need protection. but, no matter how healthy you feel, your immune system declines as you age increasing your risk for getting shingles. so, what can protect you? shingrix protects. you can protect yourself from shingles

with a vaccine proven to be over 90% effective. shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your pharmacist or doctor about shingrix. shingles doesn't care. but you should. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults.

elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. and, we're back! it's time to see which chew provides the longest-lasting flea and tick protection. bravecto's the big winner. 12 weeks of powerful protection, nearly 3 times longer than any other chew. bravo, bravecto! bravo!

the eat fresh® refresh just won't stop! now, subway® is refreshing their catering. we're talking platters fit for any event, like throwing yourself an over-the-top party. who would do such a thing? yeah, i wonder. subway keeps refreshing and refreshing and re-

this is xfinity rewards. subway keeps refreshing our way of showing our appreciation. with rewards of all shapes and sizes. [ cheers ] are we actually going? yes!! and once in a lifetime moments. two tickets to nascar! yes! find rewards like these and so many more in the xfinity app. mike pence's reaction when you showed him the email after the attack on the capitol still ask that the vice president delay certification and send it back to the states. >> he said that's rubber room stuff. >> i'm sorry. he said it's rubber room stuff? >> yes, congressman?

>> what did you interpret that to mean? >> that that was certifiably crazy. >> that third day of testimony did focus donald trump's efforts to pressure mike pence into overturning the election. the committee presenting evidence that several of trump's advisors told him the vice president did not have that kind of power, just couldn't do it and that when pence did not do what trump wanted, the president incited his mob of supporters against him. we'll start with the committee demonstrating how close that pro-trump mob came after the capitol had been breached. >> by 2:24 p.m. the secret service had moved vice president pence from the senate chamber to his office across the hall. >> the noise from the rioters became audible in which case we recognized they had gotten into the building. then president trump tweeted

mike pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our country and constitution to correct a set of facts and not the fraudulent and inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. usa demands the truth. >> bring him out! >> it was clear that it was escalating and escalating quickly. >> hang mike pence! >> so that when that tweet of mike pence tweet was sent out i remember us saying that that was the last thing that needed to be tweeted at that moment. the situation was already bad, and so it felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire by tweeting that. >> 30 seconds later rioters already inside the capitol opened the east rotunda door just down the hall. and just 30 seconds after that rioters breached the crypt, one floor below the vice president. foot secret service couldn't control the situation and do their job of keeping him safe.

>> at 2:27 p.m. the secret service rushed vice president pence down the stairs. >> they were trying to figure out whether they had a clear route to get us to where they wanted to move us to. >> we moved pretty quickly down the stairs through various hallways to a secure location and upon arriving there there was discussion as to whether or not we would leave the capitol complex or stay where we were. >> vice president pence and his team were ultimately led to a secure location where they staid for the next four and a half hours, barely missing rioters a few feet away. >> make no mistake about the fact that the vice president's life was in danger. a recent court filing by the department of justice explains that a confidential informant from the proud boys told the fbi the proud boys would have killed mike pence if given a chance. this witness whom the fbi affidavit refers to as w1 stated

that other members of the group talked about things they did that day and they said that anyone they got their hands on they would have killed including nancy pelosi. w-1 further stated that members of the proud boys said that they would have killed mike pence if given a chance. >> so, joe, a couple things. the vice president could have left the building quickly and he insisted they stay and certify the election and this "hang mike pence" chant and the gallows put outside the capitol were dismissed as symbolic and chants by some people, but now you hear the evidence inside that hearing and you go, oh, no, these people were looking for mike pence. they were looking for nancy pelosi and god knows what they planned to do what they found them? >> they wanted to kill mike pence. they would have killed mike pence. they were searching for nancy pelosi. they wanted to decapitate the united states constitutional

government, that's why when you have republican senators and republican house members trying to push this information away from the american people, they're actually, they're trying to brush aside a coup against the united states of america and when you look at all this evidence you see just how serious it was, and you also see a very clear intent these people were trying to decapitate our constitutional government, kill the number two highest ranking constitutional officer in the land, kill the number three highest ranking constitutional officer in the land and basically leave donald trump to be able to do whatever he wants to do, to re-certify an election and be a tyrant who doesn't have to leave office when the american voters vote him out. >> when you take a step back which i did as i watched the hearings yesterday and remove from it the personalities, whether you like donald trump or not or mike pence or not, and think about, we're talking about the president of the united states who we were taught since

grade school what that means, did not in any way try to help spare the life or harm of the vice president of the united states. >> right! >> this is as atrocious as it can be in a government. the head of state actually inflaming those that want to take the life of his second in command. this is unheard of, and i think may be as anxious as some of us were to get this done quicker, maybe it did take this amount of time for us to sit back and say, wait a minute, forget that it's trump. the president is out there tweeting while people are talking about kill the vice president and a rumbling through the halls looking for him and he's not on the phone or whatever mechanism he has to communicate, trying to make sure he's safe. get him out of there and i don't care whether i like the guy or not and he's tweeting something that would encourage them. this is totally unbelievable.

criminals don't act like this. there is a question. harry littman, former u.s. prosecutor said it's not clear if you can convict him of attempted murder of the vice president, but not clear you couldn't. then there's a line, this has to be the darkest moment in presidential history. and we will talk much more about this dark moment straight ahead. we have live reporting from capitol hill and legal analyst joyce vance discusses the next step happens for the doj, if they take any steps at all. "morning joe" coming right back. "morning joe" coming right back. with heart disease, reducing cholesterol can be hard, even when you're taking a statin and being active. but you can do hard. you lived through thirty-seven red-eye flights... in a middle seat. eleven miracle diets... forty-two college campus tours... four overseas postings... one minor stroke...

and four citywide blackouts... and with leqvio, you can lower your cholesterol, too. when taken with a statin, leqvio is proven to lower bad cholesterol by over 50% and keep it there with two doses a year. common side effects of leqvio were injection site reaction, joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. with leqvio, lowering cholesterol becomes just one more thing life throws your way. ask your doctor if leqvio is right for you. lower. longer. leqvio. to help prevent bleeding gums, try saying hello gumwash with parodontax active gum health. it kills 99% of plaque bacteria and forms an antibacterial shield. try parodontax active gum health mouthwash. before treating your chronic migraine— 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting 4 hours or more you're not the only one with questions about botox®.

botox® prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine before they even start—with about 10 minutes of treatment once every 3 months. so, ask your doctor if botox® is right for you, and if a sample is available. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they'd talked to their doctor and started botox® sooner. plus, right now, you may pay zero dollars for botox®. learn how abbvie could help you save on botox®. waxed. natural. sensitive. new dove ultimate antiperspirant. our unique water based formula and 6x more glycerin.

helps restore skin to its best condition. new dove ultimate. what happens when performance... meets power? you try crazy things... ...because you're crazy... ...and you like it. you get bigger... ...badder... ...faster. ♪ you can never have too much of a good thing... and power is a very good thing. ♪ as a business owner, your bottom line and power is a very is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network. with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to $500 a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers.

so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities.™ >> you know, joyce vance, we've all talked about donald trump so much over the past several years, if this was just john, president john doe most americans would say this guy is at the center of a conspiracy.

this guy needs to be charged with a crime. he's committing sedition against the united states government. i can tell you if a congressman, if a senator had done this they would be on their way to jail. no doubt about it, but i will say with eastman, it's just -- it seems like a slam dunk. this guy is directing people inside the white house to break the law. even after the riots he's telling them to break the law. he is clearly working with donald trump to try to commit sedition against the united states of america. what -- i'm sorry. how hard of of a call could this be for merrick garland by the time he gets all the evidence? >> well, eastman certainly thinks he was committing a crime. he tried to put himself back on the presidential pardon list at the close of the administration.

he takes the 5th amendment more than 100 times when he's testifying in front of the january 6th committee. so you know what they say about something that walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, and the evidence here really does become very compelling. of course, we don't know for certain how merrick garland will view this, but at least on january 5th of this year he committed that he would follow the evidence wherever it led and it seems to lead right to john eastman's door. he's acting in these final days in these series of meetings that are being held in the vice president's office as president trump's representative. this is a lawyer who comes from out of nowhere and is suddenly in the space holding these meetings and this transitional period for a couple of hours at a time. this is not just someone who wanders in off the streets. he gets to be in these meetings because everyone understands that he is speaking with trump's voice. he is the architect of this

scheme, this notion that the breaking point in the process after americans have voted and have voted convincingly for joe biden is to bypass the electoral college certification and that's why mike pence becomes an essential player, so it becomes clear that eastman and trump are working together to achieve this illegal objective. the evidence is pretty good in this regard. the justice department would have to engage in serious considerations involving whether the good evidence is all admissible. does it add up to proof beyond a reasonable doubt? does it make sense legally to bring the case or are there some impediments? there may be first amendment considerations, but joe, when you look at the evidence at some point you have to amalgamate it altogether and say it's overwhelming and it's important to americans that there be some accountability here so this can never happen again. >> still ahead on "morning joe," more on yesterday's revealing

testimony on capitol hill including the role played by ginni thomas and efforts to overturn the 2020 election, she is, of course, the wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas. that ahead on "morning joe." ah" bravo, bravecto! bravo! what's on the horizon? the answers lie beyond the roads we know. we recognize that energy demand is growing, and the world needs lower carbon solutions to keep up. at chevron, we're working to find new ways forward, through investments and partnerships in innovative solutions. like renewable natural gas from cow waste, hydrogen-fueled transportation, and carbon capture. we may not know just what lies ahead, but it's only human... to search for it. daddy, is that where we're from?

well, actually, we're from a lot of places. see, we're from here, and there... give dad a gift worth sharing, at ancestry.com only at vanguard you're more than just an investor you're an owner. that means that your priorities are ours too. our interactive tools and advice can help you build a future for the ones you love. that's the value of ownership. here we go... remember, mom's a kayak denier, so please don't bring it up. bring what up, kayak? excuse me? do the research, todd. listen to me, kayak searches hundreds of travel sites to find you great deals on flights, cars and hotels. they're lying to you! who's they? kayak? arr! open your eyes! compare hundreds of travel sites at once. kayak. search one and done. i'm mark and i live in vero beach, florida. compare hundreds of travel sites at once.

my wife and i have three children. ruthann and i like to hike. we eat healthy. we exercise. i noticed i wasn't as sharp as i used to be. my wife introduced me to prevagen and so i said "yeah, i'll try it out." i noticed that i felt sharper, i felt like i was able to respond to things quicker. and i thought, yeah, it works for me. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. at adp, we use data-driven insights to design solutions to help you manage payroll, benefits, and hr today, so you can have more success tomorrow. ♪ one thing leads to another, yeah, yeah ♪ ["only wanna be with you" by hootie & the blowfish] discover is accepted at 99% of places in the u.s. ["only wanna be with you" by hootie & the blowfish] it's still the eat fresh refresh, 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-

ginni thomas is a name we've been mentioning quite a bit in the last couple of days, an activist and wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas telling the daily caller that she is willing to testify before the january 6th select committee. thomas said, quote, i can't wait to clear up misconceptions. i look forward to talking to them. the committee is looking forward to talk with thomas about emails exchanged with john eastman. here's. >> we've sent her asking her to

come and talk to the committee. >> you've sent it already? >> listen to me. what you said, if she responded while the hearing was going on that she wants to come, we look forward to her comment. are. >> joyce vance, i don't know how you don't call ginni thomas at this point given the email exchange with john eastman and let's not forget the text exchanges reported between ginni thomas and mark meadows, the chief of staff to the president of the united states saying we've got to help the president overturn the election and encouraging a plan to do so. she's very influential in conservative circles and she had the ear of some very important people throughout this. >> well, the first thing you want to do is make sure that she's going to follow through on that offer and we've heard other people make offers and then not show up. sit her down with committee

staff for a thorough interview and then to determine whether any portion of her testimony should be presented to the american people in the public hearings. it's too unwieldy when you are first hearing everything the witness has to say to do that raw data dump on television in this tight format we've been watching the committee follow, but there are parallel inquiries that have to go on here. it is very clear at this point that her husband has to recuse any further matters that involve her work as an activist. john roberts, the chief justice, needs to based on the evidence that's come forward conduct an inquiry into the court security, because john eastman claims that he had insider knowledge about the court's deliberations around cases following the 2020 election, whether that was puffery or whether he actually did have sources inside of the court is something that the court that's already dealing with the leak of an opinion and

dogs the abortion case needs to consider seriously and those two inquiries go along on a parallel trap with ginni thomas' testimony which could be very illuminating. if she has explanations she should have offered explanations, but right now she looks to be a very important witness. >> coming up, a look at business before the bell after another brutal day on wall bull. we will go live to cnbc for a look at how things are looking this morning straight ahead on "morning joe." t ahd eaon "morning joe." so this is the meta portal plus. a smart video calling device that makes working from home work. a 12-megapixel lens makes sure your presentation is crystal clear. and smart camera auto pans and zooms to keep you perfectly in frame.

oh, and it syncs with your calendar. plus, with zoom, microsoft teams, and webex, you'll never miss a meeting. and neither will she. now that's a productive day. meta portal: make working from home work for you. only at vanguard, you're more than just an investor you're an owner. that means that your goals are ours too. and vanguard retirement tools and advice can help you get there. that's the value of ownership. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk

of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. we hit the bike trails every weekend ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. shinges doesn't care. i grow all my own vegetables shingles doesn't care. we've still got the best moves you've ever seen good for you, but shingles doesn't care. because 1 in 3 people will get shingles, you need protection. but, no matter how healthy you feel, your immune system declines as you age increasing your risk for getting shingles. so, what can protect you? shingrix protects. you can protect yourself from shingles with a vaccine proven to be over 90% effective. shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix.

fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your pharmacist or doctor about shingrix. shingles doesn't care. but you should.

we're back now with msnbc correspondent trymaine lee. so father's day this weekend. right? >> yep. >> and for you, well you're going fishing or something. >> that is right. >> you're going to try, but you're a father yourself. >> i am. >> how do you think that is going to go. when you say honey i'm going fishing. >> i don't think i'm going to be

allowed. my 10-year-old daughter and wife will collude together and say you're going to brunch. >> i think you're probably right. but i'll tell you what, you've put together something really special for this father's day. this sunday. and you actually sat down with the fathers of trayvon martin and michael brune jr. and jacob blake jr. it is part of a new special for nbc news titled "can you hear us now, black fathers." so just remind everybody, i'm sure most viewers know about it. but just talk about the terrible tragic connection all of these dads share. >> it is hard to imagine, it is been ten years since trayvon martin, a 17-year-old was shot and killed in sanford, florida. and he would have been 27 years old now is kind of mind blowing. we see the picture of the young man. he was armed with a bag of skittles and arizona iced tea and shot and killed by a neighborhood watchman and then a year and a half later you have

michael brown in missouri, a scuffle with the police officer and he shot down in the street and he laid baking in the street for four hours and we know what happened after that. and jacob blake in 2018 was being detained, shot four times in the back by a police officer. he is paralyzed and still with us. and we think about father's day and how much we sacrifice and pour into our children and part of that is protecting our children but what happens when you could not protect them and you have cases like these three men would are now part of the club, none of them wanted to be a part of but they lean on each other and brothers but they talk about a grief from the actual violence and then the violence that happened after that. and i do have a piece to play. >> sure. let's watch. >> we got to take the blinders off at some point, right. mike brown, they assassinated mike brown's character after he was dead, right. trayvon martin, they assassinated his character after

he was dead, right. and they said it was due to bad parenting, right. but what happens when you got a 17 or 18-year-old white kid going into schools, shooting his peers. and it was never said that it was due to bad parenting. >> that 18-year-old walked into that grocery store in buffalo, new york, that white boy walked in there and killed those people. it never was a question of how this parents raised him. >> never. >> there was never -- there was never a question. they were why didn't jacob stop walking, hell he didn't have to. is that a death sentence? >> when the other race do

certain things it is called mental health, but what about ours. >> talk about that a little more if you will. because it is not something that we all talked about so much. for instance, i can't remember a whole lot of conversation after regarding the parenting or whatever. but obviously because they're so close to it, it is something that they remembered. so they're enduring just a loss that you and i could never, never -- a loss of children that we could -- it is just impossible to imagine. but then they have to put up like you said with a heartbreak and the tragedy after. >> tracy martin, trayvon's margin talked about when the trial was looming of george zimmerman, the man who killed his son and ended up being acquitted, there was a potential juror in a said if only trayvon would have had a father in his life, he would have been alive. and tracy martin cut the umbilical cord.

he still stuck around and was still a constant presence in their life so the idea of grappling with as you say, that kind of loss we could never imagine but the public perception and the racialized stereo typed around black men and black fathers if there is this absenteeism when so many fathers pour everything they can into their children just like everybody else. and we had this intimate kofg in a way that we rarely see. so to get these guys together, it is was to have a conversation for black fathers in particular because there are forces that tug at you around every corner. >> and gene, and you and i have been talking for way too long about this. >> yeah. >> i know especially after trayvon, we were talking and you were saying, my god, i know had to take my kids to the side, my boys to the side, sit them down

and say listen, this is what you need to do if you get stopped. the things that, you know, i'm a father of four, and any father, any mother worries about so many things, right. i tell people i have four lights going on in my head at all time. if one is blinking red, everything stops. well, you multiply that so many times with you, especially as a father of young black men. talked about this so much. it is so much harder. and it is got to be heartbreaking as a guy who loves your country to have to explain to your boys it is different for you. it is different for us than it is for joe's kids. >> well, yeah, and what is heartbreaking, is that this is -- this is not just now, it is generation after generation, after generation, i think of growing up myself, i think of my

father, my father-in-law and what they went through and the fact that if a black man and you encounter authority, police authority, or self-avoided authority, you are considered guilty until proven innocent. and you are considered a threat and you are considered older than you are, for example. you're considered a man rather than a boy. the suspect in the buffalo shooting was the white suspect was often described in newspapers as a teenager. a teenager. that is not how they describe treyvon martin even though that is what he was. that is a question for trymaine, did the fathers that you spoke with see any hope of breaking this generational pattern that goes back 400 years. >> i didn't get that sense, gene. that they felt anything wou