if we can do that, i think the no votes will prevail. >> all right, kathleen sebelius, think you so much for your time tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> that is all in on this monday night. the rachel maddow show starts right now. monday night the rachel maddow show start right now. that is "all in" on this monday night the rachel maddow st geengs, rachel. >> thanks for joining us for joining us, happy to have you here. we initially expected two hearings from theav january 6 investigation this week.al now the thursday hearing, the one we thought was going to be thursday in primew time is not going to t happen. at least it's not going to happen yet. they are putting that one off untils some later date. we have no idea when but the hearing tomorrow on tuesday is still on. it will be live starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern. and because we know a big mportant hearing in the middle of a schoolno day, in the middl of a work day is not the most convenient thing for everyone,

we here at msnbc will have a prime time recap of tomorrow's hearing right here tomorrow night starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern. hosting that tomorrow night, along with my dear friends chris hayes and joy reid and nicolle wallace and lawrence o'donnell and the whole team, 1:00 p.m. is when the live hearing starts, and 8:00 p.m. tomorrow night is when we will start our prime time recap. i can tell you one thing in advanceim of tomorrow's hearing. i can tell you for sure that the tattoo quotient among the witnesses isth about to go way, wayth up and i do not want to speculate what any of these folks might haveat lurking unde their collars, it is totally possible of course that like, you know, rusty bowers has an amazing torso full of tattoos, who knows or just michael luttig had a full sleeve tattoo working under his very silver suit but in terms of visible tattoos, tattoos visible o even in busins

wear, in terms of face tattoos, neck tattoo, head tattoos, hand tattoos, tomorrow is going to really up the numbers in terms of what we have seen yet from liveer witnesses at january 6th hearings. tomorrow's hearing, we have been advised will focus at least in part on the relationship between former president trump and the trump white house and the pro-trump fascist groups that breached the capitol building january 6th. one of the live witnesses we are told tomorrow is going to be a named jason, a spokesman for one of the groups, for the oathkeepers. and he was a tattoo shop owner, also an artist, a very accomplished artist, he ran a podcast radio show thing for a while called revolution radio. and when he was doing revolution radio, he was sympathetic to these far right militia type

groups claiming the government was out to get you and government needed to be resisted by force during the obama administration. when there was the bundy ranch armed standsoff in nevada in 2014 with 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, he went off to cover it as a sort of journalist. he covered itof for his revolutn radio podcast thing. and at that standoff, he met the head of the oathkeepers group, and then he started attending and covering more of the events and standoffs and stunts where the oathkeepers showed up and eventually the leader of the oathkeepers and the other members of that group decided they likedot him enough and lik his way of talking about him enough that they put him on

theirgh payroll as the oathkeeps spokesman and in that role he produced lots and lots of videos and online content for next the videos and online content have been absolutely key to their ability to promote themselves and recruit new members. he spoke to the press on behalf of the group. he made all of these public statements. lionized their actions. he said thatse at the time, he thought that they were sort of pulling a hunteresque thompson and held's angels and he was in his mind, he was imbedded with the oathkeepers and he as a journalist doing that sort of imbedding with the group, he would ultimately produce a great novel, a great work of journalism about his time, you know, riding with the oathkeepers. that's what he says he thought at the time but he now realizes he was just behaving as their propaganda-ist. and even though he had broadly supporting them sympathetic, he

eventually got grossed out by them, white supremacists and neo nazis and holocaust deniers and liked to talk about that among themselves and for that and a number of reasons he ultimately left andmb recently part of a a abc documentary about what he did and why he now regrets it. >> my day consists of, you know, up, taking in the news, and k writing all day. >> hey, guys. jason van tatum of the oathkeepers here. >> i was doing it before then and something i believed. >> i have an important story that we need to get out there. the first time in our country's recent history that good americans stood up and said you know what, t we're not going to let this happen on our watch. shore to shore. . so best americans in this country. >> another video. >> yeah. >> do you remember that video? >> yes, i do. >> i got to own. it i was swept up. i was excited. and i was wrong.

>> and i was wrong. jason was the spokesman for the oathkeepers para-military group for about a year and a half two years, involved with the group fornd longer than that though, r years, involved to the point where the leader of the oathkeeper, stewart rhodes, the guy with the eye patch from the gun handling accident, he lived in jason's basement for eight monthsin and jason does a local podcast in colorado and it is amazing to hear him on his podcast, straight up, relaying the most recent news about january 6th, the investigation, and the criminal charges against these para-military tigroups, a then while he is doing his normal news podcast he has to mention, kind of like as a fair disclosure to his listeners that oh,ik yeah, that view we're talking about, that dude used to live in my basement. >> the new indictment now is the

second time that a far right group has beenhe 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? this guy has had unique access to these groups, which are an important part of what happened to our country when we came very close tohe violently losing the transition of power and violently losing the whole idea that elections ought to determine who the government is of the united states. so tomorrow, we'll hear from jason van tatenhove about the para-military group he was part of, as he was describing there on his podcast, members are under federal indictment for seditious conspiracy for attempting to overthrow thect u. government by force to. the extentti that the trump whi house was trying to use these para-military groups for that

purpose, trying to use them essentially as the physical force that would be needed to physically block the finalization of the election results, to physically intimidate the vice president and theel congress from finishi that job, well, to whatever extent that happened, to whatever extent these groups didn't just do it on their own but they wereth directed in tha effort, tomorrow we're going to hear the january 6th investigators lay out thatoi ca, and we know to expect live witness testimony from the former spokesperson for the oathkeepers who is now quite repentant about his time with the group, we may also hear from otherhi people who were actuall personally involved in the january 6th attack, we may also see more video tape than you might usually expect, in part, because by the latest count, i think there appeared to be not one, not two, not three, but maybe four separate documentary film makers who were involved with the main figures in the january 6th attack, up to and including the day of the attack. the most recent one just being

over the publicly weekend, yet another documentary crew was apparently shooting roger stone and his merry band of whatevers, during the lead-up to january 6th and on the day of. there's more tapery than you mit expect from your average criminal conspiracy, because they all hired film makers to follow them around and lionize their behavior inow those days. now, both roger stone on the left there and michael flynn on the right there, both of them were convicted of crimes during the trump administration, and then pardoned by trump. both of them are known to have used members of these pro-trump para-militaries, oathkeepers and the proud boys essentially as armee candy at trump rallies an in mr. stone's case on the day of the january 6th attack itself. there's no crime in decorating your entourage with dressed up fake soldiers because it makes you feel important. but to the extent that the presence of these groups with roger stone and with mike flynn,

up to and on the day of january 6th , indicate that the trump white house was in contact with those groups, and using those groups for the purposes of w trying to use force against the government, well, i mean using force to overthrow or stop the functions of the government, that is a crime. a very serious crime. that's sedition or seditious conspiracy, s right? and if you were part of directing those groups, aiming and pointing at aiming those groups that you knew would use force at your suggestion, if you were part of them deliberately suggesting that it was go time for them, that would mean that you would appear to have been involved in the crime, you would appear to be in on the conspiracy, for which members of both t oathkeepers and the proudbo boys are tonight sittin in jail waiting on felony charges that could keep them in prison for decades. so no pressure, the fact of tomorrow's hearing is that there

are already a whole bunch of guys about to be on trial for seditious conspiracy and tomorrow's question is as to whether or not the trump white house and other trump associates working on it with them, and should bear or potentially face the same criminal charges. now, i mentioned there might be more video tape tomorrow than we were otherwise expecting for your typical criminal conspiracy. part of the reason i think we should c be sort of ready for tt tomorrow is because of this, which we recently saw from "the new york times." hi, so what time is the whole political presidential situation happening that day, that, i don't know, i guess we're just going to have to, a lot of the questions are coming in about dc. we stillqu haven't formulated a plan for dc yet. >> we somewhat know. there's a lot of detailed information that i guess we got to go over, but yes, we will have a plan for dc. >> why is there tape of that?

apparently, the proud boys, pro-trump para-military group, recorded their video conference calls, which is the venue they chose for making their plans for washington, d.c. on january 6th. the plan for the whole political presidential situation happening that dayle with pence. this is the part where stringer bell says you are taking notes on a fricking criminal conspiracy? what you are thinking? i have no advanced knowledge as to what the january 6th investigators know and what they, don't but i'll inquire, last month that the proud boys para-military group not only recorded their video planning sessions for january 6th but at least one of the recordings was seized from the phone of the group's leader, by the fbi, this year, in 2022. quote, and a copy was recently obtained by the a times. so these big brains in this pro-trump fascist group, first

of all, decided to do their organizingou on video conferenc andor then they made recordingsf those planning sessions, which is amazing, then their leader guy kept the recordings for at least a year after the capitol attack. he then had them seized by the fbi, and also, they have made their way to at least one reporter who was able to publish pieces of them at "the new york times." so yeah, like i said, i don't know exactly what the january 6th investigation has but it's got to be a help to have guys like this right in the middle of your criminal conspiracy. i mean you pray in investigations of all kinds for targets like this. did you literally leave bread crumbs, too? that's why the leadership of both of these pro-trump armed fascist groups are about to be put on trial for sedition. part of the way you're able to

put somebody on trial for a crime that serious is when they lay out and make records of everything they've done. the question we will get at tomorrow, though, is not just about what they did, but about who else might have been in on what they did. sedition, seditious conspiracy is using force to try to stop or overthrow the government. the justice department we know because they have indicted, they believe they have the goods to successfully prosecute multiple members of these para-military groups for doing that. but if other people, people without bin laden beards, people without neck tattoos, were knowingly setting these guys to that cause, knowingly triggering them to go do it, well, those people who aimed and fired these para-military groups at the u.s. capital knowing what they were capable of and knowing what they intended, well, in that case, those people, the people in theh suits, would be equally implicated in a seditious conspiracy to use force to overthrow the unlawful functions

of the u.s. government. and now we know from the member of the january 6th investigation who will lead tomorrow's hearing, now we know from him, that the january 6 investigators believe they have figured out that in fact, someone did that, and tomorrow they are going to show the evidence of what he did. >> donald trump was of course the central figure who set everything into motion. hefi was the person who identifd january 6 as the date for the big protest, and he announced that in his tweet in the middle of night, on december 19th after a crazy meeting, one that has been described as the19 crazies meeting in the entire trump presidency, and then just an hour or two later, donald trump sent out the tweet that would be heard around the world, the first time in american history when a 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 going to hear the story of that tweet and thee. explosive effect it had in trump world and specifically among the domestic violent extremist group, the most dangerous political extremists in the country at that point. >> explosive effects that trump statement had specifically among the domestic violent extremist group, the most dangerous political extremists 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, stephanie murphy of florida, the two leaders of the hearingor tomorrow, congressman raskin this weekend on cbs saying effectively that president trump set them off,

pulled their trigger. and you know, we've got a lot of get to tonight. there's a lot going on. a lot of news. but i just, as we look ahead to the hearing tomorrow night, i want to just close by making one last point. because it's me. it's a two-part point. but it is one point. and it's about what is getting attention ahead of this hearing tomorrow. i think it is one thing that is getting way too much attention ahead of tomorrow's hearing, it is sort of prurient interest but substantively not that important, and save brain space, and who should i focus on and what should i ignore and a ton of noise and it deserves little attention and wipe that part of the hard drive. and there is something that is not nearly getting enough attention and what we should look out for and what should be more important e here, we will treat it in more detail tonight.

the less important, the not at all important thing is named steve bannon. i know mr. bannon has been all the last day for or two, lots of headline, many pixels, many newsy-ish headlines about steve bannon and so much thatin you might think he matte to the january 6 investigation and what happens tomorrow and i honestly think in this case the noise about him shouldn't distract you. what is going on with him and why hest is getting all this prs is actually very simple. not that complicated. it doesn't take that long to explain. steve bannon got a subpoena to testify toai the january 6th investigation, a subpoena is a legally-binding thing. it is notve an invitation. it is a legal summons. you can't ignore. it he ignored. he denounce t he put on a red facede show and yelled to tv cameras and i'm sure he enjoyed it but that is not a legal response. a subpoena is a binding thing. you have to respond to it. he claimed the reason he was

defying the subpoena was executive privilege, that president trump had a right to his counsel and he couldn't violate his sanctity of his advice as an official adviser to the president. legally speaking that is a pile of cornid nuts. 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, the former president has to assert the executive privilege, it's not clear that that ever happened here and alsoe, what you're t supposed to do is respd to the subpoena, honor the subpoena, sit down, hear the questions they're going to ask you, 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,no they wanted to ask him about is 2020 and 2021. in 2020 and 2021, steve bannon was a podcastor. not a presidential adviser.

he was a podcaster. and nothing against podcaster, some of my best friends, right, but did not work in the white house or for thet government i any capacity and had not for time he did this stuff that the investigators wanted to ask him about. it would be like bill clinton getting on board your jet blue flight to denver today and saying hey, everybody, you all need to get out of here because i am on this plane, it's now air force one, and so you're all not cleared to be here, you have to go. that's not howea it works, righ? you would be like hey, that's bill clinton on my jet blue flight, nis to meet you, but also sit down, this is jet blue and we're not leaving, this isn't just air force one just becauseg, you're out of that. that part of your life is over. that's not how this works. it's not how this works. either for former presidents or former presidential visors who now have sad podcasts sponsored by the my pillow guy. there is no executive privilege

that attends anything steve bannon did as a podcaster. didn't even, i mean they're in the law book, this wouldn't be something that you would be able to look up in the index. this is irrelevant. and somebody asks me a coke or a pepsi and you say i would love a fruit rollup. completely irrelevant. steve bannon defied a legal subpoena in a way that was not legal. it was not even a close approximation of legal. so the u.s. justice department is prosecuting him for doing that. the reason he has been getting all of this press the past couple of days because his criminal trial is about to start for that. he is facing up to two years in prison and 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 n now relead him from the bonds of executive privilege so he now would like to testify, please. now, right before his trial is supposed to start in federal court. and he's doing this because he's trying to derail this trial. and the reason we know that none of this matters is because

today, the federal judge hearing steve bannon's case laughed it all out of the courtroom. the bannon criminal trial is not derailed. bannon has not succeeded in using thisba tactic to delay th trial past the scheduled start date which remains one week frot today. and oh, by the way prosecutors disclosed to the court today that the fbi interviewed trump's lawyer and trump's lawyer clarified to them, trump never tried to assert executive privilege when it comes to steve bannon, ergo, the whole thing was madenn up. so there is no drama around the january 6 investigation and steve bannon other than the fact that steve bannonio may now go 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 to the committee. 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 coveringes mr. bannon's every stunt, but he doesn't matter in the larger 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 substantively deserves, i think the thing that does deserve more attention ahead of tomorrow's hearing is the grenades. the military ordnance 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. that's next. en source reporting that stuff actually is important. that's next.

ar 15s, shotguns, tons of pistols, semi-automatic handguns, bear spray, chemical spray, stun gun, flag poles, spears, flag poles made into spears, clubs, collapsible batons, bullet proof vests, cross bows, ma shesty, machetes,

and bullets, and mason jars filled with gasoline and styrofoam, do it yourself napalm packed together in that tight space, hit any speed bumps along the way? on friday, just a few days ago, the "washington post" did a public service, they sent several reporters to pull from court filings and public reporting all of the different weapons we now know were at the capitol on january 6th in the hands of the pro-trump mob. the post reported on 121 people ultimately charged with using or carrying dangerous weapons that day. that reporting of course follows testimony from white house staffer cassidy hutchinson that not only was president trump warned early on january 6th that the crowds near the capitol were quite heavily armed but the people choosing to go through the metal detectors had tons of weapons confiscated from them already that he was warned that the people choosing not to go through the metal detecters were choosing to avoid them, choosing to go through magnetometers 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. because whoever they wanted to use those weapons against, he figured it wasn't him. >> the president said something to the effect of, i don't care that they have weapons, they're not here to hurt me, take the f'ing mags away, let me people in. >> and then we'll go to the capitol. 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 into the context of a whole burst of new news about just how armed the crowd was on january 6. i mean 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, i mean in addition to that "washington post" reporting, which is a real public service, on friday, from the justice department, we also got an update in the seditious conspiracy case against the leaders of the oathkeepers. and alleged members of that group. u.s. prosecutors laid out a series of revelations about weapons they say those individuals had brought with them to dc on january 6th. the government has evidence that members of the group from florida and arizona allegedly staged semi-automatic rifls and other weapons in a suburban washington hotel and a vehicle in the parking lot and another member of the group came to washington with explosives in his recreational vehicle which he left parked in college park maryland. the government later seized from that rv quote military ordnance grenades. he had them in his rv which he had used to travel to dc on january 6. all of that is information i

think it is worth noting, that is all information 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 job of the investigators? how does it change the stakes? well, joining us now is somebody in a unique position to be able to talk about that, barry burke, counsel to the house judiciary committee during the first impeachment, about ukraine and lead counsel in the second impeachment which is the line about january 6. mr. burke, a pleasure to have you with us tonight. thank you for taking the time. >> thank you, rachel. great to be here. >> is it fair to say that when trump was impeached for the january 6 attack, again for which you were lead counsel, is it fair to say that it wasn't yet clear at that time just how many weapons were among the mob

that day, and how many weapons or types of weapons they had brought to dc let alone the fact that trump was aware of how armed they were? >> that is all true. this is so much more direct evidence that supports everything we were saying during the impeachment, seeking to prove and all of the circumstantial evidence evidence that we thought proved it and it shows the lies to trump's defenses. you may remember during the impeachment, we had him saying to the proud boys, stand back and stand by, december 19th, the tweet, you know, big protest in washington, d.c. on january 6. it will be wild. and we have all of the other evidence. what this shows is that everything we were saying was true and then some. of course he was summoning these violent domestic extremist groups and should have known and would have known that they were violent, when they stood up there, he knew the crowd that he was encouraging, he had received the warnings. cassidy hutchinson's testimony was so great because it explained what preceded it and what followed. he knew they had guns but didn't

care because they weren't seeking to shoot him. all of these folks came prepare and even more evidence that because they were told the election was stolen and summon thered and i remember from the second impeachment and one of the most chilling piece of film, the people who raided and told the police, we are here because the president told us to come here and invited us and that's what they believe and that's why he is singularly responsible. it is new evidence. it is powerful. further proof of his responsibility for everything that happened. and that january 6 was the culmination of his attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power after all his other efforts had failed. >> now, in terms of the relationship between these pro-trump fascist para-military groups, and members of which have been charged with seditious conspiracy, and the culpability of the president, congressman raskin who will co-lead the hearing, on the second impeachment, he has said

tomorrow's hearing is not going to be about showing explicit evidence that trump, you know, approved directly of the para-military groups plans or that he told them to draw up plans like that, he said that isn't what they're setting out to prove, they're setting out to prove what he described as a convergence of trump's efforts and what the para-military groups are willing to do with weapons and with violence. can you help us understand what that, what that means, he's not talking about their being coincidentally pursuing the same idea, he is talking about 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, say she heard proud boys, oathkeepers mentioned in connection with january 6. they knew, they were warned there was going to be violence. they knew and he was warned not to use the words to encourage the crowd to fight. and yet he sent out the december

19th tweet telling them to be there and be wild. he knew they were coming. and they are not going to say he had direct conversations with the oathkeepers or the proud boys but it was 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 d.o.j. officials to say, just say there's fraud, and he'll take care of the rest. it was clear that these efforts were part of that broader scheme. so i think with jamie, who is the best was trying to say, they may not need to know show and they will show direct indications 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, to interfere with the work of congress, and he shouldn't have 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 para-military trained fascist groups, you know, just another day at the office. >> i was going to say it is so important because it adds the violence to it that he knew and that's something that the american people can understand, the violent overthrow of government is something that we've never seen, let alone by a president of the united states. so to see those efforts i think really speaks volumes and will be a continuation of that tomorrow at the hearings. >> barry berke, lead counsel for the second impeachment on these matters, thank you for setting the stage for tomorrow, great to have you here. >> thank you. we've got much more, much more to come yet tonight. stay with us. muc cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have $100,000 or more of life

insurance, you may qualify to more to come yet tonight stay with usrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.

i know there's conflicting information about dupuytren's contracture. i thought i couldn't get treatment yet? well, people may think that their contracture has to be severe to be treated, but it doesn't. if you can't lay your hand flat on the table,

talk to a hand specialist. but what if i don't want surgery? well, then you should find a hand specialist certified to offer nonsurgical treatments. what's the next step? visit findahandspecialist.com today to get started. 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 that they would be launching a fleet of mobile clinics to park just over the border from states with abortion bans, and from those mobile clinics, this we have provider does consultations for medication abortions, dispensing pills, as well as providing surgical abortions for parents

who need that or -- for patients who need that or prefer that or too far along in their pregnancy for a medication abortion. the first has been deployed 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 bullet proof. these vehicles, these mobile clinics thus equipped take about 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's one on the ground response to the overturning of roe v. wade. put abortion clinics on wheels an drive them to state borders to be as close as to be to women in these states where abortions are now banned. there is another doctor who lacked at a map and realized that the women in certain places like the deep south and south texas, there is a place that is

much closer than the nearest state where abortion could still be legal and that nearest place would be the sea. the ocean. the gulf of mexico. dr. meg autry is an ob-gyn, a professor at the university of california at san francisco and plans to launch a floating abortion and reproductive health care clinic in federal waters in the gulf of mexico. a few miles off the coast, and therefore, a few miles out of reach of repressive state laws. the idea is for many women in texas, louisiana, alabama, mississippi, it might be easier and closer and cheaper to get to a boat, 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 dr. aurty needs a boat to be able to make this happen but as sort of pie in the sky and crazy as this idea might sound at first blush, there is

salient and extensive experience of doing this sort of thing for women seeking abortions. a couple of weeks ago we spoke with dr. rebecca, a dutch doctor who has spent decades figuring out innovative ways to get abortion services to women in countries where abortion is illegal. her organization, women on waves has spent years providing abortions on ships, floating in international waters. and the work that she has been doing globally figuring out how to get one, abortion services where countries 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. on that thought, we'll be right back with more. is illegal. on tha t thought, we'll be right back with more

away things. fit together with away things. ♪ ♪ that's our thing. ♪ ♪

it's the sort of thing that would be almost unthinkable before a couple of weeks ago. it would sound a little crazy. but here's the headline. 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, desperate times call for desperate measures and this is one of them. one doctor in california is making the pretty well-grounded geographical argument at least that the gulf of mexico, the federal waters in the gulf of mexico, outside the reach of republican-controlled states with abortion bans, those waters may be the closest safe place tore many american women in the deep south and south texas who need access to abortion care.

joining us now is dr. meg autry, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at university of california san francisco. i appreciate you making time to be with us tonight. thank you. >> thank you so much for having me. >> am i explaining, the basics of it correctly and is there any important nuance that i'm missing here? >> no, i think you pretty much got it. it is, i think the, 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 wherever they want it, and this is serving a portion of our population that in these restricted states that are potentially unable to access those resources. >> how daunting are the logistics of what you are proposing, what you're trying to do? obviously there is the matter of acquiring a vote and getting it properly equipped and staffed and all that, but it seems to me

as somebody totally ignorant how something like this would work, there is also the very serious challenge of how you get women out to the facility that you're going to have to have several miles offshore, how you handle follow-up care and things like that, to the extent that that's needed, you can talk to us a little bit about what is most daunting and what feels most doable about those logistics? >> so the most daunting part is all speaks of this are incredibly daunting, and so although we're just going public, we've done an extensive amount of research and detail looking at this option. and what seems to be the best way to go about it. both logistically, from a security standpoint, from a legal standpoint. what is most doable is we have, we know that the majority of our country doesn't believe in what is happening, and that we, we must have bodily autonomy, and because of that, we have an

amazing amount of incredible people that you have already talked to about in your show that are determined to improve or create access for individuals who don't have it. >> is this plan, is this project based at all off the kinds of similar work that has happened internationally? we had a doctor on the show, talking about her international experience in other countries where abortion has been illegal. have you, is this consciously based on that, are you informed at all during her experience in other countries? >> so i came up with the idea completely separately, but was quickly alerted to the doctor's efforts and have spoken to her. so it is a little bit different. she, as you know, had women on waves, which was on international waters, off the coast of ireland, and my understanding focused mostly on medical abortions. so it's federal waters in the u.s., and different legal and

different security issues, but very similar, and she was, she is a visionary, a pioneer, and she was incredibly helpful in giving me advice going forward. >> dr. meg autry, professor of obstetrics and gynecology ucsf, extreme and extremely necessary idea and i think it has caught a lot of people's imaginations because it is so mind blowing that this is the sort of thing that might be needed but you're working to do it practically and we would be interested to hearing from you as you start putting together the funds and the logistics to make it happen. please come back. >> thank you very much. >> thanks for your time tonight. we'll be right back. stay with us. s for your time to. we'll be right back. stay with us

every search you make, every click you take, every move you make, every step you take, i'll be watching you. the internet doesn't have to be duckduckgo is a free all in one privacy app with a built in search engine,

web browser, one click data clearing and more stop companies like google from watching you, by downloading the app today. duckduckgo: privacy, simplified.

the past six and a half month the most powerful telescope in the history of the worl has been on the one million mile mission to look at the very first galaxies and stars ever formed. tonight, we finally got to see the first full color full resolution image, a first image from that telescope. it's 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 the

universe itself, over 13 billion years old. tomorrow at 10:30 a.m. eastern, nasa will unveil more photos from the telescope, that's the first one. watch this space. i'll see you back here again tomorrow. 8:00 eastern for the prime time rae cap of tomorrow's january 6 hearing. s january 6 hearing. a live picture from capitol hill as the public hearings into january 6 resume today. as the committee prepares to tie the trump white house to the extremist groups that led the attack. we'll tell you what more to expect. and we'll have the latest from ukraine, amid reports that iran is now supplying russia with weapons. we're also following the latest on that search for survivors in the apartment building collapse over the weekend. and concerns for republicans aheads of the midterms of the environment seems right for the gop to take control of the senate but we'll