so, it's not like the rubber band can stretch forever. the question now, in georgia is, how far can a stretch and that's what we will be watching. jelani cobb, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> that is all in on this tuesday night. msnbc prime starts right now with ayman mohyeldin, good evening, amen. ighey, good evening to you, chris. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. you probably won't hear him talk this way again. but, i want to play this for you. this was with the top house republican, kevin mccarthy said on live television back on january six, 2021, as the attack on the capital was unfolding in realtime. >> i've spoken to the president. i asked him to talk to the nation, and don't stop this. i told him we need to talk to the nation. i told him what was happening right then. i was very clear with the president when i called him. this has to stop. he's gotta go to the american public and tell them to stop it. >> he has to go to the american

public and stop this. kevin mccarthy was not the only republican calling on donald trump to put an end to the violence on that day. in fact, we have learned that at least 11 other republican members of congress reach out to the white house, or at least made some kind of public statement that day to implore the president to do something. to do anything to stop the violence. in fact, his eldest son, don jr., texted then white house chief of staff, mark meadows saying, he's got to condemn this asap. the capitol police tweet is not enough. and he has to lead now. it is gone too far. it is gotten out of hand. three different fox news host, sean hannity, laura ingraham, john -- all of them texted meadows saying trump needed to make a statement telling people to leave. that is what we know is happening outside of the white house during the 187 minutes from trump's speech on the

ellipse, urging supporters to fight like hell. and when he finally released a video telling the rioters quote, go home, we love you. you are very special. what we still don't know, is what was happening inside the white house at that time. and we have learned some details about what was going on around the president that day, from former white house staffer, cassidy hutchison. but it looks like we are about to learn a whole lot more. because on thursday, the january 6th investigation is about to hold its next hearing to discuss what happened inside trump's white house during those crucial 187 minutes. nearly three hours. and today we learned that committee chairman bennie thompson has tested positive for covid, the committee says the hearing will go on without him. the live witnesses at thursday's hearing will be to former white house staffers. sarah matthews and deputy

national security adviser, matthew pottinger, who both resigned, by the way, from the trump white house on that day. we don't know exactly what they plan on saying. but we have gotten a preview of what their testimony might look like from deposition played at previous hearings in the committee. in fact, here is with thursdays witnesses told the committee about the key moment when donald trump decided to ignore the ongoing and violent attack on the capitol. and instead, tweeted out about how his vice president, mike pence quote, didn't have the courage to do what needed to be done. >> we had all talked about at that point, about how it was bad. and, you know, the situation was getting out of hand. we thought the president needed to tweet something. and tweet something immediately. then i remember getting a notification on my phone. we all got a notification. so, we knew it was a tweet from the president.

and we looked down. and it was a tweet about mike pence. >> one of my staff brought me a print out of i tweet by the president. and the tweet said something to the effect of, my friends, the vice president, didn't have the courage to do what should have been done. i read that tweet. and i made a decision at that moment to resign. that is where i knew that i was leaving that day, once i read that tweet. >> those are the two witnesses that we will hear from on thursday, and what was supposed to be the final january six hearing. and i say supposed to hear, to be the final one. because the january 6th investigation now appears to be

contemplating holding additional hearings, surrounding the release of a report comes september. here is how political described today. as new material pours in and a potential second round of hearings get slated for the fall, this week looks more like a season finale then a serious ender. today we got new information about the unfolding scandal around text messages sent by the secret service on january 6th. text messages that were erased after they were requested by congress and a government watchdog. today was the deadline for the secret service to hand those messages over to the january six committee. these missing text messages which could conceivably shed light on trump's actions, movement that day. and either support or -- rebuke catch city hutchinson's testimony that trump got into a heated argument with a secret service detail, and demanded he be driven to the capitol. those text messages could give insight into mike pence's interaction with his security

detail. and the vice presidents refusal to get into his armored limousine and evacuate the capital. but the secret service has determined it has no new text messages to turn over to the committee, believe it or not. and anything it has not already turned over, has in all likelihood been erased. following what it described as a routine pre-schedule technology upgrades. and the secret service in from the january six committee that it was still attempting a forensic search for the text this morning. but that they were probably not recover-able. now the national archives opened its own investigation into this matter. you may remember the national archives is already investigating the troves of sensitive white house document that somehow wound up in trump's florida home after his presidency. the national archives is now also demanding that the secret service start providing answers about the troves of deleted text messages from the days around the capitol attack.

the archives is giving the secret service 30 days to provide answers about how and why these messages were deleted and not backed up. so with new information, new investigations popping up almost every day, the big question is, what should we expect to see next? joining us now is political congressional reporter for, nicholas wu, nicholas, thank you so much for joining. us i should know you are one of the reporters byline on the story about the national archives, demanding answers from the secret service. what can you tell us about that? and what does the national archive hope to get the congress can't? >> archives, you remember, is the caretaker of all these records for the federal government. and the fact that they've taken an interest in this particular matter goes to show they think something is up. potentially with the disappearance of these messages. that's why, as we reported today, the archives under federal law notify the secret

service they had 30 days to tell them what happened to these messages. and if they were improperly did need, it just wine how that happened. as we reported in that story, the secret service told us they actually do still have all these phones. despite the story and reporting of throwing away as part of the device replacement program. they are going to try to recover them from the phones. but there wasn't a lot of hope they would be able to do so. >> what has your reporting indicated about the committees reaction so far to today's news? have they given any kind of reaction behind the scenes to how all of this is playing out? >> committee members are mostly tightlipped about it when we asked about it today. although, we can expect some kind of response from them in the coming days. especially as they process this information. we know the committee is taking an interest in this aspect of this investigation. because of what we mentioned

earlier. what secret service might be able to talk to about trump that day. what -- the protection of the vice president. and also the secret services protection of then vice president kamala harris, who you will remember, was at the dnc as the pipe bomb threat was discovered. and as she was protected by the secret service. this is all part and parcel of how the january six committee is trying to put all this together. >> one of the interesting points was that early on in this process, nicholas, the committee actually manages subpoena the phone records directly from phone companies. is there any reason to believe they could do the same to retrieve these text messages? or are secret service communications on a completely different system that's not subject to these types of subpoenas? >> it's a little more unlikely they'd be able to get the messages from the phone companies. basically, early on, the

subpoenas went out for the phone records from individuals -- in the investigation. -- they were seeking messages. they solely want to records. partly because of the legal concerns that try -- to go over the messages themselves would be. and that is why a lot of the messages that we have seen so far presenting hearings, it came from former white house chief of staff, mark meadows, for example. the secret service, it's a famously opaque agency. i try doing a foyer of the secret service -- including messages. but i got basically nothing. >> you and your colleague, kyle cheney, nicholas, you reported that committee in fact has extended its timeline for the investigations. we were under the impression

that they were trying to wrap it up. you write in part, quote, the only hard deadline they say a january 3rd, 2023, when republicans likely take over the house. do you expect there will be more hearings to present new evidence? or are we just expecting more hearings later in the year when they release their final report? >> you can definitely expect hearings around the release of the final report. members of talked about that for sometime. whether or not they will do more in the interim, i think it depends on what evidence comes forth. cassidy hutchinson testimony, you remember, -- committee members i've talked to have reserve the right, basically, to do something like that again. if evidence of that magnitude were to emerge. if you had another cassidy hutchison of a witness. >> looking ahead to tomorrow, two important notes. it's happening in primetime, expect a large audience, that's to tell us something.

have your sources, nicholas, on the committee, giving you a sense of what we should expect in thursday's hearing, given the platform that it is going to be held in? and what's new information might these two witnesses have? >> with regard to the witnesses, congresswoman -- one of the two lawmakers, was asked about the witnesses stand. she said -- and also, matthew pottinger, former security official -- would be able to talk to how he was believing in the work he was doing in the trump white house. but he did not -- for sarah matthews, she would be able to speak to what was going on in the white house at the time. we could expect the committee to use them to try to piece together these remaining bits. what exactly was happening in the white house during the roughly three hours from beginning until trump told the rioters to leave. but moving into the bigger picture, what's the committee

is likely to do at this hearing is try to get into trump's mind at the time of the attack. committee members stress how they really want to figure out what exactly was in trump's mind as he, for example, put out his tweet, attacking mike pence. what -- when did the white house figure out that there was violence going on? when did the white house know the capitol was breached? we can access -- expect them to try to fill in the blanks tomorrow. >> we will find out, i apologize, i said tomorrow. and you think tomorrow. but it's actually thursday, on prime time. i know the news days are all blending in together these days, nicholas. apologies on that. thank you so much, my friend. it's good to see you, political congressional reporter, nicholas wu, thank you for your time tonight. >> as the house select committee prepares for what could be the most important hearing on the january 6th attack today, federal prosecutors open their criminal case in the trial of trump's former chief of -- chief strategist, excuse me,

steve vanished. bannon, as you may recall, was indicted last year on two counts of contempt of congress for defying a subpoena issued by the january six committee. doj lawyer amanda vance said during her opening statement that bannon defied the order from congress because, he decided that he was above the law. the defendant prevented the government from getting the important information that needed about what happened on january 6th and how to make sure it didn't happen again, she said. that, ladies and gentlemen, ignoring a legal order, a subpoena from the united states government, from congress, that is a crime. ben employer said his client didn't comply with the subpoenas because he understood the dates referred by the committee to be subject to negotiation, and quote, flexible. if convicted, bannon could face up to one year in prison for each of the two counts he faces. up to two years. and also today, we learned that fulton county district attorney,

fani willis, investigating trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election in georgia is now officially informed all of the 16 republicans who served this fake electors for trump in that state, that they are now considered targets of her investigation. meaning they could actually face criminal charges for their actions. willis's determination was made clear in a court filing that she introduced, contesting a legal effort by the republican state senator, bird jones, who was trying to disqualify her from leading this probe. jones, a fake elector, we should note, who was currently running for -- is one of the targets. and as if that wasn't enough news for one day, today deputy attorney lisa monaco said at a cybersecurity conference in new york, the justice department's investigation into efforts by trump and his allies to overturn the 2020 election won't be deterred if the former president declares his

intention to run again, this is important to emphasize here. this comes really in the wake of some significant and multiple reports suggesting trump might soon declare his intention to run again in 2024, in an attempt to shield himself from prosecution. monica's remarks also came of course just hours after rachael, here on the show last night presented a copy of a memorandum attorney general merrick garland sent to all justice department -- back in may saying specifically that in essence, no one was allowed to investigate anyone connected to a presidential candidate without his expressed permission. joining us now is former u.s. eternity from the norm or -- northern district of alabama, and co-host of the -- podcast. let me start by getting your reaction to deputy attorney generals lisa macaque -- monaco saying today would i think a lot of people want to see here in no. the doj will continue to

investigate trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election, whether the former president runs in 2024 are not. how reassuring is that statement? 2024 a re not how >> so, i find it to be very reassuring. i think that this is a reaffirm meant of the speech the attorney general made on january five, when he said that the justice department would follow the evidence and chase the facts no matter who is implicated, no matter how high up they were. and i took that at the time as a clear statement that the department would not flinch if it turned out to be the case that the former president was implicated for criminal conduct. i hear the deputy attorney general statement today is being a reaffirm inside of that, a commitment that no matter what the former presidents status becomes as a candidate, that doj will continue the work it has begun. >> let me switch gears to the other big news today. steve bannon's lawyers arguing

today that because they were in contact with the january 6th committee, bannon understood the dates of his subpoena and his deposition to be, quote, flexible. do you buy that as an argument? what should we make of that? >> i think the more important question is whether the jury will buy it. prosecutors did a great job of setting this up in their opening statements today. they clarified for the jury what this case is about. it is about someone who set himself up above the law and decided he did not have to comply with the subpoena. prosecutors will show the jury that subpoena. it will be for a date certain. it won't have anything to do with ongoing negotiations after the date for testimony has passed. and hopefully prosecutors will convince the jury that that subpoena means precisely what it says, that bannon, like any other witness in front of a grand jury or congressional proceeding, was required to show up when his testimony was called for.

>> i feel like i ask you this question almost every time i speak to you. but you said today that you are hoping to see trump face the same kind of justice bannon is facing here. how likely is it that we are going to see attorney general merrick garland, during his tenure, file some kind of charge against donald trump for his role in the 2020 attempt to overturn our election? >> this is the question that we all struggle with. and you and i have talked about this a lot. the problem that we faces a country is the fact that the former president seems to have a real knack for alluding accountability. committing acts of obstruction while he was the president, former business dealings -- he seems to be very tough on [inaudible] when it seems to be being held accountable. it seems clear to -- i think that's why we are all frankly a little bit jaded, as we look at the investigation that it is increasingly clear that the justice department is

conducting, the evidence that the january 6th committee is presenting on an ongoing, on a rolling basis, makes it more and more incumbent upon the justice department to act. and although none of us knows where doj will land and what the future holds, it seems to me that we are watching them amp up their presence, amp up the information that they are gathering, and this evidence increasingly leads to only one conclusion. and that is that the former president engaged in criminal conduct around the big lie on january 6th. it's doj's job to hold him accountable. i have to believe that we still live in a country where that is possible. >> last night, i'm sure you heard rachael show a copy of an election sensitivities member that garland sent to doj, back in may, pretty much saying that no one is allowed to investigate anyone connected to a presidential candidate without his permission. i know you have thoughts on this. what might they be?

>> so i think it's really understandable that seeing a bar memo being carried over into this administration would raise alarm. but i don't have that level of concern around this memo. career prosecutors know that if you want to open any investigation of this nature, you've already got to go through something called the public integrity unit, up in main justice in washington d.c., for prior permission and approval. and that's not just a check the box kind of approval. it's important for prosecutors and the folks in main justice to have a back and forth, to talk about the evidence, to make sure that allegations are really providing a strong basis for opening the case. so, what this memo does is, it's actually more protective of candidates and campaigns. there is no political bias in this memo. it simply adds to those already existing requirements. the requirement that the attorney general be in the loop and that he or she as well have the ability to look over the

evidence -- and that's at the point where a case is being opened, that they were involved in that decision-making process. it seems to me that this is more restoration of rule of law and doj's back to business as usual than anything else. i have heard folks say that, well, this sort of a memo could be used by a future attorney general who is not as scrupulous as merrick garland, in a really bad, malicious way. and while lather is true, if we have an attorney general in the future who is inclined to behave, whether this memo is in place or not, they will certainly do what they are intent upon doing. for now, this signals to me, as someone who has been involved in over 25 years at doj, with this sort of ongoing election work, that the commitment remains in place that doj's job is not to interfere with elections. doj conducts its investigations in a way that is respectful of american voters right to determine the outcome of elections.

and you will remember, ayman, that one of the real problems at the end of the trump administration was trump trying to corrupt doj. and go into the acting attorney general, rosen, who told him persistently, there is no fraud here, and trump said, just say that there is corruption and i will take it from there. they are worried if there is really evidence. you just say and i will keep going. this is the kind of memo that keeps the president from corrupting doj in that sense. it keeps a president from going to some sort of rogue actors. this is, i think, ultimately good. but doj has a lot of work to do when it comes to helping the public we gain confidence in their operations and explaining the processes that they go through so that we can have that confidence. >> former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama and co-hosts of the sisters in law podcast. joyce white vance, with that clear eyed -- joyce, thank you so much. democrats in congress today

went on the offensive enforce republicans to go on the record with her stance opposing the majority of americans views on key issues. oh, and in a related story, more than a dozen members of congress were arrested today, we will tell you about that next. will tell you about tha next the features you need, and none of the hassle. i use lively hearing aids and it's been wonderful. it's so light and so small and it's been wonderful. you take the hearing test online, the doctor programs in the settings. you don't even need to go into an office. they're delivered to your door in a few days and you're up and running in no time. it connects via bluetooth to my phone. you can stream music and you can answer phone calls. the audiologist was so incredible she's full of all kinds of little helpful hints i love it. they're a game changer for me. i feel like i can take on anything. it feels great to be in control of my hearing.

better hearing has never been this easy. >> our our guy, the dark try lively risk-free for 100 days. visit listenlively.com

body, our. choice our body our choice. our body our choice. >> you are currently participating in illegal

demonstration activity. cease and desist or you will be arrested. >> earlier today, more than a dozen members of congress you saw there marched from the u.s. capitol building to the supreme court. joining a crowd of demonstrators protesting against the abortion ban states are enforcing since the supreme court overturned roe last month. after officers warned the protesters, as you heard in that video, including members of congress to cease and desist, those lawmakers sat down, in the middle of the street. chanting, we won't go back. and at that, point police began to make arrests. they arrested a toll of 35 protesters, including 17 members of congress. democrats like congresswoman barbara lee, carolyn maloney, alexandria ocasio-cortez, elaine omar, and it doesn't others were escorted out one by one. this comes just days after the house passed two bills that aimed at protecting women's autonomy and their right to abortion. one bill codified roe into law,

and the other protected the right to interstate travel to seek an abortion. and the bills, though, are not expected to pass the evenly split senate. but despite all of the legislative roadblocks, democrats are trying, and the key word or trying, to find ways to do something to protect the fundamental rights that are under threat. and also put republicans on record opposing them. in response to the concurring opinion, justice clarence thomas wrote last month calling into question the right to same sex marriage. congress voted today to codify the right to same sex marriage, and interracial marriage with the respect for marriage at. the bill passed with bipartisan support, 47 republicans joined all democrats in voting yes. despite that broad support and the very clear language in justice thomas's concurring opinion, some republicans, like congressman mike johnston, and jim jordan, they actually called the bill unnecessary. and superfluous. this is how congressman jason

david cicilline, one of the co-sponsors of the marriage bill responded. >> and to mr. jordan's suggestion that this is not necessary, tell that to the millions of lgbtq families that are worried about the supreme court's intention to rip away more freedoms. they've taken away the freedom to reproductive care, they've hinted at takeaway contraceptive. justice thomas urgings look at marriage equality. this is real for families. >> and there is more coming tomorrow. the house judiciary committee will mark off a bill that will ban assault weapons, for the first time since the federal assault weapons ban expired back in 2004. if that bill passes committee, it can go to the house floor. so in this moment, with many items on the democratic agenda, stymied in congress, there are plenty of questions about what dems can do and should do with the limited power they have to get things fast. this weeks we are seeing democrats and congress pushing

to do something. one of the leading democrats involved in putting these bills on the floor and putting republicans on the record, on these key issues, joins me next. y issues, joins me next next

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.

seen this ad? ask your neurologist it's not paid for by california tribes. it's paid for by the out of state gambling corporations that wrote prop 27. it doesn't tell you 90% of the profits go to the out of state corporations. a tiny share goes to the homeless, and even less to tribes. and a big loophole says, costs to promote betting reduce money for the tribes, so they get less. hidden agendas. fine print. loopholes. prop 27. they didn't write it for the tribes or the homeless. tomorrow, the house judiciary they wrote it for themselves. committee will consider the first assault weapons ban put before congress a decade. this bill would ban the sale, transfer, import and

manufacturer, -- manufacture several models of several semi automatic weapons. it has a chance of making its way to the house floor. joining us now is the congressman who cosponsored that bill, congressman david cicilline -- who sits on the judiciary committee. he also chairs the congressional lgbtq+ equality caucus. congressman cicilline, thank you so much for joining us tonight. you are taking a step towards giving an assault weapons ban passed in the house for the first time in decades, that should be commended. democrats in the house had been very busy passing other legislation to protect the rights of things like marriage, and abortion. my question to you tonight sir, is which you say to people who might claim the legislative work for the democrats are doing in the house is symbolically important, but is not enough considering the inability to actually pass the legislation in the senate. >> thank you for having me on tonight. look, the house is going to continue to do its work. we have been very focused on a whole range of issues, right

driving down the cost of working families, addressing the climate issues, addressing the surge of gun violence, making sure people have rights to marry, and to contraception. we have a lot of legislation which is pending in the senate. and we are always challenged by the rules of the senate that require ten republican to join us in this work. but the house democrats will continue to do what we do. and that's deliver for the american people, -- before the congress vote and pass excellent bills and get them to the senate. we are responsible for our, work they are responsible for their. and if this -- if we're only gonna pass things we know the senate will pass, many of us feel like we should go home. because we have so many great pieces of legislation that are languishing in the senate. we are going to -- continue to respond to the urgent -- of the american people. -- good infrastructure bills, gun safety bill, and we will expect the senate to do the work as well. >> that is fair enough.

i think that's a very valid point, the division of labor between the house and senate. but even if the senate does not have the votes to pass the bills, that the house is passing, is it important? do you think it is important to proceed and put the votes on the record? >> absolutely. look, these votes matter because we are fighting to protect our constituents from gun violence. we are fighting to protect our constituents ability to marry the people they love, to have access to full reproductive health care, including abortion services. access to contraceptives. these are really important issues. and we are going to continue to focus on the important prime or -- priorities of the american people. like helping build the economy, recovering from the devastation of the pandemic. defeat, ultimately the pandemic so people can resume their ordinary lives. we are doing a lot of things simultaneously. all of them are important. and i think in some of the situation, it's important for the american people to see who is fighting to protect their freedoms, who is fighting to

take away those freedoms, who was fighting to preserve reproductive health care, who is against it. so that in november people will have a clear choice. they will know will people stand. we hope the senate will take up all these bills, and passed, them it would make a real difference in the lives of american people. we don't have control over that. so we're gonna keep doing the coworker -- work in the house, senate's senate, give the american people and understanding that we're fighting for them. >> let me ask, you if i, can for a moment about the actual assault weapons ban. there has been some question about whether democrats actually have enough votes in the full house to pass the assault weapons ban. what is your understanding this evening? do democrats in fact have the votes in the full house? >> look, we're going to mark up the bill tomorrow, first time in almost 30 years we've taken up this weapons banned. these are weapons of war, decide to kill as many people as quickly as possible. to use in military combat. they don't belong in the

neighborhoods of our cities. this last for a mass shooting, including the legal perhaps just of assault rifle -- we know we had the assault wipe and then in effect, it was a 25% decline in gun massacres. a 40% decline in fatalities. we know we saw that the ban were. so i'm confident that after it passes at the judiciary committee, when it comes to the house, we will have the votes to pass it. and almost senate to the senate. it's going to make a real difference in the lives -- we have a gun violence epidemic. this is the gun of choice for mass shooters. it's particularly lethal because their military style weapons. we have got to do something to stop the use of these weapon that are massacre and kids in schools, and people in grocery stores. and people at theaters. and places where people congregate. >> rhode island democratic congressman, david cicilline, thank you so much for your time, i greatly appreciate. it >> my pleasure. >> britain had its hottest day ever today.

that story and what it means for us in the u.s. is next. r us in the u.s. is next

hi, i'm eileen. i live in vancouver, washington and i write mystery novels. dogs have been such an important part of my life. i have flinn and a new puppy. as i was writing, i found that i just wasn't as sharp and i new i needed to do something so i started taking prevagen. i realized that i was much more clear and i was remembering the details that i was supposed to. prevagen keeps my brain working right. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. - [narrator] every three minutes, pa child is born within a cleft condition. without surgery, some will die. those who do survive face extreme challenges. operation smile works to heal children born with cleft conditions. we need you. there are still millions in dire need of healing. go to operationsmile.org today and become a monthly supporter, or call. (gentle music)

in two seconds, a vacationer will say... yeah, i'm going to live here. only to realize... what if i can't sell my place? ♪♪ don't worry. sell it directly to opendoor and we'll help you buy your next one. aah. when life's doors open, we'll handle the house. you see the light gray

rectangle here that those construction guys are filling in? that is the spot on the tarmac at an airport in london that literally melted, and had to be repaired yesterday because of how hot it was. today was actually hotter. this is footage of what the

mayor of london called a huge surge in fires today as the uk had its hottest day ever recorded. this was the view out of the window of a passenger train traveling northwest from madrid, spain, yesterday. you can see the fire caused by europe's intense heat wave. it is on both sides of the trucks as the train passed through. much of western europe has been literally scorched for a week now with record breaking temperatures. tens of thousands have been forced to evacuate their homes and terrifyingly this is part of a larger global extreme heat phenomenon. baking essentially the entire globe in a way that might no longer be corrected or described as a wave. it is more like the new normal for summers. perhaps the most devastating part is the impact it is having on our health, our human health. the uk meteorological office, for the first time ever, issued what is known as a red alert for exceptional heat this week, and that means even otherwise healthy people could be susceptible to illness and death from this heat.

in spain and portugal alone, health officials have linked more than 1700 deaths to the overwhelming heat, which makes it all the more notable that a country like france, which suffered the same heat wave, zero heat wave deaths have been reported. after suffering thousands of deaths back in 2003, france has got really serious and protective about combatting heat, parks and open 24/7, misting fountains to cool down the public, the government productively checks in on the elderly and the vulnerable. they have public air conditioning, or cooling rooms, and an app that shows you where you could find one. for access to swimming pools, open every day until 10 pm. none of those solutions, alone, are a silver bullet to our climate crisis. cities in the u.s. do a lot of those things here on their own. clearly, being proactive and using the power of the government helps to save lives. it is why this is so

infuriating. during president biden's first week in office, he signed an executive order directing the establishment of an office of climate change and health equity, basically an office within health and human services to look at how climate change impacts human health, and to suggest ideas for mitigating that impact daily. the whole office was slated to cost the federal government a grand total of, wait for it, $3 million to run. it, compared to the federal government overall spending, is basically like a normal person spending a penny, quite honestly. yet, a year and a half after biden's executive order, congress still, still to the state, despite everything that is happening, has not funded that office at all. zero funding and zero permanent staff. today, we've got some conflicting reports about whether or not biden may declare a national emergency on climate change. maybe biden will do that, maybe he won't. here, in the u.s., today, more

than 60 million people live in areas where there were dangerous levels of heat. with the climate crisis here, and congress refusing to act, what can, what should president biden do? joining us now is leah stokes, professor of political science and environmental science at the university of california, santa barbara, and an adviser to the climate activist groups evergreen action and requiring america, the host of the climate podcast, a matter of degrees. leah, thank you for joining us tonight. i will start looking ahead to tomorrow. president biden is reportedly going to announce some sort of executive action on climate change. we don't necessarily know what that will look like. if you are in his shoes, if you could advise him, what would you announce? what should he be doing? >> look, when we say that congress won't act, that's not exactly true. it's senator manchin, one democrat, as well as 50 other senators from the republican party who are refusing to act

on climate change. that's what we are talking about. we have hundreds of representatives from the democratic party in the house willing to act, and 49 senators from democratic party in the senate willing to act. that is the situation we find ourselves in. president biden needs to use the full force of his executive authority. there is one thing i think he really should do, which as he should block a permanent permit for a pipeline that runs through west virginia, that senator manchin really wants to be approved. if he won't do the right thing for the planet, and for his own grandchildren, he should not get that permit for that pipeline. >> they're in, up and it's a good way to look at it. you bring up senator joe manchin. he has yet gotten democratic efforts to pass meaningful climate legislation in congress. this is, maybe, i think, the fourth or fifth time he has pulled the loose from charlie brown with the putback before democrats could kick it. can you help us understand why prolonging this negotiation is

a problem in and of itself? >> absolutely. senator manchin has not been negotiating in good faith. he keeps saying he wants to do something on climate change, yet it never materializes. what senator schumer did, the majority leader, is that he gave, him last week, every single thing that senator manchin wanted. yet, manchin still walked away. senator schumer called his bluff, saying you're not serious about doing this on climate change. that is why president biden has been so delayed in terms of moving forward on the executive actions that we desperately need for him to be doing on climate change. we have a president who cares a lot about this issue, and i think we are going to see him acting in the coming days and weeks. >> you ended enough bid in the new york times this fixing the climate crisis is getting worse and congress is one vote short of saving us. we're going to have to save ourselves. what do you mean by that? what do you mean by we have to save ourselves? >> well, i think it is two

things. first of all, in our daily lives, we should all be looking at the things we own that run on fossil fuels. our cars, ourselves, our furnaces, and asking ourselves how can we get off fossil fuels? can we get an electric vehicle, or an electric bike? can we get an inductions stove, or a heat pump? there are things each of us can be doing to try to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. thanks a lot of sense because it's a lot cheaper when you're not dealing with all the inflation, that is happening around fossil fuels. the second thing is we also need to be working as a community to keep ourselves cool. there is 100 million americans today who are under extreme heat, and there are 60 million americans who are under an extreme drought. the worst in a millennium. all of us need to be pushing our politicians at the state level, local level, and still keeping on when it comes to president biden and congress, that, you know what? we must act on climate change. >> liu stokes, professor at the university of california, santa

barbara, and an adviser to the climate activist group, evergreen, action, thank you so much for your time, and your warnings tonight. i appreciate your insights. one of concerted media's biggest stories last week turned out to be blatantly provably wrong. if not outright false. now it is looking like at least one conservative who is pushing that big story could face consequences. we will tell you about that next. we will tell you about tha next next making moves... ♪♪ making a connection... a train connection. making a connection... breathing problems. it's an add-on-treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma that can improve lung function for better breathing in as little as two weeks. eliminate, oral steroids. and here's something important. dupixent can cause allergic reactions that can be severe.

get help right away if you have rash, chest pain, worsening shortness of breath, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor about new or worsening joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. are you ready to du more with less asthma? just ask your asthma specialist about dupixent. >> we have this abortion

activist acting as a doctor with a history of failing to report. we are gathering the information, gathering the evidence as we speak. we are going to fight this to the end. including looking at her license or, if she failed to report in indiana, it's a crime to not report, intentionally not report. >> that was indiana's republican attorney general todd rokita, threatening to criminally charge the indianapolis doctor performed an abortion on a ten year old

girl who traveled across state lines to end a pregnancy that was the result of a rape. for the record, abortion is currently illegal in indiana. let's be clear about. it is one of the few red states where a person who is up to 22 weeks pregnant can seek an abortion. the abortion performed by dr. caitlin bernard for that little girl was totally legal. the crime here, attorney general rokita alleges, dr. bernard may have failed to fire all the necessary paperwork. news outlets obtained records showing dr. bernard did report the abortion to the necessary agencies, and despite this, rookie does upside still has a statement pushing his baseless claims. today, dr. bernard took the first step towards potentially suing the indiana attorney general for defamation. a notice filed by dr. renard's lawyer claimed that mr. rokita knew the statements were either false or acted with reckless disregard of the truth, or falsity of the statements. doctor bernard's lower your

added given the current political atmosphere in the united states, mr. rokita's comments were intended to heighten the public condemnation of dr. bernard who phillips provided legitimate medical care. today rokita's now has 90 days to investigator or settle claims against dr. bernard. if he fails to do so, he could face a defamation lawsuit and have to pay dr. bernard for security costs, legal fees, reputational harm, and emotional distress. 90 days. tiktok, tiktok. that does it for us tonight, we will see you again tomorrow. it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. hey, lawrence, good evening. >> good evening, ayman. we had dr. bernard on this program at the very beginning of the story, when it was just a little story in the local news media, out in indiana. it has become quite a story since then. >> it is a large part to a lot of false information from