success for these firefighters in the coming days is gonna be the conditions. unfortunately, the forecast is not good. there's a little or no chance of rain in the coming days. and the temperatures only supposed to rise. stephanie? >> thank you cal perry. let's hope the firefighters are able to protect these giant national treasures. we are thinking about the sequoias tonight in yosemite national park. on that note, i wish you a good and safe night. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thanks for staying up late with us. i will see you at the end of tomorrow. wit us i good evening chris thanks my happy to have you here. we had initially expected there would be two hearings from the january six investigation this week. now, the thursday hearing, the one we thought was going to be thursday is not going to happen. at least it's not going to happen yet, they're putting that off until some later date. we have no idea when. but the hearing tomorrow on tuesday is still on. it will be live starting at 1

pm eastern. and because we know a big important hearing in the middle of a school day and work day is not the most convenient thing for everyone, we here at msnbc will have a prime recap of tomorrow's hearing, but tomorrow starting at 8 pm eastern. i'll be hosting that along with my dear friend chris hayes and others the whole team. that is 1 pm when the live hearing starts. 8 pm is when we will start our prime time recap. i can tell you one thing in advance of tomorrow's hearing. i can tell you for sure that the tattoo portion quotient among the witnesses is about to go way up. i don't want to speculate about any of these folks might have lurking under their collars. it is totally possible of course that rusty bowers has an amazing torso full of tattoos, who knows?

perhaps judge michael luttig has similar jerry stifle sleeve tattoos lurking under his very sober suit. but in terms of visible tattoos, visible even in business where, and terms of fast tattoos, neck taxes, had tattoos hand tattoos, tomorrow will up the numbers in terms of what we've seen yet from live witnesses at the january 6th hearings. tomorrow's hearing we have been advised is gonna focus a least in part on the relationship between former president donald trump and the white house and the pro trump fascist paramilitary groups that spearheaded the violent breach of the u.s. capitol building on january 6th. one of the live witnesses tomorrow we are told is going to be a man in jason van caden half. he used to be a spokesman for one of those groups, the oath keepers. mr. van taeden half as a tattoo owner, he ran a podcast radio

show for a while it was called revolution radio. when he was doing revolution radio he was sympathetic to these far right militia type groups that were claiming that the government was out to get you, the government needed to be resisted by force. this was during the obama administration. when there was the bundy ranch armed standoff in nevada in 2014, the far right armed extremists anti government groups aimed guns at federal agents and got away with it. the gentleman who you are going to see testify tomorrow, mister -- went off to cover as a journalist. he covered it for his revolution radio podcast thing. and at that standoff, mr. van tate enough met the head of the oath keepers group and then he started attending and covering more of the events, standoffs

and stunts were the oath keepers showed up. and eventually the leader of the oath keepers and the other members of that group decided he liked that enough, they liked his way of talking about them enough, he seem like a fellow traveler that they put them him on their payroll as the oath keepers spokesman. in that role, he produced lots and lots of videos and online content for them. ir videos online content have been key to their ability to promote themselves in recruiting members. he spoke to the press on behalf of the group. he made all these public statements, he lionized their actions. he said that at the time he thought he was sort of pulling a hunter s. thompson and the hells angels. in his mind he was embedding with the oath keepers. as a journalist doing that sort of embedded with the group, he would ultimately produce a great work of journalism or great novel about his time riding with the oath keepers. that's what he says he thought

at the time, but he now realizes he was just behaving is their propagandist. but even though he had broadly supported them and he had broadly so sympathetic to them, eventually got to grossed out by them over there working with white supremacists and neo-nazis, over the fact that at least some of the more holocaust deniers, they like to talk about that amongst themselves. for that and a number of other reasons, he ultimately left. he was recently part of an abc news documentary about what he did and why he now regrets it. >> my day consists of waking up, taking in the news, and writing all day. >> and just invented, and oath keepers. i >> did it with the oath keepers, but i was doing it before that. it's something i've always done. >> i have an important story that we need to get out there. for the first time in our country's recent history, good american stood up and said you know what? we're not going to let this

happen on our watch. >> shore to shore with some of the best americans in the country. >> cover the video? >> yeah i do. i just got to own it, noah? i was swept up, i was excited. i was wrong. >> and i was wrong. jason tatenhof half was the spokesman for the oath keepers paramilitary group for the two years. he was involved with a group for longer than at, four years. involved to the point where the leader of the oath keepers, stewart rhodes, the guy with the eye patch from the gun handling accident, stewart rhodes apparently lived in mr. tatenhof's basement for eight months. jason van tatenhof in half now does a park asked about local politics in colorado where he lives now. it's kind of amazing to hear him on his podcast straight-up relaying the most recent news about january 6th and the investigation and the criminal charges against these

paramilitary groups, and then while he's just doing his normal news podcast he has to mention kind of like as a fair disclosure to his listeners that, oh yeah, that news that we're doing right here, he used to live in my basement. >> the new indictment now is the second time that a far-right group has been charged, as i said. in january, stewart rhodes, leader and founder and previous basement roommate of mine -- he lived in my basement for about eight months -- was arrested and charged along with ten others in the same crime. >> previous basement roommate of mine. so this guy has a unique perspective right? the skies had unique access to these groups which are an important part of what happened our country when we came very close to violently losing the transition of power and violently losing the whole idea that elections ought to determine who is a governs united states. so tomorrow we'll hear from jason van taken off about this paramilitary group he was part

of. as he was just describing there in his podcast, members of that group are under federal indictment for seditious conspiracy, for attempt to overthrow the united states government by force. to the extent the donald trump four white house was trying to use those paramilitary groups to their purpose. trying to use them as a physical force that will be need to physically blocked a finalization of the election, to physically intimidate the vice president and the congress from finishing that job. to whatever extent that happened, to whatever extent these groups didn't just do it on their own but, they were directed, in that effort, tomorrow we're gonna hear the january six investigators lay out that case. and we know to respect life witness testimony from the guy who's a former spokesman from who's a former spokesman fro

triggering them to go do it. well, those people who aimed and fired these paramilitary groups at the u.s. capitol, knowing what they were capable of, and knowing what they intended, well, in that case, those people, the people in the suits, would be equally implicated in a seditious conspiracy to use force to overthrow the lawful functions of the u.s. government. and now we know from the member of the general sixth investigation, who is gonna lead to mars hearing, now we know from him that the january six investigators believe they have figured out that in fact someone did that. and tomorrow, they're going to show the evidence of what he did. >> donald trump was of course the central figure who said everything into motion. he was the person who identified january 6th as the date for a big protest. and he announced that in his tweet, in the middle of the night on december 19th, after that a crazy meeting, one that has been described as the

craziest meeting anytime trump presidency. and then, just in our two later, but donald trump sent out the tweet it would be heard around the world, the first time in american history, when the president of the united states, called a protest against his own government. in fact, to try to stop the counting of electoral college votes in a presidential election he had lost. absolutely unprecedented, nothing like that had ever happened before. so, people are gonna hear the story of that tweet, and then, the explosive effects it had on, in trump world, and specifically, among the domestic violent extremist groups, the most dangerous political extremists in the country at that point. >> explosive effects that trump statements had, specifically among the domestic violent extremist groups, the most dangerous political extremist in the country at that point.

again, members of those groups already facing felony criminal charges, for seditious conspiracy. that's 20 years in prison. congressman jamie raskin of maryland, congresswoman stephanie murphy of florida, they're gonna be the two leaders of the hearing tomorrow. congressman raskin, this weekend, on cbs, saying, effectively, president trump set them off, pulled their trigger. and you know we've got a lot of show to get to tonight. there's a lot going on, a lot of news. as we look ahead to the hearing tomorrow night, i will just close by making, making one last point. because it's me, it's a two part point, but it is one point. and it's about sort of what's getting attention out of this hearing tomorrow. i think there is one thing that's getting way too much attention out of tomorrow's hearing. it's sort of a variant of interest, but i really don't think it's substantively that important, so if you're looking to kind of like safe brain space, like which i focus on? and what can i ignore? i think there's something that's got that ton of noise in

the past day or two, that actually deserves very little attention, and you can wipe that part of a hard drive. there's also something now that isn't getting nearly enough attention out of tomorrow's hearing, just in terms of what we should prep, for what we should be looking out for? what might end up being important here? we're gonna tweet that one in more detail tonight. the less important thing, that perhaps not at all important thing, is named steve bannon. i know that mr. bannon has been all over the news for the past day or two. lots of headlines, lots of pixels, many news-y-ish seeming developments about mr. bannon. so many, in fact, that you might think he matters right now to the january 6th investigation, and indeed, what's gonna happen tomorrow. i honestly think that in this case, you just couldn't that let the noise about him distract you. what's going on with him? why is getting all this press is actually very simple, it's not that complicated, it doesn't take that long to explain. steve bannon got a subpoena to testify to the january 6th investigation, a subpoena is a legally binding thing. it's not an invitation. it's illegal something, you can't ignore it. he ignored it.

he denounced it. he put on a little red face and yelled about tv cameras. and i'm sure he enjoyed that, but it's not, that's not a legal response. a subpoena is a binding thing. you have to respond to it. he claimed the reason that he was defying the subpoena was executive privilege. that president trump had a right to his counsel, as a government employee, and he couldn't violate the private sanctity of his advisors an official adviser to the president. legally speaking, that is a pile of corn knots. i mean, first of all, if you want to assert that you can't answer questions because of some assertion of executive privilege, a, the president, maybe the former president has to assert that executive privilege. it's not clear that ever happened here. also, what you're supposed to do is respond to the subpoena, honor the subpoena, sit down, hear the questions that are gonna be asked, and then, on a question by question basis, you assert any relevant privilege you think may apply. you can't just say, i cannot be asked anything!

ever. also, the time period in question here they wanted to ask him about this 2020 and 2021. in 2020 and when he's on one, steve bannon was a broadcaster, not a presidential advisor, he was a broadcaster, and nothing against podcasters. some of them are our best friends, right? but dude did not work in the white house or for the government in any capacity and head not four years, by the time he did this stuff that the investigators wanted to ask him about. it will be like bill clinton getting on board to denver today, and saying, hey everybody, hey y'all, need to get out of here because i'm on this plane. it's now air force one. and so, you are not clear to be here. you have to go.

it's not how it works, right? you'd be like, hey, that's bill clinton on my jump blue flight. nice to meet you, former president bill clinton. but also sit down. this is a jetblue, and we're not leaving. this is air force one, just because you're on it, the part of your life is over, that's not how it works. it's not how this works. either for former presidents, or four former presidential advisers who now have sat podcasts sponsored by the michael o guy. there is no executive privilege that it tends to everything, anything steve bannon did as a podcaster. it just doesn't -- even --, this wouldn't even be something that you would be able to look up in the indexed. this is like if somebody asked me if you want your pepsi, and you say i love a fruit rule up. it's completely irrelevant. steve bannon defied a legal subpoena in a way that was not illegal. it was not even a close approximation of legal. and so, the u.s. justice department is prosecuting him for doing that. the reason he's been getting all this press the past couple of days, is because this criminal trial is about to start for that. he's facing up to two years in prison. as a last-ditch effort to try to screw up that case against him, he came up with this new gambit, in which he says,

president trump has not released him from the bonds of executive privilege, so he now would like to testify, please. you know, right before his trial is supposed to start in federal court. and he's doing this because it's trying to derail this trial. and the reason we know that none of this matters, it's because today, the federal judge hearing steve bannon's case, laughed it all out of the courtroom. bannon in criminal trial is not derailed. bannon has not even succeeded in using this tactic to delay the trial. past its scheduled start date, which remains one week from today. and oh, by the way, rescuers dispose of the court today that the fbi went to interview trump 's lawyer about all of this. and the lower clarify to them, yeah, trump never even tried to assert an executive privilege. when it comes to steve bannon, they will go, the whole thing was made up. so -- there is no drama around the january 6th investigation and steve bannon, other than the fact that steve bannon may now go to prison for contempt, for defying their legal subpoena to him.

and, he can't get out of it by belatedly coming up with this publicity stunt, where he agrees to testify to the committee. yes, maybe, he will, eventually come in and testify, who knows? but, if he does testify, it will reportedly be behind closed doors, just like all the other kids, big guy. i mean, the press, for whatever reason, may enjoy covering mr. bannon's every stunt. but he doesn't matter. in the largest scheme of this. nothing he is saying or doing means anything in substance. and also, he should maybe be focused on, you know, other stuff, pack a toothbrush, big guy. while the steve bannon red faced breath holding tantrum, over these past couple of days, has gotten way more attention than it substantively deserves, i think the thing that does deserve more attention ahead of tomorrow's hearing is the

grenades, the military ordinance grenades, and explosives, and the many, many, many guns that we are only just now learning about, mostly from justice department filings, but also from brand-new open source reporting. that stuff, actually, is important. and that's next. enjoy these and more when you join panera's unlimited sip club. like pulsing, electric shocks, sharp, stabbing pains, or an intense burning sensation. what is this nightmare? it's how some people describe... shingles.

a painful, blistering rash that could interrupt your life for weeks. forget social events and weekend getaways. if you've had chickenpox, the virus that causes shingles is already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles.

and it's easier than ever to get your projects done right. with angi, you can connect with and see ratings and reviews. and when you book and pay throug you're covered by our happiness check out angi.com today. angi... and done.

we've been streaming all day from every room. and wthe power and speed ofhroug you'rthis super-sonic wifiiness from xfinity is incredible. mom! mass speeds was my idea, remember? get minion net, with speeds of up to one minion bite per hour. [ low screaming ] but that was an epic fail. with xfi we can stream, share, swipe, like... impress your mom with super-sonic wifi. it's unbeatable internet for a more unbeatable gru. ar-15s, shot guns, tons of i mean, you.

pistols, semi automatic handguns, also bear spray, chemical spray, stun guns, flagpoles, spears, flagpoles made in the spears, clubs, collapsible batons, bulletproof s, crossbows, missionaries, grenades, thousands of rounds of ammunition, ranging from shotgun shells to hollow point bullets.

plus a nightmare and homemade stuff. these mace jars filled with gasoline and styrofoam. do it yourself napalm. they pack them altogether enough tight space. maybe speed bumps on the way? on friday, just a few days ago, washington post today public service. they sent several reporters to pull from public funds in public reporting all with all of the different weapons we now know or at the capitol on january 6th in the hands of the pro trump mob. the post reported 121 people ultimately charged with using or carrying dangerous weapons that day. that report of course's testimony from cassidy hutchison that not only was president trump warned earlier on january 6th the crowds near the capitol were quite heavily armed, but the people choosing to go through the metal detectors that had tons of weapons confiscated from. he was one of the people

choosing not to go through the metal detectors or choosing to avoid going through magnetometer's in part because they wanted to keep their weapons on them. trump responded to that information allegedly by saying that he wanted the metal detectors for his rally taken down so the crowd wouldn't have to have their guns taken away for them to be able to attend. whoever wanted to use those weapons against, he figured it wasn't him. >> i heard the president say i don't care that they have weapons, they're not here to hurt me -- >> they're not here to hurt me, let the people in with weapons, and then we'll go to the capitol. again, we have known that information for a couple of weeks because of testimony from white house staffer cassidy hutchinson. but that information we can now put in the context of a whole burst of new news about just how armed the crowd was on january 6th. first we learned from her that

trump knew they were armed, now we're learning a lot more about how exactly they were armed, and how armed they were. in addition to that washington post reporting, just as a public service, on friday from the justice service we also got an update on the seditious conspiracy case against the leaders of the oath keepers and alleged members of that group. u.s. prosecutors laid out a series of revelations about what charges what weapons those individuals are brought with them to dishing d. c. on january 6th. the government has evidence that members of the group from florida and arizona allegedly staged semi automatic rifles and other weapons in a suburban washington hotel while other people -- and florida member of the group, came to washington with explosive and his recreational vehicle, which left carting college park, maryland's. the government laid early seized from that vehicle, quote military grenades. from the same rv that he used

to travel to washington, d. c. on january six. >> all of that information that is all information worth noting that we did not have the first time anybody tried to hold trump accountable for what he set off on january 6th. during his second impeachment trial right after january 6th, one of the key pieces we now know was missing was just how armed that crowd was when they stormed the capitol. that makes this kind of fresh new ground. how does it change the stakes? joining us now is someone in a unique position to be able to talk about that. barry berke was counsel to the house judiciary committee during the first impeachment counsel, and he was a lead counsel in trump's second impeachment. mr. burke it's a real pleasure to have you here with us tonight. thank you for the time. >> great rachel to be here. >> is it safe to say that when trump was impeached for the january 6th attack, again for which you are lead counsel, is it fair to say that it wasn't

yet clear at the time just time any weapons were women in the mob that day, how many weapons, how many types of weapons they brought to d. c., let alone that trump was aware of how armed they were? >> that is all true. there is so much more direct evidence that supports everything we were saying during the impeachment proceedings, and all the circumstantial evidence that we thought proved, it shows the lies to trump's defenses. remember during the impeachment, we had him saying to the proud boys, stand back and stand by. we had him saying the, sending out a tweet on december naji, big protests on january six, at washington d. c., it will be wild. we have all the evidence. what's the shows this is that everything we were saying and showing was true and then some. of course he was summoning these domestic violent extremist groups, and he would've known that they were violent. when he stood there he, knew that the crowd was armed, he had received those warnings. cassidy hutchinson's testimony

was so great because a shoulder proceeded it and what followed it. he knew they had guns but didn't care if they were shoot you knew there were not gonna shoot him. all these folks came prepared, and there's even more evidence of that because they were told the elections being stolen and they were summoned there. i remember from the second impeachment one of the most chilling pieces of film we saw was the people who raided told the police, we are here because the president told us to come here and invite us. that's what they believe, that's why he's singularly responsible. it's further proof of his responsibility for everything that happened and that january 6th was a culmination of his attempt to interfere with peaceful power, after all those other efforts had failed. >> now in terms of the relationship between these pro trump fascist paramilitary groups, members of which have been charged with seditious conspiracy and the culpability of the president, congressman raskin is gonna coley tomorrow 's hearing. i know you worked closely with

him on trump's second impeachment. he has said the tomorrow's hearing is not going to be about showing explicit evidence that trump approved directly of these paramilitary groups plans or that he told them to draw up plans like that. he said that's not what they're setting it to prove, they're setting out to prove what he described as a convergence of trump's efforts and what the paramilitary groups were willing to do with weapons and with violence. can you help us understand what that means? he's not talking about there being cars went similarly for pursuing the same idea, he's talking about there being converged efforts? >> absolutely and i think i can't help but look at this as a trial lawyer because it's so effective to have cassidy hutchinson come in as the last witness saying she heard proud boys, oath keepers mentioned in connection with january 6th. they knew they were warned there was going to be violence. they knew he was warned not to use the words, to encourage the crowd to fight, and yet he set

out, sent out that december 19th tweet to be there in the wild. he knew they were coming. he's not gonna say they had direct conversations with the or kobe's keepers of the proud boys, but it is all happening in realtime. at the same time, he was trying to influence state officials, telling them to find the exact amount of votes he needed to win, trying to get his senior doj officials just to say, say there's fraud and he'll take care of the rest. it was clear that these efforts were try part of that broader skin. i think jamie who's the best was trying to say is, they may not need to show and they won't show direct communication, but they don't need to, because the proof is overwhelming that these were all part of the same effort to prevent the peaceful transfer of power and interfere with the work of congress and it should've been surprised that when you're reaching out telling the proud boys to stand back and stand by when you know these folks are hearing your messages that they will be armed and heavily armed. he just didn't care because they weren't there to harm him.

>> it was a unified holistic effort where everybody was aware of the other elements of the effort and one of the elements of the effort were heavily armed paramilitary trained fascist groups. just another day at the office. sorry >> it's so important because they had the violence to it that they knew, and that's something the american people can understand, the violent overthrow of government is something we've never seen let alone directed by a president of the united states. i think that speaks volumes and a little be a continuation of that tomorrow the. meeting >> barry berke was lead counsel for trump's second impeachment on these matters. barry, thank you for helping us set the stage for that tomorrow. it's great to have you. here are what we have much more to come tonight. so stay with us.

a couple of weeks ago here, just after the supreme court overturned the right to an abortion in this country, we talked here on this show about one of the ways that abortion providers are trying to keep abortion services accessible to americans who now live in states where abortion is banned. we talked about mobile abortion clinics. an abortion access group called just the pill, announced they would be announcing a fleet of mobile clinics to park just over the border from states with abortion bans, and from

those mobile clinics, they would have providers do consultations for medication abortions, dispensing pills, as well as providing surgical abortions for -- or are too far along in their pregnancy for a medication abortion. just until tells us tonight that they have now deployed their first medication abortion mobile clinic, in a pilot program. a second, larger mobile clinic providing that, and also surgical abortions will deploy later this summer. just the pills medical director tells abc news that the vans are both completely unmarked, and bulletproof. these vehicles thus equipped take eight months to build, that's the main thing slowing their expansion to other states so far, but that's what they're planning to do. so that is one on the ground response to the overturning of roe v. wade, put abortion clinics on wheels and drive them to state borders to be as close as possible to women in the states where abortion is

now banned. but, now there is another doctor who looked at a map and realize that, for women in certain places like the deep south and south texas, there is a place that is much closer than the near state where abortion could still be illegal. and that nearest place would be the sea, the ocean. the gulf of mexico. doctor meg awtrey is an ob/gyn is a doctor at the university of san francisco, she plans to launch a floating abortion and reproductive health clinic in federal waters in the gulf of mexico, a few miles off the coast and therefore a few miles out of reach of oppressive state laws. the idea is that for many women in texas, louisiana, alabama, mississippi, it might be closer and easier, and cheaper, to get to a vote. to get to a floating clinic a few miles off the coast, rather than trying to fly or drive to the nearest state where abortion is legal. this project is still in the fundraising stage. for starters doctor autry needs a boat to make this happen. maxlength=32> but it is sort of painted guy and crisis might seem in first blush, there is

really salient and extensive experience of doing this kind of thing for women who are seeking abortions. a couple of years ago we spoke with doctor rebecca -- a dutch doctor who spent decades figure out innovative ways to get abortion services to places where abortion is illegal. her organization, women on waves, has spent years providing abortions on ships, floating in international waters. the work that she has been doing globally, figure out how to get women abortion services for the countries where they have made it illegal, that is now work that needs to be done here inside the united states as well. figuring out how to get abortion services to women in states where it is illegal, hold that thought, we will be right back with more. re

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.

like pulsing, electric shocks, sharp, stabbing pains, or an intense burning sensation. what is this nightmare? it's how some people describe... shingles. a painful, blistering rash that could interrupt your life for weeks.

forget social events and weekend getaways. if you've had chickenpox, the virus that causes shingles is already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles. it's a sort of thing that would be almost unthinkable before a couple of weeks ago. i would least sound a little crazy. but here's the headline. a california doctor proposes floating abortion clinic in gulf of mexico. in the wake of the supreme court ruling, overturning roe v. wade, overturning the right to get an abortion in this country, different times call for desperate measures. this is one of them. one doctor is making a well-rounded geographical agreement at least that the gulf of mexico, the federal waters in the gulf of mexico outside the reach of republican controlled states that have abortion bans, those waters may

be the closest place for many american women in the deep south and south texas you need access to abortion care. joining us now is the doctor meg autry, obgyn at ucsf. i really appreciate you making time for us tonight. >> thank you so much for having me. >> now by explaining the basics of this have, i've done this is there any important new outside missing to convey to my audience? >> no i, think you pretty much have gotten it. one of the really important things to remember is that wealthy individuals in our country will be able to get the care that they want and how they want it, whenever and however they want to, and this is serving a portion of our population that in these restricted states are virtually unable to access those resources. >> how daunting are the logistics of what you are proposing? obviously there is the matter of acquiring a boat, getting it

properly equipped and staffed and all that. for me who's ignorant of how this sort of thing would work, there's the challenge of how you would get the women out to the facility that you're gonna have to have several miles offshore. are you handle follow-up care and to the extent that is needed. can you talk to us a little bit about what is most daunting and what is most doable about this? >> so the most daunting part is all aspects of this are incredibly daunting. although we are just going public, we have done an extensive amount of research in detail looking at this option and what seems to be the best way to go about it, both logistically, and from a security standpoint, from a legal standpoint. what is most doable is that we know the majority of our country doesn't believe in what is happening. we must have bodily autonomy,

and because of that we have an amazing amount of incredible people who you've already talked about her new show who are determined to improve or create access to individuals who don't have it. >> this plan, is this project based at all of the similar kind of work that has happen internationally. we had another doctor talking on the show talking about her international experience in other countries where abortion has been illegal. is this consciously formed on the, are you aware of other doctors experience in other countries? >> i came up with the idea completely separately but was frequently made aware of her efforts and quickly spoke with her. she had women with waves which were on international waters off the coast of ireland. my understanding focused mostly on medical abortions. this is federal waters in the u.s. and different legal and different security issues, but she is a visionary, a pioneer and she is incredibly helpful and giving me advice moving forward. >> doctor meg autry, director

of obstetrics at ucsf. this is an extremely necessary idea, it's called a lot of peoples imagination because it is so mind-blowing that this is a sort of thing that might be needed. to do it practically, would be interested in hearing from you as you start to put it together, and get the funds in the logistics to make it happen. please come back. >> thank you very much. >> thanks for talking with us tonight. we'll be right back. stay with us. mom's a1c is down with rybelsus®. (♪ ♪) in a clinical study, once-daily rybelsus®

significantly lowered a1cabe. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? (♪ ♪) ask your healthcare provider about rybelsus® today. for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are positive for acetylcholine receptor antibodies, it may feel like the world is moving without you. but the picture is changing, with vyvgart. in a clinical trial, participants achieved improved

daily abilities with vyvgart added to their current treatment. and vyvgart helped clinical trial participants achieve reduced muscle weakness. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. in a clinical study, the most common infections were urinary tract and respiratory tract infections. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or if you have symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. the most common side effects include respiratory tract infection, headache, and urinary tract infection. picture your life in motion with vyvgart. a treatment designed using a fragment of an antibody. ask your neurologist if vyvgart could be right for you.

for the past six and a half

months, the most powerful telescope in the history of the world has been on its 1 million a mile mission to look at the very first galaxies and stars ever forms. tonight, we finally got to see the first full, colorful resolution images. our first image from that telescope. it is the deepest look into the universe, ever, from the most powerful telescope ever made. some of the biggest, brightest lights in this image, took 4. 6 billion years to get to the telescope. so, looking at those lights on this image is like looking that far back in time. nasa says, actually, some of

the faintest lights in this image are almost as old as universities self, they're over 13 billion years old. tomorrow at 10:30 am eastern, nasa will unveil more photos from the webb telescope, but that is the first one. watch this space -- sorry. i'll see you back here again tomorrow, night eight eastern, for our primetime recap of tomorrow's january 6th inning. now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell, good evening lawrence. >> good evening rachel, i'll be joining you in that recap tomorrow evening. tonight, rachel, i'm very excited. this is one of those things that, in this job, where i just sit here wondering, how did this happen? how did this happen? because, i was a kid watching the watergate hearings, and watching the moment the changed everything, which was alexander butterfield testifying under oath, on tv, and revealing that pretty much everything that richard unexcited said was on tape. pretty much all of it was tape recorded in the white house, on the telephones, at camp david, everywhere. and, alexander butterfield we