age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east and an eyebrow raising move. the insurrection and the plot by the ex-president and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election has abruptly and unexpectedly scheduled a hearing for tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. the committee as toing just this. recently obtained evidence as well as witness testimony, who exactly the witness is remains unknown and unreportable at this

hour. the announcement comes after five hearings this month that were chock full of really juicy, previously unknown details and lots and lots of brand new evidence on the lengths that trump and trump officials and trump advisors and trump allies went to try and secure a second trump term illegally. the committee's chairman, bennie thompson had said more hearings were set for next month as the committee absorbs a mountain of new information from documents from the trump white house and tips from the public as well as new witnesses coming forward. politico reported this about the work of the committee in recent day, quote, the select panel has maintained its investigative work even as it ramped up its pace of hearings. documentary filmmaker alex holder who had extensive access to the trump family met with investigators last thursday morning after getting subpoenaed for his select panel for his recordings and his testimony.

the panel also sent a letter to virginia tom a thomas, wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas after she had communicated with john eastman. here's what adam schiff had to say on "meet the press" about the next round of public hearings. >> the next couple of hearings will cover the run-up of january 6th and the marshalling of this mop that appeared on the mob that day and attacked the capitol and the final hearing will cover what the president was doing and more importantly, what he was not doing as we were being attacked. >> in those -- in those hours on january 6th itself. >> exactly. basically the president's flagrant dereliction of duty while the capitol was being attacked. >> schiff adds that the committee needed, quote, breathing space to prepare for the final public hearings. it's a comment that makes

tomorrow's sudden announcement at 1:00 p.m. all the more surprising and that's where we start with our friend, jackie alemany for "the washington post" and msnbc contributor. jonathan karl, chief washington correspondent author of the best-selling book "betrayal," washington correspondent and msnbc national security contributor and former senator and msnbc political analyst claire mccaskill is here. let me start with the reporters. jon karl, what do we know? >> the committee as they've gone through these hearings have gone gathering more information. as the witnesses that they've talked to so far have come forward, they've been hearing from others. you heard liz cheney make an appeal publicly for pat cipollone to come forward to testify. they're still negotiating that. he is not the witness tomorrow, but the point is members of the

white house counsel and people from the white house counsel's office testified and we've heard from eric herschmann. he's been a star and worked side by side with pat cipollone. they're hoping that as people who were close to trump see others come forward and present information that more information will come out, and i'm told that has been happening. so yes, these hearings have been dramatic. they've been impactful and they've revealed a lot of new information and new testimony, but as the hearings have been under way the committee has been gathering more evidence. >> we are going to talk to all of you about how atypical the january 6th select committee's public hearings are, but jon karl, this announcement of a public hearing tomorrow is atypical even for an atypical congressional investigation. can you take us behind the scenes? do you know when they decided to skill ud tomorrow's hearing? do you know if they're all here? do you know if they will all be

here? what do we know about how this came to be announced today? >> well, they have been -- they had held open the possibility that this would be a hearing date, so it is atypical. it did come as a surprise and it was a late development, and i am told it was based on witness testimony. that's the key thing. they have been negotiating with potential witnesses, as you know, from vice president mike pence on down. again, i'm told it's not mike pence tomorrow, but they have been -- but they have been -- they've had ongoing negotiations with witnesses that, you know, are reluctant to testify live, and a key factor in tomorrow's surprise hearing is they've got somebody who has agreed to testify. >> mike schmit and jackie alemany, you both have some fantastic new reporting over the weekend about what this committee has achieved thus far. i'll start with you, jackie.

do you have anything to add about how a surprise public hearing came to be announced today? and what sort of strategic hurdles this committee still views as being in front of them? >> so we have just a tiny bit more reporting than what jon karl just said that this announcement was shrouded in secrecy and senior staff and committee members and lawmakers were in the dark about the details of tomorrow's hearing and after news quickly spread, members on the committee were asked explicitly not to do any press and to go dark. so it suggests that tomorrow's hearing there's an urgency and a sensitivity that we haven't necessarily seen with these previous hearings and actually might, in fact, be a culmination of the previous hearings.

obviously, there's been a lot of attention on what the committee's doing and the last hearing especially, some of the revelations that were made have really upped the temperature and you have to wonder if the committee finally struck a negotiation with the witness that they're worried could bow outpost-fourth of july and they're eager to just get them out there and continue with the momentum that they've been seeing thus far, but yeah, michael and i wrote similar pieces with my colleague about these a-typical hearings and the structure unlike congressional hearings where there's lots of bloviating and lawmakers speaking and instead this is very witness focused and very video heavy. there is a beginning, a middle and an end and it's almost in the structure of some sort of political thriller, although obviously, this is very much real life and we have also been told that liz cheney in

particular has been a master at driving the arc, the narrative arc that we've been seeing in each hearing that will all coalesce together at the very end. >> mike schmit, i want to put the same question to you that i put to jonathan and jackie about what else we might know about tomorrow, but i want to add a second part about this committee's sort of communications acumen, and it has not been -- other than rescheduling last wednesday's hearing which you report it was really about not being prepared and not being ready for prime time in the committee's view, what do you make of -- this is something they haven't done before. they haven't changed their hearing schedule to add a witness. what do you think what it says about what they've got tomorrow? >> it's funny. i was thinking about this, at the time there was this legendary investigative reporter bogdanovicz and when he was giving tutorial work shops to us

in the newsroom and he said when you have someone cooperating with you and talking to you, whether that means they've allowed you into the room with them or an open line of communication, you need to get everything you can from them in that moment. you cannot wait because as soon as you walk out the door or you walk away from that call and you put it off another minute, another hour, another day, the chances of something happening simply increase. so what i'm anxious to note here is that whether this decision is motivated by that investigative you know, sort of guide post and investigative reporters rely on and other investigators do. when you have someone who has agreed to do something extraordinary, and i think testifying before the country is extraordinary, you have to move as quickly as possible to nail that down because who knows what will happen? and this is not just trying to get someone to cooperate with the committee. this is trying to get someone to

go and basically looks like testify against the former president of the united states who has millions and millions of followers who have shown a willingness to do whatever he tells them to do, so i'm anxious to know how much of that investigative guide post is the driving the decision. >> yeah, claire, it's an interesting sort of frame around which to wonder and try to read the tea leaves about who this is. in our interviews with this show with committee members they feel like what they presented they accomplished. they presented witnesses to show that trump lost and knew he lost. check. they did that with steppy and they did that with canon and where everyone who testified in the first hearing. they set out to communicate that the pence pressure campaign was both ill-advised and likely illegal and trump knew it. they had the witnesses, mr. jacob and judge luttig, check. they viewed this as mission accomplished and they view that

what's ahead of 197 minutes and specifically focused on what trump and didn't do. they all talk about dereliction of duty publicly in their hearings and in the press interviews, and i wonder what those outstanding to-dos for the committee suggest to you tomorrow might be about. >> well, first, they've done a very good job exceeding expectation so i don't think they'll want to upset that track record. so you have to assume this is big because i will tell you one thing i know for sure having spent a lot of time in washington, d.c., members of congress don't show up three days before the fourth of july weekend for just anything, and so this is either a witness that for some -- because of a frailty, an illness, maybe perhaps, they're not sure of their ability to appear later or probable much more likely what mike just said, they're saying they'll do it now, but they're

reluctant so there is an effort to make sure they capture the live testimony while the iron is hot and while the witness says i will do it because they've had a lot of witnesses who have refused to give live testimony, so i think that's probably what it is. now this is the one time as a prosecutor i'm jealous of the committee members and you cannot put a witness on that the other side doesn't know about in a real trial. surprise witnesses are only in rebuttal and then the other side has to have opened the door, and i think this will pique interest with all of us and i don't think they would be peeking interest if they didn't think they could deliver something. >> that is true, jon karl, they have set expectations publicly exceedingly high for themselves and by every objective standard and even on fox news the day side, at least, they have met those marks and they didn't have people saying the testimony was

underel whenming and this all takes place against the backdrop of a climate of pressure for the justice department. i want to show you something that committee member congressman jamie raskin said yesterday. >> would you be disappointed if the justice department does not file charges against donald trump. >> i have to tell you speaking for myself that is not my principle interest. our democracy is on the line here. our constitution is at stake. are we going to have violent assaults against our elections? are we going have politicians who disappointed with the results try to overthrow the election and just seize power? is that what american democracy is going to look like in the 21st century? so for me, i'm principally interested in materieling the american people the truth so that we can fortify our institution against coups and insurrections going forward, but i know there's a great public

hunger for individual criminal accountability and i have confidence in the department of justis and attorney general merrick garland to do the right thing in terms ever making all of the difficult decisions about particular cases and they've brought more than 850 indictments already. >> so jon karl, i watched that, and i wondered if moving up a witness or calling this emergency public hearing tomorrow with just one witness is about the doj investigation getting closer to their evidence and witnesses? >> i don't think that's what's going on here, nicole. i think a very important point about expectations, my understanding of tomorrow's hearing, this will be significant. it will be important. it will be interesting. i wouldn't expect tomorrow to be the gamechanging hearing. this is not going to be john dean coming forward talking about a cancer on the presidency. it's going to be important and i think the factor driving this is exactly what mike was touching on and it's that when you've got a witness ready to go, you go.

this committee is running out of time. they don't have time to go through and have more subpoena battles to force people to testify. for these hearings, the bottom line is they've got to get people to come in who are willing to voluntarily testify or voluntarily comply with the subpoena and not try to fight a subpoena. so that is really what's going on, and the criminal investigation is truly separate of this, for the purpose of this committee especially in liz cheney's mind and you're exactly right that liz cheney is the one that has conceived of how these hearings are structured. liz cheney is the one who is driving so much of this and the democrats, to their credit, have realized that it's important to have her be the one out there and doing this. she is, for whatever donald trump and his acolytes and kevin mccarthy want to call her, she is a lifelong republican and a true conservative, and she was horrified by what she saw and remains horrified and wants to

not necessarily lay the groundwork for a prosecution of donald trump, although i don't think she would mind that, she wants to make -- create a situation where it is impossible, inconceivable that he would ever be a major party nominee for president again and certainly never be president again. >> yeah. jackie, that is evidenced in the tightness of these hearings and the presentation of evidence. one of the things that was shaken loose either coincidentally or through the process that was under way at the same time that the public hearings started was the committee gaining possession of footage from the documentary filmmaker. i want to show you what adam schiff had to say about alex holder's testimony yesterday. >> it's hard for me to characterize because we have information from other sources that the public hasn't seen yet, but it certainly adds to the

footage of that day, some new perspectives that we haven't had at least captured on film. i don't want to get too far ahead. part of what's made these hearings successful is the combination of things that they've already known and what the public hasn't known yet and most importantly, we do try to tie it all together and show the public where it all fits its pieces. >> so, jackie, in terms of what remains, we know that the hearings that remain really are focused on what was happening while the insurrection was happening while capitol police officers were engaged in what they described as medieval hand to hand combat in the form of footage to perhaps corroborating and what do they know about how they plan to use it? exactly right, nicole. the committee wanted these few

weeks and as they refer to these ten-plus hours provided to investigators and he sat down with the committee last week ahead of the hearing on the doj from what was roughly six hours. he also teased what he had provided them which was footage of trump, his children, former vice president mike pence and actual footage of the capitol hill riot, but i believe we'll probably be hearing some of those interviews that he conducted that seemed to contradict in some way that we've heard so far that we also know that alex holder described to my colleague josh dawsy that president trump told him that the insurrectionists were smart. that's how he described them on camera after the january 6th attack and that he also remained pretty tight-lipped about it, and he added some more context to the mindset of the former president which the committee

has been trying to get at with a lot of these descriptions of the former president's intent, but i think from what we see from here on out, i want to point out that, you know, liz cheney has really been the one again, driving this, that she is the one who left that clip of eric herschmann almost cherry bombing the end of one hearing saying -- >> yeah. >> a 15-second snippet, you are out of your f-ing find about john eastman almost teasing going forward, and the committee has a limited amount of time left and i don't think we'll see too many hearings than the ones being scheduled about violence on the political right and 187 minutes and painting a picture of trump's dereliction of duty and in september we know there's supposed to be another hearing as well where they'll roll out

the final report. i'm not sure that we'll get many other surprises other than tomorrow and i do want to take issue with one thing jon karl said that we're not going to have a john dean moment tomorrow. that seems a little tbd. >> wow! that's a cliffhanger. >> wow. >> as reward/punishment, i'll ask all of you to stay where you are and we'll come back to all of you after the break with more on where the january 6th committee has turn its highly watched public hearings into must-see tv and we'll push her. how women are already having to fight back and in what amounts to huge and very welcome, very good news for all of us at msnbc and all of our viewers, the new host of the 9:00 p.m. hour on this network is our dear friend alex wagner, a supremely gifted broadcaster, top-notch journalist and interviewer and a phenomenal human being.

we couldn't be prouder to celebrate the two anchors at the 9:00 p.m. hour and rachel maddow who will continue to anchor monday nights and alex wagner who takes the helm in august will anchor the time slot tuesday through friday nights. great news. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. t news a quick break for us we'll be right back. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro. every year we try to exercise more, to be more social, to just relax.

and eating healthy every single meal? if only it was this easy for us. i am robert strickler. i've been involved in communications in the media for 45 years. i've been taking prevagen on a regular basis for at least eight years. for me, the greatest benefit over the years has been that prevagen seems to help me recall things and also think more clearly. and i enthusiastically recommend prevagen. it has helped me an awful lot. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

you're binging the latest true crime drama. while the new double oven you financed is taking care of dinner and desert. you're remembering how to tie a windsor. and while your washer is getting out those grass stains.

you're practicing for the big leagues! for all of life's moments get the brands you trust to get the job done at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ "the new york times" out with new reporting on how the january 6th select committee has redefined maybe forever congressional hearings with a kind of storytelling capitol hill has never quite produced before. the times reports this, quote, the five sessions the panel has produced so far this month

resemble a tightly scripted television series. each episode has a defined stories a beginning, middle and end and it's created riveting television with constituents continuing the next session. it's one thing to tell america there was an attempted coup and a violent insurrection, he said. it is another to tell the inside story of how these things happened with the human dimension was all about. we are back with our panel. mike schmidt, tell me if this was something they learned from watching the failure of the mueller report in terms of turning anyone's mind and seeping into the public consciousness and as all of you reported, and liz cheney's commitment to really communicating the truth about trump and trumpism. >> i think it's two main things. one is they did learn from a lot of the failures of the previous

two impeachments and the mueller hearings and these struggles that they've had to successfully land deafening blows on trump. i think what really allowed this to happen, though is the fact that there is no antagonistic minority on the committee. so if there was a minority, the committee would be much more adherent to rules that govern these types of hearings, and because of that you will have the minor the at each hearing and it's very difficult to have an entire two-hour scripted television show essentially and be interrupted every 20 seconds and few minutes by jim jordan objecting or wanting to come in with his own type of cross-examination on the witness. so the uniqueness of the committee's makeup on capitol

hill and we did not see many committees these days where both democrats and republicans are rowing completely in the same direction has allowed this type of new type of presentation to occur and has given the committee this freedom, this unusual bipartisanship where you have two republicans that have gone along directly with the committee's work, if not in cheney's case directly driving the committee has birthed this new and gamechanging type of hearing. >> jackie, i know you reported on the same idea and we talked about some reporting in the post last week that there was one person who notices this as well and doesn't benefit from it and that's donald trump. how he's now mad that his guy in the house kevin mccarthy blundered, in his view, by not having any of his defenders there. >> he's been pretty furious according to a lot of the people that we've spoken with and has

also been in admiration. someone told us game recognizes game. this is not included in any of the reporting that we've done and something we've heard anecdotally and it's pretty fas fascinating to watch democrats that have not taken the tactic of eating their own and watch liz cheney employ that tactic for them against republicans and we, by all accounts, all of the democrats on the committee that we've spoken to have praised her publicly and privately, have really enjoyed working with her behind the scenes and have had a head start despite the copious amounts of records they've had to sift through because cheney was there on january 6th and they knew exactly what direction to work in before that evidence because she was on the conference calls because she witnessed first hand and bofrped the response to the insurrection

and really has brought her a game in terms of putting together such a sweeping, huge story and effort in such a short amount of time. >> jon karl, some of these things are all known by liz cheney and known to close readers of betrayal as someone who covered the story closely as was everything? what has surprised you by the evidence presented in the committee? >> the storyline has basically been known and the storyline of how donald trump started on election night 2020 and started in election night 2020 did everything he could to overturn the presidential election. we know the extraordinary efforts he went to do that. we know the way he laid the groundwork and did nothing once it was under way and to see those close to donald trump tell

the story has been, i think, has been the think that's had the greatest impact and by the way, this has happened again because it's not an antagonistic committee and all of these depp sipgzs are taped. we went through two impeachment trials that didn't have a single witness. the january 6th committee interviewed more than a thousand people and those were -- most of those interviews were videotaped. they were all except for a few non-depositions that were informal. there were audiotape and there was tape of everything and that might not have happened if you have an antagonistic committee and if you've had a minority on the committee that objected to that, but that has happened and to see that all laid out in the words of people closest to donald trump and the decision here that made everything possible was the decision that kevin mccarthy made to refuse to appoint republicans to this committee when the fans of

pelosi wouldn't allow jim jordan or jim banks to be on this committee and there was a reason why they weren't allowed and remember, much of the republican party in the house was complicit in what is being investigated here. >> right. >> one thing that has probably not gotten enough attention is the texas attorney general lawsuit. there was an entirely bogus lawsuit rejected by the supreme court 9-0. there was an effort to throw out tens of millions of votes in states that donald trump lost was the amicus brief that was signeded by the entire republican leadership except for liz cheney. kevin mccarthy will have two things that he will have to answer for at the end of this. one is signing on to that lawsuit. the other is the fact that he and so many other republicans including again, all of the leadership except for liz cheney actually voted to challenge the

election results to throw out biden electoral votes even after congress came back into session on january 6th after the insurrection that might. they still voted to throw out biden's electoral votes. >> it's incredible. claire, we have so many conversations -- i guess we don't do it anymore about where the bottom is, and even some of the most compelling, heartbreaking witness scombes i'm thinking of rusty bowers saying i would vote for trump if he were the nominee in 2024 and i think that's mitch mcconnell's and bill barr's position in the 2024 if it's donald trump and any democrat. what do you think we've learned or the unique understanding of the grip on the party that we wouldn't have necessarily been able to get to if there was this

adversarial dynamic? >> it's really interesting. liz cheney has somehow broken the fever of tribalism in favor of the constitution. we have this cliche phrase we always say, country over party or constitution over party, well that's what she is. >> yeah. it's so fascinating to see party over everything, party over integrity, and party over the truth and morality. they have put party and donald trump at the very top of the food chain in a democracy that depends on people with integrity and really caring about the oath they took and that's why liz cheney will be such a historical figure, i think, throughout all of this, and i'll push back a little bit on the comments that have been made about the committee. let's say there were republicans

who were antagonistic on the committee. the chairman still has a let of power to take as much time as the chairman wants to take to present evidence. so these videos and they have the power to interview witnesses without the minority stopping them from interviewing witnesses. now, whether or not subpoenas would be issue individual of that, but a lot of these witnesses were there without subpoenas. so i think they could have still done it, but the pace of it would have been broken up by the obnoxious attempts by trump acolytes to try to muddy the waters, but i've got to tell you, part of me would like to see some of those people try to break down somebody like rusty bowers or somebody like jeffrey rosen. i think those witnesses would hold up pretty well against those idiots and that wouldn't have been bad either. >> it just would have taken longer, claire. >> it would have been sloppier. yeah.

>> the -- right. they get in and they get out when they say they are which makes it easier for us, but you're right. maybe they've set a new model. >> jackie alemany, jon karl and mike schmidt, good to have you, all three of you for starting us off today. claire sticks around. the scramble at one mississippi clinic to find care for the patients they now have to turn away. that's next. don't go anywhere. o turn away that's next. that's next. don't go anywhere.dscapes into the heart of iconic cities is a journey for the curious traveler, one that many have yet to discover. exploring with viking brings you closer to the world, learn more at viking.com [whistling]

when you have technology that's easier to control... that can scale across all your clouds... we got that right? yeah, we got that. it's easier to be an innovator. so you can do more incredible things. [whistling] ♪ so i climbed into the cab, and then i settled down inside ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man ♪ ♪ of travel i've had my share, man ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere ♪ ♪♪ 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.

i'm eight and a half months pregnant with a daughter and never in a million years did i think i would have to fight for a basic fundamental right for myself and for her. >> right now you can't force a corpse to give up its organs without paperwork, but you can force me to have a baby i don't want. i think that taking a step backward we now need my generation, people my age to step up and fight so that we're not going back in time because it's 2022. we don't need to go back to the '70s the '60s. >> we can't go back. it's time to move forward. >> steely determination, that's what we're going to need to fight this in protests all across the country as we witness and live in the first few days of a post-roe america. from "the new york times," quote, a big spending battle over abortion set off by the

supreme court's decision to overturn roe versus wade is moving to state courts and legislatures with the florida judge scheduled today to hear a challenge under state law to a ban taking effect this week. california lawmakers are preparing to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to protect reproductive rights. on the ground in mississippi at the abortion clinic that's at the center of all of this is a scramble to help ensure that those who want an abortion can still get one. more from the times, outside the clinic abortion opponents where the churches might do a better job of spreading a message of abstinence in the state with the highest teenage pregnancy rate and they're working to create a group of donors, educators and even pilots to help women in the nation's poorest state travel to places where the procedure remains legal. joining our coverage kimberly atkins columnist for the boston globe and senior columnist with

the project on the globe, alexis mckennon is here and claire is with us for the hour and all of them are msnbc contributors. what were you watching this weekend? it was too much for me. i had to sort of dole out my newsites inand doses, but i wonder if you can just tell me what struck you of the weekend? >> yeah. you know, what i've been thinking most about are a couple of things. one, the fact that if the idea was to reduce the number of abortions in this nation that when you look at the data, actually abortions went down after obama care passed when there was increased access to contraception coverage for insurers. when women have access to contraception they're able to make decisions about their lives, you see abortions drop. what you've seen recently is an

uptick in abortions for the first time in decades and that corresponds to the bans being passed. the bans is not about reducing and ending abortion because it doesn't do that. it does make it less available to the most vulnerable and it does make it more dangerous, but toy me this felt squarely about control. this feels of a part of a political campaign that has been in the making for decades to try to turn back the clock, to try to exert control over women's bodies and to try to return as the young people in the clip you just showed to a nation to a time past when women were in their place, black and brown folks were in their place. it's part and parcel to all of this and that's the part that really is at the pit of my stomach. >> yeah, the pit. the pit of the stomach has had a lot of attention here, too. alexei, this is not an issue

that divides americans equally. this is not a 50/50 issue. this isn't even like our political sort of team splits where you've got, you know, enough people voting for the democrat and the republican and the elections are closed, 63 to 70% of americans were for keeping abortion legal in some form. what do you make of what has been put into motion politically and from activists and from women and from younger voters in terms of paying attention? >> so many things and kimberly just brought up a good point that i think the larger message being sent by republicans in enacting these bans is one of overreach, and you hear democrats making that long-term message about lou they feel it's republicans overreaching and denying you your own privacy. it starts with reproductive rights, and they say it will continue with other things and so it is in some way show going

back to a time people don't want. i've not heard this in any other psyche elg i've covered with folks and today i was having a conversation about state supreme courts, people understanding the importance of electing people to your state supreme court to be able to challenge your state's constitution. there's a number of litigation going on around the country right now in places like utah, louisiana folks asking how their state's constitution provides some sort of protection in light of overturning roe by the supreme court. so the political activity that we're seeing in this moment already is about the positions that matter, getting out and organizing as you've shown and really, understanding what this is all about which isn't just health care. >> claire, you have been taking us to school since i think it was late last summer when the

texas vigilante law was passed in the dobbs case. i have this map. i found this with you in mind and this is where the bans are banned right away, alabama, arkansas, kentucky, louisiana, south dakota, texas, utah. within a month, idaho, mississippi, north dakota, tennessee, wyoming likely to ban or considering bans, georgia, indiana, south carolina, west virginia. uncertain fate, arizona, florida, kansas, michigan, montana, nebraska, north carolina, pennsylvania, virginia, wisconsin and then likely to be protected is everything in blue. when you see it like this, it is -- it is so out of reach and unrealistic to think that telling women they can travel or be protected legally if they try

to do something that's illegal in their states will help them, and i wonder, you were so exquisitely raw on friday and still productive and i wonder your thoughts over the weekend. >> the first thing i did was i read the missouri law and i am ashamed of myself that i didn't look at the missouri law in detail, i, along with most americans who care about the constitutional right that was torn away that was ripped from our grasp last week hadn't really looked to see what these folks have been up to anticipating this day, and in my state, and this is the law right now, not only can they prosecute women for taking the morning-after pill after they've been raped, not only can they mandate if a 13-year-old victim of rape by her father carry her

sibling to term, they're lying about it. the governor actually put out a statement saying women were protected from being prosecuted under this law and it's just not true. it is absolutely not true. the way the law is written, a woman can be prosecuted if by any means taking a drug or using a device by any means she does something that makes it more likely that there's not a live birth. in other words, it's like a reverse intention thing, and they put a throwaway line in there that she can't be prosecuted for conspiracy, but nothing about whether she could be prosecuted for the actual crime or as an accessory and as a criminal prosecutor, they write themselves. i've been talking to experts and current prosecutors in missouri and i've talked to some they respect a lot and all of us

agree that are rapists having more power today than their victims in missouri, but women can be prosecuted under the missouri law for something as potentially using an iud or taking the morning-after pill because they prevent implantation. >> claire, what is the emergency response? is there an effort to set up a legal defense fund or a stable of lawyers to defend those women, or what do we do right now? >> well, it's interesting because a lot of the republican prosecutors are saying behind the scenes that they don't think women can be prosecuted. the governor said women can't be prosecuted, but you know, in this bill, a zygote, a one-cell organism is a person. a one-celled organism is a person. so it is really going to be interesting because you know there's going to be a whack-a-doodle prosecutor somewhere in missouri who will be brought a case and whether it

is a woman who has -- who has gotten the morning-after pill knowing she's pregnant and then somebody tells on her and they take the evidence to the prosecutor and they put -- they put severance in the statute and for those lawyers out there, what that means is they wrote a provision in the bill is that part of it is unconstitutional and it can be taken out of the bill and the rest remains. i think they'll take themselves in to challenge griswald. >> to try to take away a right to contraception. >> correct. to chip away of the ability of a woman to get a morning-after pill or iud because these people. these extreme people that are now in control, and these minority of people that are in control see everything that prevents implantation of a single-cell organism, they see that as a taking of a life and murder so that's where we're going here and it will impact

not only contraception and it will have a dramatic impact in my state on the ability to have a baby through in vitro fertilization. >> it's unbelievable. absolutely unbelievable. you continue to clarify this for us. everyone sticks around. on the other side, some incredible new polling about what happened on friday to public feelings about the issue of abortion in america. public feelings about the suise of abortion in america life... doesn't stop for diabetes. be ready for every moment, with glucerna. it's the number one doctor recommended brand that

is scientifically designed to help manage your blood sugar. live every moment. glucerna. the world is full of make or break moments. especially if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture, it's time to make your move to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions like low blood pressure, trouble breathing, throat tightness, face, lip or tongue swelling, rash, itching or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems, as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip, groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping, skipping or delaying prolia®, as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain.

don't wait for a break. call your doctor now and ask how prolia® can help you. 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. ♪♪ three times the electorlytes and half the sugar. ♪♪ pedialyte powder packs. feel better fast.

we're back with kim, alexi and claire. i want to show you some of the polling over the weekend that struck me. this is a 20-point gap in public opinion between people who support the supreme court overturning roe vs. wade and the people who disapprove. a big delta between people who think abortion should be legal in some cases, at least. it's 64% that think it should be legal in all cases or most cases. and the concern and anxiety about the supreme court limiting and impending and overruling other rights is at numbers i haven't seen. i mean, supreme court likely will limit same-sex marriage, 57% think that's likely. that they will limit contraception as claire has been describing, 55% think that's likely. kim, it seems with the aggressively and linguistically combative language that alito uses in his majority opinion, it would be foolish not to worry about those rights. >> i think you're absolutely right. for a lot of reasons.

one, when you look at alito's reasoning and completely eviscerating the kind of right that underpinned roe, you cannot help but if you apply any of those other rights to that same reasoning, that the court would come out to the same conclusion. all you have is alito's word saying, no, no, abortion is different. you also have clarence thomas speaking plainly, saying, yes, all these other rights are also on the chopping block and he thinks that it should be and only justice brett kavanaugh in a concurrence signed only by himself saying, no, that that wouldn't be the case. you would really have to take alito and kavanaugh at their word that these rights are protected. i personally do not take them at their word for that. i'm very afraid for that. and the voters should be as well. i think one thing that will make this different, and you know i always say i don't trust voters to go to the polls in droves in response to something that happens like this. but in this case, because these laws are going to be proposed --

either laws further restricting abortion rights in some states, laws trying to protect them in other states, challenges being brought, that's going to keep this in the forefront in the weeks and months and years ahead in a way that we didn't see with things like police reform, the way we don't see with a mass shooting that fizzles after a couple weeks. so, i think that this could be different. at least it will stay in the forefront of america's consciousness. we will have to see how important that is to the voters and if the voters really understand that when it comes to the senate, when it comes to state races, just as lexi was saying, how important this issue is. >> i would love to keep this group together moving forward as we're going to be covering this on a daily basis. everything changed on friday. i thank all of your for your contributions today, kimberly atkins stohr and claire mccaskill. at pride parades over the weekend, how the lgbtq improvement is mobilizing as fears about their rights ending are next. we'll be right back. fears about their righ etsnding are next

we'll be right back. (torstein vo) when you really philosophize about it, there's only one thing you don't have enough of. time is the only truly scarce commodity. when you come to that realization, i think it's very important that you spend your time wisely. and what better way of spending time than traveling, continuing to educate ourselves and broaden our minds? (woman vo) viking. exploring the world in comfort. while wayfair is installing your new refrigerator

and hauling away your old one. you're binging the latest true crime drama. while the new double oven you financed is taking care of dinner and desert. you're remembering how to tie a windsor. and while your washer is getting out those grass stains. you're practicing for the big leagues! for all of life's moments get the brands you trust to get the job done at wayfair. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪

♪ ♪ somebody said that, you know, a lie gets hatchway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on, but we're getting our shoes on and we're telling the truth. i hope when we get through our hearings, our strong bipartisan committee is going to be able to convince the commanding majority of americans about what just took place and the kind of threat that we're under. >> hi again, everyone, it's 5:00 in the east. acting with urgency and acting with secrecy, the january 6th

select committee has announced today just a few hours ago that it's going to host a surprise hearing tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. to showcase what they describe as recently obtained evidence and to receive witness testimony. it was a shocking announcement, considering just last week, chairman bennie thompson said the committee's remaining public hearings would be pushed into july. who and what we will hear tomorrow is still not known at the moment. but we do know a surprise announcement deviates from what we've seen from the committee thus far. a source familiar with the hearing tells nbc news this. "the committee was just planning on working this week in preparation for the final two hearings, so this is unplanned." you can deduce from that there will be a lot of significant to the hearing. a lot of significance on top of the revelations we've seen presented by the committee over the past few weeks. like, just how many in donald trump's orbit told him in the lead-up to january 6th that his claims of voter fraud were

meritless. like how strongly former vice president pence refused to leave the capitol while it was under attack. and things like how those at the top of donald trump's justice department threatened to resign en masse rather than perpetuate the ex-president's lies. making the revelations that are sure to come from tomorrow's surprise hearing all the more intriguing. it's where we start the hour with some of our most favorite reporters and friends. carol leonnig is back. also joining us, julie herschfeld davis and tim miller, author of the new book "why we did it: a travel log from the republican road to hell." it's fantastic. julie, you are fresh off interviewing congressman raskin. i wonder if you have any information about how tomorrow's hearing came to be. >> well, congressman raskin did not mention to us that the hearing was happening when i

spoke with him earlier today and it seems like some of the members themselves and the staff did not realize until fairly recently they were going to be having a hearing today, but you're right as you said earlier. the fact that they abruptly scheduled this, they're not previewing any aspect of it. they're not saying who they're hearing from or what they're going to present. does seem to indicate that they have some sort of big revelation or bombshell witness that they're ready to share with the public. now, it's definitely piqued people's expectations. i don't know if they're going to be able to fill those expectations, but we're certainly expecting there's going to be some reason that they would have deviated from their carefully preset schedule and decided to hold this hearing tomorrow. >> julie, can you just elaborate on what you and your colleagues, your team on capitol hill has reported in the recent days? it was my understanding that the committee had gone down in terms of a public phase after last thursday night.

in part to sift through new evidence, to deal with new tips that they've also publicly were still coming in, that they were still receiving, and i found out about this late morning today. it seemed very abrupt. do you know if what was new was on the human side, the testimony side, or if what was new was a new piece of evidence? or do we not know any of that? >> well, we're trying to sort through that right now. the committee has given us some hints in the last week or so, right? in the last hearing, we heard about this new documentary footage that they have now obtained and we understand they've been poring over now for several days. this is a documentarian who was embedded at the white house with former president trump and his family and his inner circle, so of course, there's been lots of speculation that maybe it has something to do with that. we also heard some new revelations that the last hearing that came from cassidy hutchinson, a former aide to mark meadows, the former chief

of staff, she talked about republican members of congress who had sought pardons. we know they have videotaped testimony from her talking about what trump was doing and saying during the riot, particularly when he heard that rioters were chanting to hang mike pence. she apparently told the committee that he reacted approvingly to that and said, maybe mike pence deserves it. and so, we know that they have been gathering. we also heard liz cheney, the vice chair of the committee, make a very pointed call for pat cipollone to come in and testify and they've been making these calls really at the end of every hearing, saying, if you know something, you should come forward and talk to us and clearly kind of presenting all the evidence that they've gathered as a further enticement for people to come forward and say what they know. so, no, we don't know exactly who they have or what they have, but they have been dropping some pretty careful hints, and i would imagine that it's going to be someone who can tell us something more about the key question that they haven't yet

gotten to in the hearings, which is what trump was really doing and saying during those critical hours. >> yeah, carol leonnig, i would love to just open it up to anything you can add in terms of analysis and your read of the breadcrumbs or any reporting you have. let me add this question on to julie's reporting. we know that they view their presentations as exhibit a, check, you know, trump lost the election, and he knew it. check. we showed you five witnesses that testified to that. the mike pence plot was illegal and trump was told that was the case. check. we showed you, you know, people in the counsel's office. that was communicated. that was established. we also know they have an avalanche, hours and hours of taped testimony. they have used it very carefully. they seem to have a high bar for live witnesses, and with all that we know about them, this is the first time the schedule has changed to add a hearing, to add a witness. what's your sense of what could be behind this or coming for all

of us tomorrow? >> well, as is often the case, i am with julie on being careful about speculating what we don't know. but i'm all for breadcrumbs in reporting to the degree that we feel good about that information. and i'll just say what i have heard from sources who work close to the committee and are -- or are briefed on what they're doing, and two key pieces to keep in mind, nicole. this committee had a tranche of records that came in at the very last minute. this was, i am told by both sides of the equation, intentional, because people who didn't want to be a subject of the hearing hoped that by providing information late, they wouldn't be. so, that's an interesting feature. i'm not saying that that's what's happening now. but you know, if you newly obtained evidence, maybe it came in through records you got, literally, on the final deadline

date. there were many people who did that, by the way. some of the secret service information came in at the very last minute. but the second thing that i would say is there's been a lot of chatter -- i first heard about this just before noon, and there has been a lot of chatter since then about security concerns about the information that may be provided or the witnesses who may be able to provide it. and that is very intriguing, because that is like, you know, an endless list of people who could have been threatened in the last several days following the hearings. you know, our paper, "the washington post," reported on incredible threats to lawmakers and witnesses becoming concerned that they were under threat or targeted as a result of republican candidate, mr. greitens, who recommended

going after all republicans in name only in a scary ad with a gun. so, security issues are very front and center around the committee and around the lawmakers and the witnesses. so, i think that points in the direction of something pretty interesting. there's no way i would guess about who's been threatened because so many people fit in the category of rinos, republicans are the ones testifying in large measure in these hearings. >> it's such an interesting point, and julie, when you think about the most -- some of the most -- it's hard to describe any of trump's bullying as most brutal, but he has been no less brutal on republicans and certainly his allies take special delight, thinking of what's the guy with the -- gaetz has gone to wyoming to campaign for liz cheney's opponent. there is a special target that seems to go on the back of republicans, and i imagine for former white house officials or

former campaign officials, who seem to make a point to say in their depositions, their testimony, i'm here under subpoena, that that's particularly acute for them. >> well, absolutely. and we know from my colleague, maggie haberman's reporting and then it was revealed in the hearings themselves, that that also went for the former vice president, mike pence, that his aides knew very well that once donald trump names somebody and singles them out for berating, and says that they've betrayed him, that that can actually bring a lot of very real and very dangerous consequences for that person. so, i'm quite sure that that's part of the calculus. i'm sure that's been the case for -- i know that's been the case for some of the witnesses that have already testified, that they have had a lot of threats, and so i'm sure that's part of the consideration here. i'm not sure that that's the whole reason, though, that we don't know who we're going to get. i think there's clearly some very late-breaking nature to this. there's got to be a reason that

the committee feels that it cannot wait. these lawmakers were back in their districts and home states, some of them, across the country on the west coast. they're having to come back and fly back a day into what was supposed to be a two-week time at home, so there's got to be something pretty important and something driving the fact that they feel they need to have this out right now. >> you know, carol, on the expectations front, i remember, i think, congressman raskin who said, we're going to blow the roof off the house and everyone thought, oh my god, that's an expectation-raising snafu and they have met the high expectations they set for themselves so i don't dare underestimate or sort of moderate or speculate as both of you have been careful not to do, that we'll be underwhelmed tomorrow but in terms of what's still ahead, it's the trump story. it's the 187 minutes in which

liz cheney has publicly described donald trump's conduct in a way that coincides with two crimes, obstructing an official proceeding and dereliction of duty. and it is this 187 minutes, what he was and wasn't doing during that time. i wonder if it's safe to assume this is someone who helps tell what is remaining. >> you know, i think it's really smart that you focus in on the way the january 6th committee has essentially been looking at the nexus between former president donald trump and crimes. you know, just as really good prosecutors that i covered for a long time in d.c. and in maine justice, this committee has zeroed in on donald trump. you know, there are a lot of witnesses that can tell stories about all sorts of high-level oval office and administration sorts of, forgive me, targets, people who may have aided and abetted, but what this committee

exclusively is focused on is, what can you tell me about what donald trump knew, did, said? and i think it's implausible that this testimony isn't going to go to that issue. what did he know, do, say? period. end of sentence. and that's part of what's been so unique about these hearings. so -- you know, we've all sat through a lot of congressional committee hearings and investigations where everybody gets their four minutes to grandstand, but this has been nothing like that. it has been completely like a missile going at the issue. now, i say that, knowing that many things the committee has essentially brought to life is corroborating previous good reporting by julie's organization, by mine, by others, books, et cetera. they have corroborated through actual subpoenaed or requested

testimony all of the events. but the issue you zero in on so wisely, nicole, is crime. this committee is not fooling around with on the edges, side characters, possible problems. it's dereliction of duty. possible evidence of obstruction of a government proceeding, congressional proceeding. all of them covered by 18 usc, right? all of them under the federal criminal code. so, i don't think they're going to divert from their pattern, their missile pattern tomorrow. that's the most speculative i can be. >> so, the -- tim, to talk about this committee's aggressive targeting of the head of the fish is very consistent with all the analysis of liz cheney, and she doesn't believe that simply prosecuting insurrectionists deals with the cancer that is trumpism. this rejection of facts and

reality, burning down our democracy in service of the cult of donald trump. what is your sense, one, on what we have heard so far, and two, on the stakes of upending the schedule and bringing in either a witness or a piece of testimony or evidence for a surprise hearing tomorrow? >> yeah, two things. first, i don't think this will be part of the tomorrow hearing, but to your point about liz cheney and focusing on trump, rather than just prosecuting the rioters that stormed the capitol, i think that of course liz cheney is not sympathetic to the rioters that stormed the capitol but based on that tease from the very first hearing, i think that what the -- one of the things that the committee's going to show in the final two hearings is that it was donald trump. the only reason those insurrectionists were in the building were because of donald trump. and that donald trump fooled them and he defrauded them. and so i think that's going to be central to this committee's argument. as far as tomorrow, look, i don't have any more information than the professional reporters on the hill on this one, but i

can tell you this. what we know is that they're holding this hearing based on information or witness that they have gained as a result of these hearings, and this is something that i have been saying for a long time about democrats on the hill, not just this hearing, which is bipartisan, but also the democratic committees on the house. having investigations when there is suspect information is useful in itself, because you don't know where things will lead. and i always go back to that lesson from the benghazi hearings which were ridiculous and fraudulent and a show, but what they did was they ended up ever uncovering the clinton server, and had those investigations not happened, that clinton server wouldn't have happened, all the ridiculous coverage of that wouldn't have happened, and who knows, she might have won the election in 2016. so it's a political and investigative matter, of course you want the democrats to focus on the facts. i think a lot can be uncovered just by holding hearings and we are learning that from this hearing, especially when it's being done competently and well and public and with a big microphone like the january 6th committee has been doing so i

just think that's evidence of their success and their progress, just the fact that it's both this and the documentary. i saw alex holder over the weekend, actually, and the information that they're putting forth, we know have, you know, two things that have come um just as a result of them holding these public hearings. >> you saw him? like you saw him out and about? what did he tell you? what does he have? what does he have on donald trump? >> out and about. well, obviously, i think he's very concerned, going to the security concerns that were just brought up by carol, he had security with him. and i think that basically, you know, what we learned is -- what i learned is not anything secret, something that was public, is the chaos of the white house, and i think he felt very much like a "forrest gump" situation, like how did i end up here amidst all this chaos and criming or at least crime-adjacent behavior in the white house, so i think he had to be very careful given the fact that his material has been subpoenaed but i think it was,

you know, evidence of -- the fact that he had security with him is evidence of just the seriousness of the threats and just again demonstrating that the committee is scrounging up new material that we might not have seen or, you know, that we might not have seen in a timely fashion. >> carol leonnig, julie hirschfeld davis, thank you so much. thank you for being here. tim sticks around. he's got a great new book out. we'll talk about it later. when we come back, left in the wake of the supreme court's unpopular decision to overturn roe vs. wade, a very confusing patchwork of state laws for women to navigate. governors on either side of the aisle who are digging in, some to protect reproductive rights, others to gut them completely. plus the very real fear at pride parades across this country this weekend that the supreme court may soon try to take away more of their hard fought rights. our friend tim miller weighs in on that and the big question he tries to answer in his brand-new

book. why did so many people who knew better go along with the whole donald trump show? later in the hour for us, horrific new attacks against civilian targets in ukraine and a new strategy from president joe biden and the g-7 allies to punish russia. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. russia. "deadline white house" contiesnu "deadline white house" contiesnu after a quick break. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ excuse me! uh, sir, we just cleaned the windows. enjoy the minions menu at ihop. for a limited time kids eat free! and catch minions: the rise of gru. only in theaters. for people living with h-i-v, keep being you. and ask your doctor about biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in certain adults. it's not a cure, but with one small pill,

biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to and stay undetectable. that's when the amount of virus is so low it cannot be measured by a lab test. research shows people who take h-i-v treatment every day and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your doctor. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. if you're living with hiv, keep loving who you are. and ask your doctor if biktarvy is right for you. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

when people come, they say they've tried lots of diets, nothing's worked matching your job description. or they've lost the same 10, 20, 50 pounds over and over again. they need a real solution. i've always fought with 5-10 pounds all the time. eating all these different things and nothing's ever working. i've done the diets, all the diets. before golo, i was barely eating but the weight wasn't going anywhere. the secret to losing weight and keeping it off is managing insulin and glucose. golo takes a systematic approach to eating that focuses on optimizing insulin levels. we tackle the cause of weight gain, not just the symptom. when you have good metabolic health, weight loss is easy. i always thought it would be so difficult to lose weight, but with golo, it wasn't.

the weight just fell off. i have people come up to me all the time and ask me, "does it really work?" and all i have to say is, "here i am. it works." my advice for everyone is to go with golo. it will release your fat and it will release you. i really believe that there's a danger in this nation of not just a removal of reproductive rights but lgbtq rights and a woman's right to birth control and decide when she's going to have a child. >> the decision of the supreme

court was really something that will save lives. >> we've done what we can here to become a safe harbor for women across this country. >> this was wonderful news in the defense of life. >> we're going at it. we're pulling out all the stops. this is fight like hell moment. >> dividing lines have emerged in america as the right that we as women have to access basic healthcare is now determined by which state we live in and whether or not our state government decides to view us as humans with any choice or agency. a chilling account in the "new yorker" tells the story of an abortion clinic in houston and what happened right as the supreme court's ruling came down. they write this. "sheila, the clinic's director, trying to collect herself, wiped her tears away and turned to the other women and three other patients in the waiting room. she said this, ladies, i'm so sorry to tell you that the law for abortion has been overturned. so we are not able to perform any abortions at this time. one patient burst into sobs. another who spoke no english

asked, what happened? sheila kneeled by her side and in broken spanish said, we cannot do it now. the woman who was of cuban origin had no reaction, so sheila asked another staff member to do a better translation. the supreme court just ruled that abortion is banned in texas, she said in spanish. we cannot assist you. the woman froze in disbelief." meanwhile, a new poll taken after the supreme court ruling shows the majority of americans, 56%, oppose overturning roe vs. wade. joining us now are "new york" magazine senior correspondent, coauthor of the book, "the notorious rbg" and errin haines. i've tried to ask everyone what they took in this weekend and what their thoughts are right now because this was such a shock on friday, and i think everyone sort of processed it in

different way, either by protesting or by blocking it out, and i wonder, for you, what you read, what you're looking at, and what you're looking toward this week. >> sure. well, nicole, this has been my beat for about a dozen years so i cannot say that this was surprising, although there's something surreal. because even if you are very, very prepared, this staggering acceleration of a 49-year strategy here can still come as a shock, and when you think of the stakes for real people's lives, like the ones reported in that excellent "new yorker" story, it's heartbreaking. i'm now eight months pregnant today. and happily so. but deeply aware of what a profound change in my life and body being pregnant and becoming a parent can be. and so the idea of this being forced on someone, to me, is a

profound violation, and then taking the decision out of that individual's hands and into the hands of the state is the plan here and is now finally being effectuated. i will say this notion of your rights depending on your zip code, although it is more intense than ever, did not start on friday. for at least 30 years, the supreme court has allowed this patchwork to happen, and even in texas, they allowed abortion to be banned up to six weeks just last september. they were tipping their hand with what they were going to do today. so, i think it's actually interesting to see this is sort of -- it was sort of a boiling frog situation and the water boiled over. even those women who were in those clinics were the, quote, unquote, lucky ones, because they were ones who managed to find out that they were pregnant and make a decision before six weeks, which is, in many cases, a completely impossible circumstance. and so, you know, i think we're all trying to understand the legal and the practical implications, but this was not a sudden move by any means. >> errin, what is your read on

what the brazenness of the alito opinion and the thomas comments about contraception and gay -- same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage. i mean, they seem to now be brazenly owning up to their 20% approval rating in the united states of america in the year 2022. >> i think brazen is exactly the right word for it, nicole. i think you're seeing a sense of impunity and a lack of accountability that they must feel. and you can contrast it with what justices brett kavanaugh and chief justice john roberts said, in which they signed on to the outcome but tried to distance themselves from the most strident language in the other opinions and to be honest, i think at least alito, to some extent, and thomas fully, are honest about where we are and where this is heading. there's something really

disingenuous about kavanaugh and roberts saying, in the case of kavanaugh saying, don't worry, ladies, there's still a right to travel, it's going to be okay, trust me, it's not going to extend to these other rights, with roberts saying that he wanted a more moderate outcome. he basically wanted to overturn roe v. wade in two or three years as opposed to today. both of those, i think, are highly disingenuous because they lead to the same outcome. that is what alito ruled of overturning roe v. wade and planned parenthood vs. casey so on some level, if this were truly the roberts court, we would end up with a kind of judicial gaslighting that would say, you know, what's the big deal about upholding a 15-week ban? but as even alito pointed out, once you uphold a 15-week ban, there's no consistent judicial principle that says you can't ban all abortions and once you say there's no substantive due process for 14th amendment, what about birth control?

what about lgbtq rights and protections from prosecution or recognition of marriage that have been found under similar doctrines? so at least alito and thomas were openly saying, at times, alito was kind of obfuscating about this, but they were recognizing, one, that this was a radical opinion that undid 49 years of precedent and in the case of thomas, naturally taking it almost to every possible conclusion that is perhaps -- that is consistent with what they laid out in the majority opinion. >> you know, errin, i want to get to the politics, but i want to give you a chance to answer the same question i started with irun on. what did you -- what stood out to you over the weekend, and what did you take in, and what are your sort of observations and reflections now that -- it was still a shock for me and i know we all knew this was coming but after the weekend of watching what happened in our country politically, watching the public statements in interviews, what are your thoughts today? >> yeah, i mean, well, listen, i

obviously am in a "newsroom" that is named for the 19th amendment. this is about expanding women's access to -- and participation in this democracy, in our society, so obviously, this is an issue that fits really into our wheelhouse, but you know, just spent time really collecting the voices of the people that are going to be directly impacted by this decision, by this ruling, just regular, everyday people. i mean, i think about -- i definitely had a conversation with my own mother who was born and came of age in a world pre-roe and was able to talk about what that world was like. it was not pretty. it was very hard for women. there were implications not just in terms of her body or their bodies but in terms of their quality of life, their ability to participate in our economy,

in our society, to be outside of the household. these were all considerations that could be impacted by the decision of whether or not to bring a child into the world. i have a niece that's in her 20s who certainly was very worried and concerned along with her peers because they've never lived in a world where these protections were not in place. and so they don't really know what that is going to mean for them now, but they're very angry, very frustrated by it and of course, look, i have to say, i have been spending a lot of the coverage that we have, how it's some of the same things that you were raising, we had a story out of texas as well from a clinic where that -- there were patients there the moment that the dobbs decision came down, they were confused, they were frustrated, they were angry. a lot of these women are, as we know, marginalized women who are just trying to survive. they weren't following necessarily the ins and out of

the supreme court. some of them weren't even necessarily aware of the texas law that had been put in place months earlier. and so, to be there and to find out on that day at that time that the procedure that they were there to get was not going to be possible was devastating for them, and so really, just -- i think we've spent a lot of time, those of us kind of in political journalism or who have been doing this work, preparing for this day, but i think this weekend was really the beginning to think about what a post-roe reality really looks like and seeing so many of these protests, to your point about what comes next and who could be in the crosshairs next in terms of challenging precedent, seeing the different groups who were already contemplating that coming together on the streets and cities like philadelphia where i live and so many others across the country, i think, could be a preview of what's to

come. >> to be continued. i think you're absolutely right. iren and errin, thank you so much. up next for us, our friend tim miller will be back with us. he has a brand-new book out, and it seeks to answer the big question facing many republicans who for years have known better. why did they do it? why did they go along with donald trump? we'll be back with tim. ey go alh nald trump commodity. when you come to that realization, i think it's very important that you spend your time wisely. and what better way of spending time than traveling, continuing to educate ourselves and broaden our minds? (woman vo) viking. exploring the world in comfort. [whistling] with technology that can scale across all your clouds...

it's easier to do more innovative things. [whistling] new projects means new project managers. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today. 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 hard eating healthy. unless you happen to be a dog. 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. ♪ ♪♪ three times the electorlytes and half the sugar. ♪♪ pedialyte powder packs. feel better fast. pedialyte powder packs. i was hit by a car and needed help. i called the barnes firm. that was the best call i could've made. i'm rich barnes.

it's hard for people to know how much their accident case is let our injury attorneys know he how much their accident cget the best result possible. i had no idea how much i wamy case was worth. c call the barnes firm to find out what your case could be worth. we will help get you the best result possible. ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪

i think pride and protest is probably more in line for this year. i mean, we're always protesting, but i just think it's astonishing that we're going 20-odd, 30-odd years back in time and now clarence is going after gay marriage. he's going after transgender rights. >> the breakfast i just left, it was like muscle memory to pride. we took it for granted. now we get to remember that the reason we actually march, the things that we are celebrating, are at risk. what if next year the things that we're celebrating this year don't exist anymore? so i think that's the kind of the tone. we're still celebrating but we're also being reminded that we still have to fight. >> this weekend was obviously a coast-to-coast celebration, the first pride event some cities have seen in years because of the covid pandemic but as you heard in those interviews, pride this year wasn't without a pretty heavy underdone. the roe decision had many thinking and asking, what is next? who is next?

one primary source of those concerns, an entire political party now seemingly devoted to the culture war and rolling back personal freedoms and rights. the republican descent into the muck is one of the interesting topics in our next guest's new book, "why we did it." the book is fantastic. i'm sorry i'm not there with you in the studio to sit there and talk about it, pore through it, all my favorite sections. i want to read something that was written about you and the book, which seems like a good place to start today. from ruminations on the mental jiujitsu that allowed him to become a gay man, to astonishing interviews, tim miller diagrams the flattering and delusional stories of gop operatives tell themselves so they can sleep at night. with the humorous touch, he reveals reince priebus, and a close friend's submission to a

maga psychosis. tell me more. >> nicole, there's a lot there. i think, look, the first part, we needed to understand why people who knew better went along with trump. there have been so many books about all the crazy that happened. and so much ink spilled about the sociopaths and the racists, you know, that made trump happen. but none of this bad stuff could have come to pass if it wasn't for people that we worked with, that we knew, who we me to know better, going along with it. so i had to understand that for myself, and in order to do that, i did two things. one, i think the best way to understand why people go along with evil things is to look back at your past and see why you went along with things that you don't feel good about anymore and the prime example is number one in that blurb. how did i work for people who were against gay marriage when my gay marriage and my daughter are the best things in my life? i reflected on that and thought about how i rationalized that in my brain. and then i went and interviewed our former colleagues, former

friends, and asked them, how did they do it? how'd they rationalize it? and then i diagrammed that and their answers ranged from mockable to gross to actually well intentioned if ultimately indefensible. and so, that's the book. it's about a third look back at my own choices and then two-thirds about where we are now and maybe -- and hopefully, in the end, people might look at it and kind of reflect on the stories that they're telling themselves and be a little more honest with themselves about what it is that they are enabling, particularly people on the right. >> it's so -- it's so brave, what you did. you know, the first part, i think, every one of us who were republican operatives, has undertaken and you do it more beautifully and more publicly than anyone i know. tell me more about -- because i was particularly harsh on the people who were normal, people like dana powell, you know, people that went into the white house that knew better before

they walked in the door. tell me why those people, not why they did it but why they stayed. >> that's a great question. what i came to realize was two things. one, not an every person, but in a lot of cases, their grievance towards the left, towards the liberals in their life, towards the people that attacked them for deciding to go into the trump administration, you know, towards us on msnbc, was much deeper than i realized. and i think a lot of them let their grievance really blind them. and then i think in addition to that, what they found was you get in too deep, you know? just like that -- the squid game. you're in the fifth episode of "the squid game" and you're so close to the big money pot at the end, and at this point, you've already sacrificed so much, you've sacrificed your reputation, and you don't know how to get out. and i think that a lot of people, you know, one of the people i talked to, alyssa, to her credit, finally did get out right before the insurrection and people can say that that's too late and criticize her, but

i think the most interesting thing about the book is her story, because we can learn from alicia and says, can we shake some of these other folks, the dina powells of the world and get them to come to the light by learning what it was that alyssa realized that finally allowed her to come public. it's the same story for some of the folks that have been on your show, olivia troye and chris krebs and people that went in. i think those are important people to learn from because hopefully we can use their stories to help persuade people next time to do the right thing. >> the only way we end up not in another january 6th but this time with all of trump's accomplices running state elections, and having changed laws and greased the wheels for overturning the will of the people in their state, is if all those people you named don't vote for trump next time and at least with bill barr and mitch mcconnell and rusty bowers, who testified about billboards outside his house calling him a pedophile, as his daughter was gravely ill, that was his sworn testimony, when asked who he

would vote for in 2024, his answer? donald j. trump. how do you -- that's sick. that's like a dog running back to an owner who kicks it. how do you fix those people? >> boy, the rusty bower situation, i don't know him personally, but i thought that was very telling and revealing and same for chris christie. a lot of these folks. bill barr. and i think that the people that are responsible to voters, right now, they are in league -- the mob is in charge of them. they are not in charge of the mob any longer, and i don't know how you shake them free, except for getting them out of the political game entirely. i think the better question is, how can we get to the voters, the people around them, the people that might work for another trump administration, and convince them next time to not get into the game in the first place. because i think that right now, as we've seen, after six years, if you're looking at this book for an answer as to how we can shake people free from being completely -- to completely submitting to the maga mob, i don't have the answer on that one for you.

i think that what we have to do is try to convince people that are outside of that process to see this more clearly. >> that's not how you sell a book. you answer a lot of questions. i read the book. i blurbed the book. it's also very, very witty and very funny, and sort of makes you laugh while you pour another cocktail. it's called "why we did it." it's fantastic. tim miller, thank you for spending time with us. >> thank you, nicole. up next for us, we'll turn to ukraine for a live report. today, russian missiles hit a crowded shopping mall just as president joe biden and his g-7 counterparts look to ratchet up pressure on moscow. that's next. ook to ratchet up pressure on moscow that's next.

the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go.

[whistling] with technology that can scale across all your clouds... it's easier to do more innovative things. [whistling]

there's some terrible breaking news out of ukraine today. a shopping mall in the country's special paltova region was hit by a russian missile strike this afternoon. ukrainian president zelenskyy is saying that more than 1,000 civilians were inside that shopping mall at the time of the attack. with officials fearing the number of victims could be impossible to imagine. early figures from local officials said at least 13 people were killed. more than 40 injured. nbc news has not been able to independently verify those reports. all of it comes after a flurry of activity this weekend as russia launched dozens of missiles across the country as the rest of the world tries once again to pressure the kremlin. president joe biden, along with other members of the g-7, agreed this weekend at a summit in germany to a proposal that would

limit the price of russia's oil exports. let's bring into our conversation, greg myre and ambassador michael mcfaul. greg, ukrainian who's in kyiv said to me, you know, imagine this is like your 9/11. flames, horrific injuries, horrific terror eked out today on these innocent civilians. what else do we know about this attack? >> yeah, well, this is a city in central ukraine. it's been hit before, but that's because it had a big oil refinery. this was a shopping mall that was absolutely obliterated and just was hit. it burst into flames. there were hundreds, maybe a thousand people inside. they're still trying to determine the casualty count. but it really speaks to this

larger russian approach that we've seen in the past few days of, you know, if you search for a military rationale here, you're not going to find it. the russians, over the weekend, and today, have hit -- fired 60-some missiles at a lot of cities 60-some missiles, and a lot of cities in the northwest, and west and center of the country, places that are not being hit previously, causing civilian considerableties and a number of cases here in kyiv, just a couple miles from where i'm sitting right now. so it seems to be possibly directed at the g-7 meeting or the nato meeting tomorrow as iweh of russia just saying, look, we can still do this, but from a military perspective, just hard to figure out what's going on. >> just so our veeers understand, is that mostly on the eastern part of the country? >> yeah, nicole, it's in the

east. that's the most intense fighting and the russians have continued to make those kremtle gains. so that's certainly the focal point. you do still see fighting in the south. it's not as intense. the russians are not trying to make any big advances there so it's a little more static, but there is shooting back and forth in the south, so the east and south, but these missile attacks really hit areas that had not been part of the conflict in recent weeks. >> sounds like reporting, there's no military rationale. these are campaigns of terror against against ukrainians. as the world looks away, russia becomes more heinous and its cruelty has come to pass. >> nicole, i think the word you use second down exactly right. it's terrorism, an act of

terrorism by a sate, and in my view russia therefore should be designated a state sponsor of terrorism. if cuba is on our his, how can what you're showing the american people right now, that not be a terrorist attack? with that would come more financial sanctions i know people in the biden administration worry that is too great a step, but compared to what? compared to what we're watching now. there's no question that putin is trying to terrorize zelenskyy and his government. he's trying to get them to -- for peace on bad conditions and i hope there will be a big reaction at the nato summit starting tomorrow. starting wednesday. >> that's a good point. can you take us inside what is happening in terms of president zelenskyy's -- he projects supreme confidence, but they're realistic, i understand this is intense fighting but these strikes target his civilian

population, and if you're a terrorist you terrorize their civilians so they no longer back the government at war. i mean, what do we do as western allies to protect the civilian population and to protect zelenskyy? >> it's a great question. first of all, he is a very strong leader, heroic leader publicly he has to show strength. i know privately -- i talk to his administration pretty often, including to him on occasion, it breaks his heart to see things like this. when you're the leader, the commander in chief and you can't protect your citizens, that is a horrible feeling. make no mistake about it. that is a horrible feeling. number two, what he would say and his government would say, give us the weapons to stop putin's army. s that the only way you're going to have a diplomatics settlement. as long as putin is still making progress, however incremental, he's going to keep marching, and what the ukrainians need is more

weapons, they're outmanned in the donbas. the only way you're going to get peace is stop his military machine, stop his army in ukraine today. >> i want to ask you about another story, ambassador mcfall. brittney griner, wnba player is going to be put on trial in russia. it seems to me she is a political hostage, that as the russian government, putin's government became ostracized on the world's stage, they are using her. what can be done to extricate her from what is clearly a political prosecution there? >> nicole, you're asking some hard questions today. that's a very hard question. it's not easy. i want to remind everybody there are other americans like her that are less famous. paul whelan's been in jail for years. mark fogle, a teacher that used to teach at the anglo-american school, used to teach my kids by

the way, he was just sentenced to 14 years in jame there's no rule of law in russia. you need to be blunt about that. these are hostages in my opinion, and the government, putin, wants to trade them for people here in the united states. one guy in particular, his name is viktor boot. and i don't know how you do that because it creates a very dangerous precedent. i know that behind the scenes our diplomats are doing what they can, and i don't -- there's not a silver bullet here. there's not, if we could just do this thing, all these people could come home. i hope and pray they eventually will. >> from our end, we are going to stay on it. we're going to pay more attention. we'll turn to both of you for help with that. thank you so much for being with us today. we're going to take a quick break, but on the other side we have a really important announcement. something i've wanted to tell you for weeks but haven't been able to. that's next. r weeks but haven'tn able to. that's next.

there's a monster problem and our hero needs solutions. so she starts a miro to brainstorm. “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro.

your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

there's a reason comcast business powers matc more businesses thantion. any other provider. actually, there's a few... comcast business offers the fastest, reliable network... the protection of securityedge™ and the most reliable 5g network. want me to keep going? i can... whether your small business is starting or growing, you need comcast business. technology solutions that put you ahead. get a great offer on internet and security, now with more speed and more bandwidth. plus find out how to get up to a $650 prepaid card with a qualifying bundle. minions, i have been captured. you have 48 hours to rescue me. mini-boss!

my minions will save me. before we go, a brand new project. i'm so excited to finally tell you about. something i have been working on in my free time, which means in the commercial breaks during the january 6th hearings it's called "ukraine, answering the call". it's in response to president zelenskyy's request at the grammy award show to respond with music. president zelenskyy will be guest. there's presentations from chef jose andres, alicia keys performances from poeland. rosie perez is in it. prodway human naries come together to perform "what the world needs now is love". there will be an opportunity for to you do something if you feel like it to help famiies through

donations or musical everyone can get involved in the want to. don't miss it. sunday july 3rd, 7:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. thank you for letting us into your homes during these times. "the beat" with ari melber who's also been enlisted to help me starts now. >> there's a lot going on in the world, i think we all know, and the thing that you're doing here, which i want to shout out and echo, i love it not only because it relates to music and culture, which i do love, but i think that i know you care a lot about what's going on overseas. we have been covering that story along with everything else that comes in and out of people's attention, ukraine needs the world as eyes than issue in whatever way people can participate and i know you have been working hard on this, so on behalf of whomever, myself,