hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east on the eve of what promises to be another blockbuster hearing by the january 6th select committee, and on the day of and the hours during the deadly capitol insurrection. the supporters storm the u.s. capitol sending his own vice president and lawmakers in both political parties running for their liveses. it led to seven deaths and hundreds of injuries. axios reported this this week, the house january 6th committee's prime time hearing will include not too subtle signals by the justice department. not that the committee hasn't already built a case against trump, three former federal

prosecutors two of whom served under republican froms, this in the atlantic, after several hearings by the committee, doubt as to who is responsible has been resolved. trump was behind the massive criminal conspiracy behind the proceeding and to defraud the united states of a fair election outcome. trump was not just a willing beneficiary of a complex plot of which others played most of the primary roles, while in office he himself was the principal actor in nearly all of its phases personally involved in elements and aware of and involved of the worst features including the violence on capitol hill mp most remarkably, he did so after vehement objects even by his sink fantic and loyal hand picked team. this was trump's project all

along. add to this that more than 800 insurrectionists face charges for their role in trump's project and one big question looms over the country right now when it comes to january 6th. what will the justice department do about the person who is behind it all? the disgraced, deplatformed, twice-impeached ex-president himself. it's a question that needs to be taken with even greater seriousness, that the ex president is mulling another run for the white house and trying to place allies in political office at every level all over the country who would be all too willing to help him overturn the next election if he loses again. here's what house impeachment manager congressman raskin said in 2021, words that are all the more true today in light of the mountain of evidence the january 6th select committee has uncovered. >> they attacked this building. they disrupted the peaceful transfer of power. they injured and killed people

convinced they were acting on his instructions and with his approval and protection and while that happened he further incited them while failing to defend us. >> that is where we begin today. our next guest is no stranger to the twists and turns in the darkest chapters was trump's presidency. he was the chief counsel for the democrats during donald trump's second impeachment trial for inciting the january 6th insurrection. he was also special counsel for the democrats in the 2019 impeachment inquiry against donald trump in which he made this prescient comment. >> if, in fact, president trump can get away with what he did again, our imagination is the only limit to what president trump may do not or what a future president will do next to try to abuse his or her power to serve his own personal interest over the nation's interest. >> joining us now, it is a pleasure and a privilege to

welcome trial attorney barry burk to the show. thank you for being here. >> it is my pleasure for being here. thank you for all you do. >> i have a million questions and i'll try to cole them down. president trump calls zelenskyy and asks him it dig up dirt on biden, and after playing criminal whodini and getting away with things. i know that the justice department prosecutes crimes and criminals, not patterns, but from your vantage point, how important is it to hold him accountable if he did, indeed, commit the crimes that the january 6th committee. >> you heard my views back in the day and unfortunately my predictions proved through. you are exactly right in the throughline of donald trump's behavior.

the day after he thought he got away with the first investigation and was in the clear for interfering with the 2016 election. the very next day he tries to interfere in the 2020 election by getting ukraine to interfere on his opponent joe biden. then obviously, we go through that whole process. he does not get impeached as we know in impeachment one, and then he has no illusions about being held responsible, so even when we go through all of the evidence of him knowing he lost the election he still won't give it up because, as i unfortunately predicted, he put his own personal and political interest over the interest of the country and all those close to him. it is imperative that the department of justice act if there is evidence of him committing crimes, and i can speak for that for sure, not only to deter him, to deter anyone else who is in that position either in the office of the presidency and loses an election or all these other people who are not only saying that they would interfere with

an election, but running for campaign offers on that principle. people need to know that even if they hold political office, if they violate the law undermining our principle of our democracy, free and fair lechs that they could and would be prosecuted so it is critical that the department act. >> so in terms of the evidence that the committee has marshalled, can you help us understand why they seem to be so far ahead of where we believe doj to be? >> listen, what i can say is the committee has done an enormously effective job. they do have an independent department of justice which did hold witnesses in contempt for not honoring the subpoena. so the department gave them a huge assist by making them know they will be held accountable if they don't appear and they have appeared or could be prosecuted for perjury and that is important. the department may not have

realized the extent of the evidence showing the culpability of donald trump directly as well as circumstantially. so we don't know everything the department is doing, but what is clear is that what the committee has done is give them a trial run. all of these witnesses are now available to the department of justice and the department of justice has far greater tools than the committee. they not only have subpoena you poor from a grand jury. they can do warrants and all kinds of things. whatever the timing it has a huge leg up to follow up on the great work of the january 6th committee and they know where the evidence takes them and that is to one person at the top of the conspiracy that shows overwhelming evidence, not only of the former president's acts to interfere with the election and the certification of those results, but also his criminal intent. i think there's tremendous evidence about why we know why donald trump had to know what he

was doing was wrong and it's not simply because he was told he lost the election and he did things that regardless because of the dispute of the election could never be right. so i think for all of those reasons the work of the committee has been tremendously helpful and we can go back and second guess yet department didn't do it earlier and the evidence is now out there and available for everyone including the department of justice. >> i think about the excuses that republican senators offer for not convicting donald trump in the first trial. was it just mitt romney that voted to convict just one or two -- >> in the first. in the second trial there were seven. >> there were seven. so the criminality became too blatant for at least one and then seven in the second, which is -- a stain on the republican party forever, but one of the excuses that the republican senators who voted to acquit hung those acquittal votes on

was a lack of firsthand witnesses. this committee had first-hand witnesses spilling into the aisles. what do you make of sort of the distinction between the ability to gather testimony from these sort of insider insiders, in terms of making the case and as you said, proving trump's intent? >> i think you put your finger right on what's significant. let me take a step back. what we heard from the republican senators were two things. one, he had proven his case and that's a dereliction of duty and he clearly violated his oath and it was a technicality and we would have had more than enough republican senators to have that. the other is they wanted to know what happened during the attack. they were very concerned. did the president truly simply sit on his hands and cheer on the insurrectionists? did he incite them further with knowledge when he sent his tweet

about mike pence and continued to reiterate that the election was supposedly stolen, and so i think direct witnesses would have helped tremendously. we had circumstantial evidence and we had some direct evidence about his conversations with kevin mccarthy and the like, but i think now whether you're talking about republican senators or people who are republicans, independent or democrats would care about our democrat see and care about what's right. i think this upcoming hearing is so critical because it is the culmination of a former president's plan, and when you have questions about his intent, if it is true, and they have direct evidence from his former white house counsel and those closest to him, the best witnesses in any trial, if we have any witnesses saying that he was there. he saw on tv what was happening. he heard the reports. he knew he caused it and then he showed glee and happiness it was happening. they obviously care more than people like kevin mccarthy. he was happy to hear about attacks on his vice president

and he refused to send in help or do anything, and he incited them further. that text about mike pence which you could hear the crowd react to it so wildly which we spent a lot of time on and called on the brave officers to get further attacked. i spoke to many of those officers, and it was horrible what they went through and he then took further action even when he released more information he reiterated the lie. he said he loved these people. they were patriots. again and again and again he took action and anybody with a sensibility, a sense of humanity has to say that is wrong, but more fundamentally from a criminal justice process that is sort of the home run evidence. that's what you want to see. it shows the culmination of the scheme in a way that's going to affect any jury. it reveals his intent and there could be no claim that he was trying to do the right thing. >> wow. >> this last hearing is, in fact, a high point of what we're seeing from the january 6th committee. >> wow.

i want to play some of cassidy hutchinson speaking to what you were articulating which was his state of mind as the deadly insurrection was under way. >> i remember pat saying to him something to the effect of the rioters have gotten to the capitol, mark. we need to go down to see the president now, and mark looked up and said he doesn't want to do anything, pat. and pat said something to the effect of, and very clearly, said this to mark. mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die. the blood will be on your f-ing hands. >> so, barry what i want to understand is the white house counsel and the most senior legal adviser in the white house says that not only is trump cup culpable, but mark meadows will be responsible. what sort of legal poo-poo

platter is evidenced with the 1/6 committee? >> the most damning evidence in the trial is from witnesses who don't have an axe to grind. defended him and doesn't have an axe to grind against us, assuming the evidence is what it appears to be about donald trump's culpability and his conspiracy to interfere with the wok of congress, mark meadows was right there with him and he knew the election wasn't stolen. he knew that they should admit defeat and the fact that as there is some evidence, there may be more that we hear on thursday and he actually encouraged and took actions. that makes him a co-conspirator. it doesn't require much more than that, knowledge, intent and some action and mark meadows would be subject to the investigation and potentially

culpable for crimes. >> i asked congresswoman lofgren whom i had a chance to speak to the day pat cipollone was there if he didn't invoke his fifth amendment right at all? she said not at all. what's being revealed by the committee is who the bad actors were, who as you just said were the co-conspirators were and the folks that have either defied their subpoenas or partially complied, people like meadows or invoked the fifth at every turn, people like john eastman, mike flinn and others. what is the strategy for prosecuting a conspiracy? you have almost a baker's dozen of pardoned ex-trump cronies. you've got trump himself. how do you approach a criminal conspiracy with those actors? >> so that's exactly the right question. a couple of things, first. you always want to be focused, who is the lynchpin of the

conspiracy and who is at the top and everyone should agree that that would be the former president and then you work backwards. so you have the range of people who were involved suggesting actions that they knew were wrong and would interfere with election in ways that could violate the law. so i think what you're looking at is who are the witnesses most culpable who could ultimately become cooperating witnesses. john eastman had a raid of his house with the search warrant and he's someone who can say, you know what? i'll make a deal and i'm prepared to provide testimony and you have other people who along the way would be extremely culpable against the ultimate goal of any criminal prosecution and the head of the conspiracy even if there's someone no one heard of let alone the former president and has nothing to do with his prior position and it's his culpability. so i think what they'll be looking at is who could be part of the case, and the indictment

involves defendants and who helps them prove their case and has their own criminal culpability while at the same time keeping an eye which of these potential defendants which decide to make a deal become a cooperator and become joint team usa in testifying against others in the conspiracy for a deal for themselves. >> i know what people in your position are inclined to say when i ask the following question, and i ask you to humor me. what is it like on a personal level for someone at doj to be assigned or tapped to participate in that kind of investigation when you look at the way trump, you know, basically put human beings through the wood chipper starting with jim comby and going through every other honorable prosecutor who had as part of their public service the job of investigating him. what happens on a human level if lisa monaco commenced an

investigation like what you just described into eastman or dealing with whether eastman will flip or deal because he doesn't want to go to jail? what happens to the people who have to take that on? >> you know, i think the true professionals as you have at the department of justice, just as people on the defense side on a high-profile case. they are focused on doing the job. so i do believe that the people at the top of the department who are high-quality people they are simply looking at the evidence and the case. obviously, involving a former president you have other considerations not only can you prosecute is the evidence there and he can prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, and you absolutely could, but should the case be prosecuted and that is where reasonable people can differ. i don't think any personal considerations, whether a former president should be charged, but to my mind they have to focus on the things that drive those decisions, deterrents. do they have to tell people if

you interfere with our elections, our most sacred right you will be criminally prosecuted and to me the only political decision that would be made is if a decision is made not to prosecute someone only because he had served in a position as the former president or as a senior government official. so my hope is when those factors are considered as they all should be, all discretionary decisions should be on the table that ultimately it's the evidence. we should drive the decision as well as the need it make sure that everyone recognizes that no one is above the law and that if any of my clients who then had the things we were talking about or a fraction of them would be charged as they would be, then someone who was a former president should be charged, as well. >> i want to go back to the second impeachment. i was -- i was anchoring when mitch mcconnell came out and tried to be -- i don't know what he was trying to do, but he seemed to be trying to exonerate

himself for not holding donald trump accountable for crimes that were not in dispute, for clearly impeachable offenses and a technicality and they had some republican cover, if they wanted to not view it that way. they had plenty of cover to do so, but he seemed to be calling for a criminal investigation and prosecution of donald trump. did you see it that way and do you think there's any utility for that commitment? even mitch mcconnell thought it was an appropriate path to be accountable. >> you're pushing the buttons with my memories, you're right. i was there for the second trial, 99% of the trial and i was staring right at mitch mcconnell and we had special tables, and i saw his face, and i knew he had it. i saw the faces of a lot of other republican senators who i know we had, and i do believe there are those who thought if we had 17 republicans so that we would convict and disqualify we would have had their votes. i don't know this for certain,

but i think mitch mcconnell would say can we retain it? his intent would have been to convict purely my supposition from watching him and others and i think at the end, when he didn't have enough to convict he votes not guilty based on a technicality and then wants to tell the world, he proved this case, that i don't think this person is fit to serve and i can agree with mitch mcconnell he had gone and and he should convict and that is his duty and i think he should go back not only to mitch mcconnell, but to kevin mccarthy. you want to talk about politics, that's everyone's reaction today, but in real time, they knew what happened and had first hand information and that's important. it's important for the american

people to be reminded that this is not politics. these are facts in evidence and what i committee has done so well as a trial lawyer and we tried to do this in the second impeachment, get away with political speeches. don't talk about big issues. talk about the evidence. who is responsible and why it matters which isn't talking about democracy, because that's what's at stake. my hope is if the committee focuses on these key elements as i'm sure they will on thursday, there is an opportunity, as you suggest to go back in time and to remind people, this is not an issue and beyond the two on the committee, people saw which was wrong and it's much worse than, and what happened here are multiplied by tenplus. when you look at the events of december 18th and to me what's important about december 18 suggest the when pat cipollone

told donald trump no one will believe these folks if you come in and you appoint special counsel and whatever you do. he said he got him and then he didn't want to do it. that night and early the next morning he sends his text, so many people to washington, will be wild and knows exactly what he's doing and that is the through line for all of his efforts. >> yeah. no, it's amazing and that's how we get to impeachment one, too. he wants the -- the state to extort zelenskyy. ends up having to have rudy do it. that's the through line. he's always moving off book to create the conspiracy that he wants to put in motion. barry berke, we have wanted to talk to you for so long. please come back. thank you for starting us off. >> my pleasure. thank you. when we come back, we will talk more about the ex-president's efforts to overturn his election defeat in georgia. the fulton county prosecutor is putting all 16 of that sit's fake electors on notice telling

them they are now targets up for investigation. that, then blouse one of the loudest voices in the scheme that we were just talking about, rudy giuliani has been ordered by a judge to testify in the georgia investigation. that criminal probe clearly picking up steep and the contempt of congress trial continues today, and leighing out why why they wanted to the hear from the ex low pressure strategist and it is one day before the deadly insur ekdz. his supporters showing no signs of slowing down. new evidence to election workers that are still happening and are still very, very real and all of those stories and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. please stay with us. continues after

it's easier to do more innovative things. [whistling] please stay with us. on our jackets? -denied. -can you imagine? i want a new nickname. can you guys start calling me snake? no, bryan. -denied. -hownot gonna be snake,uotesos can i be snake? -all: no.

[whistling] with technology that can scale across all your clouds... it's easier to do more innovative things. [whistling] so... i know you and george were struggling it's easier to do more innovative things. with the possibility of having to move. how's that going? we found a way to make bathing safer with a kohler walk-in bath.

a kohler walk-in bath provides a secure, spa-like bathing experience in the comfort of your own home. a kohler walk-in bath has one of the lowest step-ins of any walk-in bath for easy entry and exit. it features textured surfaces, convenient handrails for more stability, and a wide door for easier mobility. kohler® walk-in baths include two hydrotherapies— whirlpool jets and our patented bubblemassage™ to help soothe sore muscles in your feet, legs, and back. a kohler-certified installer will install everything quickly and conveniently in as little as a day. they made us feel completely comfortable in our home. and, yes, it's affordable. i wish we would have looked into it sooner. think i might look into one myself. stay in the home and life you've built for years to come. call... to receive fifteen hundred dollars off your kohler® walk-in bath. and take advantage of our special offer of no payments for eighteen months.

there are some important developments to tell you about in georgia show casing how the fulton county probe is inching closer to potential criminal charges for the conspirators behind the ex-president's scheme to overturn the 2020 election result in that state, and perhaps the ex-president himself. today we learn that rudy giuliani has been ordered to testify before the fulton county grand jury on august 9th for his spearheading. those legal efforts to subvert the election results in several key states. it comes after giuliani failed to appear in court to explain why he shouldn't and one of those fake electors clearly much more than witnesses.

all 16 of the georgia republicans who falsely declared themselves presidential electors have been subpoenaed. district attorney fannie willis that each of them received similar letters alerting them that the testimony was required by the special purpose grand jury and that they were now, quote, a target of the investigation. joining our coverage betsy woodruff swan, and jonathan lemire is back for politico, the host of msnbc's "way too early" and author of the amazing new book "the big lie. election chaos, political opportunism and politics after 2020," it is out this thursday. all three are msnbc contributors and jonathan, we'll talk about your book in just a minute. the fake electors conspiracy is perhaps in terms of what's public facing the most advanced federal investigation, as well, it doesn't get quite as much air

time as the other aspects of donald trump's coup plot, but it appears at the federal level and down in georgia it is steaming ahead. >> no question of that. the january 6th hearings here in washington, of course, grabbing so many of the headline, but for months now there have been many observers who felt that what was happening in georgia posed the most legal peril to the former president. in fact, just a few hours ago a democrat close to the white house suggested to me they wished merrick garland was as aggressive as the d.a. in fulton county. now we have rudy giuliani facing a subpoena. she has not been shy about giving subpoenas to lawmakers. senator lindsay graham ensnarled in legal issues there because of his phone call to secretary of state brad raffensperger there in georgia and of course, the big phone call of all when donald trump asked raffensperger to find the exact number of votes he needed to win georgia

which was rightfully won by joe biden and the fake electors scheme is one that sort of hard for some folks to understand who don't follow this carefully, but in short it was to present two sets of electors, one, the correct ones who voted for joe biden in these battleground states and the false set, a second set who were supporting trump and the idea was to create enough confusion that the they would throw them out and mike pence would say, well, let's take account of what we have and give it to trump, and think, pence defied his boss' wishes to do that. this is the matter here where the drumbeats are loud and plenty of people in trump world nervously watching what's happening outside atlanta. ? it's the lynchpin, too, that ties all of the republicans who donald trump stupidly said in a phone call of which notes were being taken. declare it corrupt and our congressmen will do the rest. this is the rest, betsy woodruff

swann. >> yeah. no question. the alternate electors were a key step in the chain of events that trump and his internal campaign officials and his bevy of outside lawyers thought would somehow result in him being able to stay in power after january 20th of 2021. one thing that's important about the fact that all these individual alternate electors from georgia have now received target letters. that means, of course, that they are on notice. they've now officially been told by prosecutors that they could face criminal charges. that in and of itself is the kind of thing that gets your attention, but it's also potentially part of a legal strategy to try to get these people to cooperate. remember, these folks are obviously powerful and obviously important and made important decisions, but they are very much the foot soldiers for the trump campaign when it came to its efforts to keep trump in

power despite the fact that he lost the election and when prosecutors build cases like this, they don't just want public information and documents. they also often particularly in complex, white-collar cases such as this one, want cooperating witnesses who are willing to testify against people who are higher up than they were on the chain of command. 16 people in just one state is a lot of people, and the likelihood that those folks all remain in lockstep, all cooperate -- or all agree among each other not to cooperate, the likelihood of that is not particularly high and that's not what i would expect is a priority for the district attorney. >> it's such a smart point, ben rhodes and when you look at how many states fake electors were sought and it's a slightly smaller number that actually produced and sent fake electors, but it is something that nara is investigating and it's obviously in the purview of the january

6th committee and we know it's under investigation by the doj, as well. to betsy's point, you need one of 16 to answer the question, do you happen to have that voice mail? can i look at your phone? this seems in some ways the softest open door to push on. >> yeah. i mean, sometimes it's easy to look at this thing that with just a few crazy meetings in the white house, right? this was steve bannon at the willard and rudy giuliani having press conferences and in order to achieve the situation where you have people speaking up as fake electors and that entails conspiracy and that proves coordination and that wasn't just the dreams of donald trump in a crazy meeting with mike flinn or rudy giuliani cooking up legal theories and filing fair lawsuits and this was a nationwide effort focused on the specific states that trump needed and it would have left a

very long paper trail of emails and text messages and other communications that you can pull the thread on to prove that this was truly a national conspiracy to overthrow the democratic election. >> all right. everyone is sticking around. there's brand new news today on how many times the secret service was actually asked not to delete text messages around the date of january 6th when the insurrection took place. we'll bring that to you next. k . k . we'll bring that to you next with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ while they... 0oh... uh... figure their stuff out.

so many people are overweight now, and asking themselves, "why can't i lose weight?"

for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now there's release from golo. it naturally helps reverse insulin resistance, stops sugar cravings, and releases stubborn fat all while controlling stress and emotional eating. at last, a diet pill that actually works. go to golo.com to get yours. we got the house! you did! pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team.

the secret service allowed the evidence that would have been commanded to be retained to be destroyed. so that's a tremendous concern. we have -- we got one text message, and i haven't seen it yet. it will be sent over to me, but i'm -- it's clear to me that that is a text message that might have been captured through another branch of government. i just think we need to find out a lot more about this than we currently know. >> that was january 6th select committee members zoe lofgren on our network on the single text messages. i don't know anyone who has a single text message to or from and that's all the committee received as part of a subpoenaed trove of records. a failure to preserve federal records by agents who were given

multiple orders to preserve records and detailed instructions on just how to do so in case they didn't already know, leaving the committee with none of the texts they had asked for as stephanie murray confirmed on our program and prompting the national archives to ask the secret service to investigate the, quote, pots earn unauthorized deletion of text messages. betsy, in that break we got some breaking news from the committee on this topic. chairman bennie thompson and vice chair liz cheney put out the following statement, quote, the secret service has begun, a system migration resulted in the erasure of secret service cell phone data. the secret service migration process went forward on january 27, 2021, three weeks after the attack on the capitol while the vice president under the

protection of the secret service was steps from a violent mob hunting for him. four house committees had already sought these critical records from the department of homeland security before the records were apparently lost. additionally, the procedure for preserving content, a seems to be contrary and may represent a possible violation of the federal records act. the committee is seeking additional records, as well. every effort must be made to retrieve the lost data, as well. >> i worked in the white house. every message you send is copied automatically to the white house records keeping. the laws cannot be different that govern the people who protect the people i wokked for, jonathan lemire. >> no, they should not be, and this is truly hard to fathom. the time line is so damning for the secret service here where certainly and perhaps there was a plan to migrate data from one set of phones to another. that doesn't seem to be in contest, but what is unclear is

how they could have gone through with this? january 5th and 6th were not just any other days and they were arguably some of the most important days in the history of this agency where it was as the committee's statement points out, not just about the vice president who was there, his life in danger with questions about his detail trying to get him in a motorcade out of the capitol and pence refusing to go, but of course, the actions and whereabouts of donald trump who gave the speech at the ellipse and then is said to have tried to badger the secret service and maybe grabbing at one of them to take him to the capitol and then he retreats to the white house and agents would have been nearby throughout. january 6th are huge days and that data should have been backed up on a normal day as a matter of course and standard practice and especially then and the request from the committee and other investigators for the secret service to preserve the records the day before it

commenced. it is inexcusable and the people here in washington, the words cover-up have been thrown around more and more. >> if the secret service wanted another word to be thrown around, they could clear it up. the time line is atrocious. it goes like this, december 2020, secret service office of strategic planning instructs employees to preserve all records. december 2020, refinement, and there's nothing about the migration including deletion. january 6th, capitol insurrection. ten days later, it tells dhs that the records are preserved and secret service employees again instructed to preserve records and hold how to do that. january 27th, migration process begins 22 days after the insurrection. the igs for the records and

they've all been purged already. . >> the thing that i think is most notable about the statement that the select committee just put out regarding this whole total fiasco is the reference at the tail end to the federal records act. in fairly technical language that they used in statements, basically what they're saying is we think someone or some people at the secret service might have broken the law. the records act is a law. you have to comply with it. that's one of the things that people throughout government get told when they start. the stuff isn't optional and there's not an honor system when it comes to preserving these federal records. the other piece of that statement and the context of the time line that i think is really

important is the fact that they say at the very beginning that the service has started turning over documents in response to their subpoena. previously, going back several months now the secret service said they're cooperating fully with the select committee. they're giving the select committee access to as many personnel they want to talk to, access to all of the documents they want to see. the fact that it took a subpoena for the secret service for the agency to turn over materials to the select committee didn't previously have, that's the kind of thing that really raises alarm bells on the committee and it's made them realize that whatever level of cooperation they thought they'd been receiving from this agency, it wasn't to the extent that they wanted it to be once they brought in the process. remember, the biden white house and the headquarters had very much been onboard with supporting broadly the committee's efforts to obtain

records from the executive branch outside the white house. the fact it took a subpoena even to get this far is something that will only fuel their significant concerns and distrust in relation to the secret service. >> you know, ben, i believe that the evidence will come out about what they did and didn't do, and what they knew and what they said because i believe what barry berke said. i believe it will end up in a prosecution of a vast, criminal conspiracy and they will all be, i believe, testifying before grand juries eventually. it will come out. what i do not understand is an agency with a noble mission is letting its reputation be slaughtered by donald trump's presidency. why allow the reputation of an agency whose chief qualification is to take a bullet for the protectee or any member of the family, and benefit by being near them. why allow that agency to look so shady?

>> it just -- it's an astonishing level of potential corruption of the government agency, nicole and the reality is this isn't even like white house staff. so this isn't one of these questions where they can say it's executive privilege. this is an agency that's in the department of homeland security that has obligations to congress and it has obligations to people other than donald trump and so i think they're going to have to pull the thread on this for a very long time to get at how did this happen? how did it get to a place where the security agency that has got a duty to the public, not just to the president of the united states and the person of donald trump, was so flagrantly acting against the interest of transparency and against the interest of protocol which is what has to govern the secret service and they have -- they'll have to answer subpoenas and they'll have to show up before congress and they won't be able to hide behind phony claims of executive privilege and we heard

them trying to smear cassidy hutchinson, so people overseeing the secret service out of the trump white house, this is one where even after the january 6th committee has wound up its work will continue its investigation into how something like this could have possibly happened around one of the biggest security events in the history of this country that directly implicated the secret service where they were right in the middle of it. i'm not here to impugn any secret service officers. i'm sure a lot of those people were doing their jobs under hard circumstances on a very difficult day, but clearly something went wrong and the chain of command of an agency that is not white house staff. these are people that worked for the american taxpayer up to the department of homeland security and so i hope that they continue not just under the auspices of the january 6th investigations and how did it get to this level of incompetence or corruption take root? >> jonathan lemire, very quickly, have the president or

vice president of the united states weighed in on what looks like a growing scandal on the people who protect their lives and the people who protect their families every day? >> there have been no comments from president biden or vice president harris about this. those at the white house are concerned and they urge secret service to turn over whatever records do remain, but nicole, privately, it is an open secret here in washington that the secret service was politicized by donald trump and there's some definitely some members who worked for him and remain on staff and think very fondly of the former president. that hasn't risen to any sort of security concern. no one is implying that and agents do their job professionally and work hard day in and day out, but it is something that the white house staff is aware of and certainly they're horrified to learn that these messages appear to have been intentionally deleted in order to be withheld from one of

the darkest days in history. >> ben rhodes and jonathan lemire, thank you very much for being with us on today's headlines. the steve bannon trial is in washington, d.c. he was chief counsel to the committee investigating the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol. we'll bring you all of the very latest after a quick break. don't go anywhere. latest after k don't go anywhere.

to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war, forced to flee their homes. a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger. exhausted and shell shocked from what they've been through. every dollar you give can help bring a meal, a blanket, or simply hope to a child living in conflict. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org

today with your gift of $10 a month, that's just $0.33 a day. we cannot forget the children in places like syria, born in refugee camps, playing in refugee camps, thinking of the camps as home. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, your gift can help children like ara in afghanistan, where nearly 20 years of conflict have forced the people into extreme poverty weakened and unable to hold herself up, ara was brought to a save the children's center, where she was diagnosed and treated for severe malnutrition. every dollar helps. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, just $0.33 a day. and thanks to special government grants that are available now, every dollar you give can multiply

up to ten times the impact. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special save the children tote bag to show you won't forget the children who are living their lives in conflict. every war is a war against children. please give now. the contempt of congress

trial against steve bannon today started with a warning from the judge to bannon's defense team not to turn it into a, quote, political circus. after the pardoned podcaster gave a press conference slamming the government outside the courthouse step complete with props it would appear. the twice impeached disgraced ex-president's former chief steve bannon is on trial for failing to comply with the january 6th committee's subpoena trying to make the case he was above the law. but he decided all on his own not to comply with that subpoena. the jury continued hearing testimony from the january 6th committee's general counsel who laid out why the committee wanted to hear from him in the first place, like all those infamous all hell will break loose comments he broadcast on his podcast the day before the deadly insurrection, january 5th, 2021. let's bring in nbc news justice reporter ryan riley out at the d.c. courthouse for us. tell us what happened today.

>> reporter: you know, it's really interesting because if you step back for a moment, the challenge for steve bannon's defense is they have to convince a jury that he is operating in good faith, that there were ongoing negotiations, that he really wanted to cooperate but there was that outstanding question of executive privilege. that's very clearly not the history here, and what we just saw inside the courtroom was that there's an fbi special agent who is being questioned about actually posts that steve bannon made on getter about how he wasn't going to cooperate with the committee and there's links to articles and they asked him whether it was a verified account, so now we're getting to a cross examination of that fbi special agent. i think it's a pretty uphill argument for -- let's say for the defense to make that this was all a good faith effort to cooperate with the committee. >> didn't donald trump obliterate that defense as well saying that he had never invoked executive privilege? >> reporter: that's right. so there was actually no invocation. that's been something that the

january 6th senior official on the committee has been very clear about was there was never actually any invocation of executive privilege. there was like some talk about it, but there was maybe some miscommunication between perhaps steve bannon's lawyer at the time, robert costello and the committee, but like there was never a formal invocation of executive privilege, which was the underlying fact, and essentially the prosecution is trying to make this as simple of a case as possible and say, listen, here's the date that steve bannon was required to produce documents. here's the date he was required to show up and testify. he did neither, and that's why he should find him guilty on two counts. essentially what the government is arguing here. there's a lot that i think because they're so limited in what defenses they can bring in on the defense side, it's going to be a real battle, i think, for them to convince a jury otherwise, especially when you consider the fact that all these jurors had to show up themselves because they got official documents from the government in this case the court requiring

them to show up to do their jury duty. so i expect that's a point we might hear the government make explicitly when it comes time for closing arguments, which might come as soon as tomorrow. >> what is the sentence if he is found guilty? >> reporter: so there is a minimum, i believe in this case of 30 days, and there's a maximum, i believe, of six months. there's two charges, you know, for both the documents and then actually for the testimony, so there could have been some, you know, if he had got a plea deal, there might have been a lesser sentence potentially imposed, but that's not what he wanted to do. you know, i think he wants to make as much of spectacle out of this as he can from those press conferences. it's very unusual to have in the middle of an actual trial have someone go up to the sticks so to speak, and go up and actually go on live television and try to make their case. typically you have lawyers who are going to wave their client off of that. but that's what steve bannon has

been doing, and it's very unusual here and certainly it's been a spectacle outside the courthouse. >> you don't get a pardon unless you've already committed some crimes in the past. so that is who he is. ryan reilly, thank you very much for covering that for us and spending some time with us to talk about it. up next for us, a look at how the seven committee hearings we have already watched have shown a rattled and angry ask flailing ex-president ratcheting up the tension that led to the insurrection and how threats of more violence exist right now today. that's right after a quick break. don't go anywhere. right after k break. break. don't go anywhere. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 2 days. that's rinvoq relief.

rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save.

seen this ad? 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. they wrote it for themselves.

[ ominous music playing ] it's here. are you ready? let's go baby! [ screaming ] what happens next? you'll know soon enough.

in the three-fourths of election officials agreed that threats against them had increased in recent years. more than half were concerned about the safety of their colleagues and one in six election officials had been threatened. effective mitigation strategies will require tackling not only these threats but the barrage of false information about our election officials that is fueling these threats. it is 5:00 in the east. this is the world in which we now live, where election workers are afraid to simply do their jobs. that was elizabeth howard. she's senior counsel for the brennan center for justice testifying before a house hearing today. the house homeland security committee on threats and election security. the increasingly threatening environment howard describes there is a consequence of the lies and vitriol spread by the ex-president in his quest to

overturn the 2020 election results. the ex-president's disinformation spreading and ignoring and defying of anyone who tells him the truth have been thrust even more prominently into public view by the january 6th select committee's recent series of seven public hearings, the last of which, at least in this first series takes place tomorrow night in prime time. "the washington post" is out today with an extensive summation of the committee's revelation so far saying the committee's findings demonstrate that trump made violence essentially inevitable. quote, on at least 15 different occasions, the president barreled over those who told him who accept his loss and instead took actions that sought to circumvent the democratic process and set the nation on the path to violence. that's according to the committee's evidence. the resulting attack on the u.s. capitol was not spontaneous the committee has argued, but instead a predictable outcome that trump enabled even after learning the crowd he was addressing that day was armed and bang for blood.

the violent path trump blazed did not end on january 6th, 2021. we see the big lie continuing to be a major pillar of the republican party platform, and as we just mentioned, threats against election workers have escalated in recent years. during one of the selection committee's hearings, former conservative judge michael luttig warned that donald trump today remains a clear and present danger. we saw that in an interview with wisconsin house speaker robin boss just yesterday. >> when's last time you talked to the former president trump? >> within the last week. >> yeah. >> before or after he tweeted about you? >> before. >> what was that conversation like? >> it was one of those that's very consistent. he makes his case, which i respect. he would like us to do something different in wisconsin. i explained that it's not allowed under the constitution. he has a different opinion, and he put the tweet out. so that's it. yeah. >> just last week, though, the twice impeached deplatformed

ex-president was still at it. he was still working to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in wisconsin. last week. with that guy. trump is responding to a ruling by the wisconsin supreme court earlier this month that banned the use of most ballot drop boxes from arguing that the ruling should upend and overturn the results of wisconsin's 2020 election. it's where we begin the hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends. phil rucker is here, "washington post" national deputy editor, mike schmidt washington correspondent for the "new york times," and kim at kin, the project with the globe focusing on racial equity and justice, all msnbc contributors. kim, i start with you. we try to spend time on the ongoing threat and the cancer that is the big lie and fueling big lie adherence in state elections, especially secretary of state elections, but to hear trump still at it in this

interview was falls in that category of perhaps not surprising but still shocking and galling. >> yeah, i would think that even anyone who was under any sort of investigation, particularly the subject of this january 6th committee and the case that they're putting forward would probably try to be on their best behavior at this point, but at this point he can't help himself. he is still pushing for any strand of evidence that he can try to continue to build the big lie that has been disproven time and time again, even with the most ardent supporters. i mean, in this case fosz is not just anyone. this is somebody who has supported trump strongly who he himself has tried to perpetuate some of the false election fraud theories himself. but because he will not say that this legal opinion gives him

some sort of constitutional power that he doesn't have to reach back two years to change the results of an election, that put him on donald trump's bad side and angered him. i mean, it's just -- it's as if donald trump is trying to give the january 6th committee more evidence as to the type of state of mind he probably had on the day of january 6th. >> well, and the january 6th committee may not even be his biggest problem. mike schmidt, let me show you something attorney general merrick garland said earlier today. >> no person is above the law in this country, nothing stops us. >> even a former president? >> i don't know how to -- i'll say that again. no person is above the law in this country. i can't say it any more clearly than that. there is nothing in the principles of prosecution, in any other factors which prevent us from investigating anyone, anyone who's criminally responsible for an attempt to undo a democratic election.

>> so mike schmidt, unless there's a secret memo saying a president isn't a person, merrick garland is there very clearly saying that if the president is a person who tried to undo a democratic election, he will be prosecuted. it's incremental, but it does seem like a new formulation for attorney general merrick garland. >> i think what you're seeing in garland's answer is some of the pressure and some of the impact of the committee. much attention was given, you know, many -- several months ago to the question of whether the committee would have to make a referral to the justice department, would the committee have to send the justice department laying out with its evidence how they believe trump broke the law, and what you see in garland's statement is that -- and you've seen it sort of evolve over the past few months is that you may not actually need that. you may not actually need for congress to say this because so

much of it has been out in the open. garland himself saying that justice department prosecutors were watching the hearing, or justice department officials were watching the hearings. it's the committee has had such an impact that a referral, something that they were clearly concentrating on, remember liz cheney herself reading from the criminal code at a hearing publicly saying, you know, this is the crime i think donald trump broke a federal judge ruling it was more likely than not that trump had broken the law with eastman. these things that have been birthed by the committee have had a dramatic impact to what you see today where garland is forced to answer questions about it and make statements like he does. >> mike, do we know why the evidence is being birthed from a congressional committee and not the justice department? >>. >> look, the justice department always moves slowly.

this congressional committee has moved at a hastened pace. they had a true deadline of the end of this year because there's a widely held belief that the democrats will lose control of the house and the republicans would shut down such an inquiry. at the same time, it's usually not congress that is in front of the justice department. it's usually congress that drafts behind the justice department, and the justice department is the one that takes the lead, and that's something very unusual that has occurred here, and i'm not sure we have a full understanding of why that happened. >> phil rucker, i want to show you, i mean, mike mentioned liz cheney reading from the criminal code. that was at the beginning of the year, but she has punctuated isn't a strong enough word, almost sort of punctured these hearings which are officially congressional proceedings and a

congressional investigation, but there is no disguising that she is directing garland and his investigators and prosecutors to the crimes that she believes she has gathered enough evidence to prove trump committed. here's vice chair liz cheney and congressman jamie raskin. >> consider how millions of americans were persuaded to believe what donald trump's closest advisers and his administration did not. these americans did not have access to the truth like donald trump did. they put their faith and their trust in donald trump. they wanted to believe in him. they wanted to fight for their country, and he deceived them. for millions of americans that may be painful to accept, but it is true. >> one user asked is the sixth d-day, is that why trump wants everyone there? another asserted trump just told us all to come armed.

this is happening. a third took it even further. it will be wild means we need volunteers for the firing squad. >> so the committee in this hearing closed the loop between the violence that was meted out against the law enforcement officials who protected the safety and lives of members of congress and the building in which the vice president was hiding out, and donald trump's statements. i wonder if you can speak to the fact that nobody has come along with any evidence refuting any of that, including the testimony that cassidy hutchinson provided that confirmed donald trump's enthusiasm for hanging mike pence and his knowledge of the specific types of weapons his supporters were wielding and his confidence that they weren't there to hurt him. >> yeah, it's a good point, nicolle. you're right to point out that these hearings are not criminal proceedings. these are congressional

hearings. they're acts of politics, but it's a real investigation, and this is real evidence that's being shared with the american people, including a whole bunch of people who work at the department of justice and are in the process of undergoing the actual criminal investigation into january 6th. they're paying attention. they're looking at the evidence that the committee is bringing forward. they're watching the testimony of people like cassidy hutchinson, and this committee's work has not revealed any truth or evidence or fact to counter the narrative that cheney and raskin and the others have put forward, which is connecting the president's rhetoric with the actions of the violent insurrectionists on january 6th, and also, frankly, showing at all of these moments, these juncture points where the president could have tried to calm down the mob, where he could have tried to do the right thing, where he could have acted as president to help protect the people who were in danger on january 6th. he instead leaned in towards more confrontation, leaned in

towards violence. that's what my colleague roz helderman's big piece this morning documents, all the ways in which this president, former president at the time was leaning in towards violence. >> you know, and kim, the threats against election workers that we led with and donald trump's enthusiasm for still peddling the big lie and still yielding the result that he sought on the 6th that the election result be overturned, be changed. that's what the call was last week to the speaker of the house of wisconsin. what do you do about a president who's never been held accountable for anything and is still committing these criminal acts? >> i think you're getting to the crux of this is that there is a lack of accountability, and that is preventing others, including republicans in office at the local and state level from really taking the action that is necessary for them to do to ensure that the election and

those who carry out the elections are all safe. and until that happens, it leaves the country very vulnerable for another attempt to overthrow another election, which is exactly what donald trump wants if he chooses to run again and if he wants to try if he loses to be successful in the next time to overturn the election. so it's all very concerning. i think this is something that the committee should be very concerned about as well as officials at the state and local election to protect these workers. it's unfortunately not a part of what congress was looking at in their election reforms. their election reforms that they're pushing forward are important, but they leave really this gap when it comes to protecting elections, how they are administered on the local and state level and making sure that the people who administer them are safe. >> mike, there's some new polling on political violence,

which is the subtext and the undercurrent that the 1/6 committee laid bare in its last public hearing. "the guardian" is reporting one in five adults in the united states, equivalent to about 50 million people, believe that political violence is justified at least in some circumstances a new megasurvey has found. 7.1% said they would be willing to kill a person to advance an important political goal. the university of california davis team points out that extrapolated to u.s. society at large, that is equivalent to 18 million americans. the survey is alarming. it supports reporting that you've all contributed to the conversation over the last five years about the country sort of as a powder keg, but donald trump is throwing matches into it to this day. why do you think there isn't any courage to be mustered among the republican ranks to push him

aside? >> i don't know. those numbers are pretty interesting because while the committee has talked about the impact of trump. they have showed how his messaging, his tweets led his people to come to washington, not only was it the people who came to washington, but it was his tweets about the election, his statements about the election that trickled down throughout the rest of the country and have taken hold in the ways that we've seen in this poll. and the real test of that will be the next election that we have at the end of -- in this november for the congressional election because these people believe that the entire system is corrupt. they believe the whole election system is. these people have been installed in positions of authority in these states where they can have some impact on the way that voting is counted and voting

allegations of fraud is investigated, and that will be the real test of what he has done because it's not just the people who showed up at the capitol. it's all the other followers across the country who listened to him, believed him, and maybe didn't drive to washington, but still hold those beliefs. >> and i mean, phil rucker, if you look at liz cheney's path or journey, she voted for donald trump twice, voted for him in '16, she voted for him in '20, and she travels this path when she sees him tarnish or destroy what, in her view, is the hallmark of our democracy, the peaceful transfer of power. her primary is coming up. i think it's about a week or two after this week's public hearing, but her goal is to defeat not just trump but trumpism. when you look at this poll and look at what mike's talking about, in all of our neighborhoods, i'm sure on all of our streets on which we live,

there are people who do not believe that joe biden is the duly elected president of the united states. when this committee's work is done, how do you force the truth in front of people that still don't believe it? >> you know, it's one of the biggest questions, i think, facing all of us in media and all citizens who, you know, care about the preservation of our democracy. i mean, how do you -- how do you convince people who are sort of choosing to be blind to the truth what the truth is and how to get good information and what to believe and what not to believe when you have a frm o'er -- former president and an entire political party intentionally muddying the waters and lying about an election that was april clear and decisive in 2020, and you know, yes, congresswoman cheney is trying to present evidence that she hopes the justice department may pick up in their criminal investigation, but she has other aims too.

she's trying to persuade the american public to believe the truth, to understand just how much our democracy is under threat and the role that the former president has played in bringing us to this precipice, and she also has a personal aim, which is try to defend her stance ahead of this primary. to, you know, in all of these hearings to lay out very clearly what her principles are, what the constitution says, and give people a sort of intellectual foundation and understanding of why she voted in early 2021 to impeach president trump over his -- over his inciting -- incitement, rather of the january 6th attack and understand, you know, why she has stood in opposition to him ever since. >> you know, kim, we had a chance to talk to barry berke, the lead counsel for donald trump's second impeachment, and he brought us back in time to this moment when all but seven republican senators vote to acquit donald trump. they did so on a technicality. i mean, nobody thought that

donald trump was innocent of the charges, of the impeachment, of what he was impeached for in the house. do you think there's buyer' remorse as you look at this threat environment, millions of americans enthusiastic about political violence thinking it's justified. by refusing twice in two impeachments to hold him accountable for what they conceded were clear abuses of power. >> i don't know if there is buyer's remorse considering the fact that he has -- donald trump has managed to maintain such strong support from within his party throughout both impeachments and beyond that. i do wonder whether these hearings and the fact that the january 6th committee's very careful and methodical, pain staking presentation of this evidence in a way that i think is much stronger than in either impeachment and certainly does not have trump allies constantly raising false flags to try to

deter from it. at the very least, i wonder from some republican strategists that i hear, there is a concern that there is just fatigue. at this point republicans are tired of january 6th. they think it's a drag on them, they want to move beyond it, at least some of them in a way that could weaken donald trump at this point, but so far his support has been strong enough that i can't say that there's remorse. >> every time i hope that that's happening, i'm disappointed. so we'll keep watching. phil rucker, mike schmidt, kimberly atkins stohr, thank you very much for starting us off today. when we come back, ukraine's first lady makes an emotional appeal to congress saying that russia is destroying the people of her country in what she calmed an unprovoked terrorist war. what america needs to do to respond to her call after the break. plus, transportation secretary pete buttigieg knocks down a popular right wing ruse about president joe biden. we'll play you what he said to a

texas republican asking about the 25th amendment. and the house of representatives moves to protect same-sex marriage in america, that's the good news. the bad and scary news is that 157 republicans voted to take those rights away. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. "deadline white house" continues discover caplyta. caplyta is a once-daily pill, proven to deliver significant relief from bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, after a quick break. after a quick break. don't go anywhere. and, in clinical trials, feelings of inner restlessness and weight gain were not common. caplyta can cause serious side effects. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts right away. antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk

of death or stroke. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may be life-threatening, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. in the darkness of bipolar i and ii depression, caplyta can help you let in the lyte. ask your doctor about caplyta, from intra-cellular therapies. there's a monster problem and our hero needs solutions. so she starts a miro to brainstorm. “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm...

back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro. wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.

>> translator: while russia kills, america saves, and you should know about it. we thank you for that.

but unfortunately the war is not over. the terror continues. help us to stop this terror against ukrainians and this will be our joy, great victory in the name of life, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness of every person, every family. because we want every father and every mother to be able to tell their child go to sleep peacefully. >> that's ukrainian first lady olena zelenska addressing congress earlier today pleading for more aid and support for her country. the address comes amid news that russia has expanded its territorial goals for its war in ukraine, despite heavy losses of troops and equipment, foreign minister sergey lavrov said yesterday that russia's territorial aims now include swaths of the south of ukraine.

moscow is using the pretext of american military aid to justify their ramped up aggression towards ukraine. joining us now congressman jim himes of connecticut. you said months ago that you supported designation for russia's sponsor of terror for what it's doing. clearly the attacks over the last two weeks have been almost exclusively aimed at civilians there. i know the speaker agrees with you. where does that stand? >> well, i don't think that's moving fast, nicolle, is that's okay because what's important right now is that we continue to provide the aid, to provide the weapons that are allowing these remarkably courageous ukrainians to stand up for things that we believe in and not just democracy, right, nicolle? yeah, we talk about this country that was trying to become a western democracy. putin puts his boot on that project. it's also about the fact that we don't want to live in a world that's the most powerful country in the world where all around the world more powerful countries think that they can

get their way with less powerful countries simply by rolling tanks over the border. that was the world of the 1890s, you know, and it's not a world we need to go back to. i'm very glad the first lady came here today because, you know, we drift. we drift. we get distracted by other things. we think we could use the money elsewhere. we can't drift on this one. >> the attacks have claimed some of their youngest victims over the last two weeks, a 4-year-old child died last week in a missile strike at a shopping mall and a teenage boy was killed today in kherson. i'm sure you've seen the images of his father just sitting on the street holding his hand. what do we do if we can't help protect an ally's children and those innocent civilians? >> well, i think we need to be clear about what's happening here, right? the russians because they have failed spectacularly to achieve their goals, almost any of their goals, in fact, since they've achieved the opposite of what they sought to achieve with people joining nato, nato stepping up, what they're going to do is they're going to count

on at some point the west saying this just isn't worth it because of the brutality of the russians, because children are driving in shopping malls, because 4-year-olds are losing their lives. they're counting on us getting tired of that and seeking a negotiated solution. but you need to envision what the world looks like if putin comes out of this whole misadventure having gained something. if he comes out of this having gained something rather than being shunned by the world for the rest of his dictatorship over the russian people, we live in a much more dangerous world than we thought we did. >> you mentioned our democracy here at home. what is your assessment of the stakes for this eighth public hearing by the january 6th select committee in making clear to all americans that we were this close to losing ours? >> yeah, you know, it's a super interesting question because, you know, the facts are as clear as can be today in a way they never have been, you know. you used to hear people say, oh, gosh, there were some things about that election that didn't

seem quite right. we're so far past that with 60 court cases. ted olson leading a group that said there was absolutely -- we're way past arguing about the facts. what's concerning for me is an awful lot of people the facts don't matter. if you tell 20, 30% of the american population president trump tried to lead a coup against the peaceful transition of power. they say gosh, it doesn't really worry me that much. polling shows that donald trump is still the preferred candidate by far to run for president of republican voters. >> how do you tie the need to protect our democracy to the need to defeat republicans in the upcoming midterms? >> well, you know, i'm careful about saying that because there are plenty of decent republicans out there, and particularly in districts like mine that are very purple in nature. you know, i think it's a mistake to say that this is a problem with all republicans. it is also true and undeniable

that today the republican party has become a cult of personality that isn't interested in facts. they're interested in promoting the power of one man. but i think there's a subtle nuance there, and i see it in my own district, nicolle, because there's plenty of republicans in southwestern connecticut who have finally said, the hell with this, i've been a republican all my life, but this is not who i am. the question you ask has to be answered pretty carefully. we're not saying all republicans are awful. we're just saying take a look at what that party has become and do you really want to help that party. >> i didn't say awful, i said antidemocratic. i mean, i would equate being antidemocratic with being awful, but is there a way to make an argument about democracy that's very tangible for the purposes of the midterms? >> well, yeah, yeah, i think so. and i think it's subtly happening you know, not a lot of people have been persuaded. i used to like donald trump but not i don't anymore.

it is reminder of the utter chaos, the president of the united states throwing spaghetti against the wall. the president of the united states trying to lunge to grab the wheel of his limousine. i don't care who you are, if that's the most powerful man in the world with a nuclear trigger, think twice. so yeah, i do think that it's important for us to remember that if the republicans win big in november, if they win big after having taken away or forget about donald trump, after having taken away a right that women in this country have enjoyed for three generations. you know, really? do we want to reward that? and i think that's a pretty good reason for people if you're feeling a little tired, a little dispirited, show up to vote. >> yeah, so much on the line. congressman jim himes we played a clip of you from an interview you and i did right after the insurrection in previewing what the committee's expecting to do thursday night and bring all of us back. we'd love to talk with you on the other side of thursday night's hearing if that's okay. >> sounds good, thank you, any cole. >> thank you so much for

spending some time with us today. when we come back, how pete buttigieg brushed off expertly a far right republican congressman's bizarre question about president joe biden and the 25th amendment. our panel will weigh in after a quick break. don't go anywhere. r when you have technology that's easier to control... that can scale across all your clouds... quick break. quick break. don't go anywhere.an do more incredible things. [whistling] i gotta say moving in together has been awesome. no regrets. for you and emily. these are... amazing. thank you wayfair.

how's the puppy? puppy's perfect. yeah great decision! ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪

sadly he shakes hands with ghosts and imaginary people, he falls off bicycles. so my question for you is, sir,

have you spoken with any other cabinet members about implementing the 25th amendment on president biden? >> first of all, i'm glad to have a president who can ride a bicycle, and -- >> answer the question. >> i will look beyond the insulting nature of that question and make clear to you that the president of the united states -- >> have you spoken to any of the cabinet members about implements the 25th amendment on president biden. >> of course not. >> that line of questioning didn't go as planned for that far right republican guy with trademark wit and a direct response, pete buttigieg shut it down, but it shouldn't distract us from the fact that this isn't a one-off. the smear that the republican congressman used in this faux cordial infrastructure hearing with huge blown up photos of president joe biden that must have cost a fortune at kinkos to try to embarrass president biden

for political purposes to get himself a soundbite on fox news is something to pay attention to. it's another banner moment for today's gop. let's bring in former republican congressman david jolly, national chairman of the serve america movement. david jolly we had some squeamishness about amplifying the republican, but what's really important is that pete buttigieg gave a master class on how to shut it down. no, we've never discussed the 25th amendment. i know seven books were written by this point in trump's presidency about how his entire cabinet had considered doing so, but at least my guy can get on a bike and doesn't have to take a golf cart around a world summit. >> that's exactly right, nicolle. joe biden is not the president who suggested injecting bleach into your arm or asking the question could we blow up hurricanes. he's not the person who tried to commit a grievance harm on our very republic. all matters that would raise legitimate questions about the 25th amendment.

joe biden is 39. he's 79. the questioning by the very junior congressman from texas who must have waited four hours to get to ask that question of buttigieg was nothing more than just a cheap shot and i think you hit it exactly right, nicolle. the remarkable thing is we were reminded what a remarkable political actor and presence that mayor pete, secretary buttigieg really is and why he was not only a contender for the presidency but very likely will be in the future. the grace, the poise, the command, and the ability to turn around the nonsense on the questioner, a perfect moment for mayor pete. >> i respect and revere michelle obama errin haines, i think she's the most admired woman in america. i was recently at a gathering with a lot of democrats and a person said that we lost our way when we followed her advice that

said when they go low, we go high. that you can't beat republicans on the high road because you can't find them there. they don't even know where it is anymore, and so to fight these fights where they're taking place is important. where do you come down on that? >> well, i think we saw today where mayor pete comes down on it, which is when they go low, we're having none of it. i mean, we're discussing the 25th amendment obviously because it was a topic during ha recent january 6th hearing when we heard about gop lawmakers openingly mulling whether to invoke the law against the former president in the face of repeated evidence that the election was accurate, and secure, he continued to repeat the big lie. he rejected the idea that the election was not rigged and promoted that to his voters. so representative nells who must have missed secretary buttigieg's remarks on a recent fox news appearance when he was asked about his husband chasten's tweet about justin kavanaugh being interrupted by

those protesters, he managed to take that fox news host to tachk task and bringing up administrative consequences of the dobbs decision. pete buttigieg was not taking the bait today, the youngest ever transportation secretary, and by the way, somebody who is nearly twice as young as his boss referred to president biden as the most vigorous boss or colleague he's ever worked with. so you know, i think that answers the question. >> yeah, i mean, david jolly, it does bring you back to what is a vital lesson, though, in politics that you have to be deflecting and combat the lies about you from today's gop, which has an entire propaganda infrastructure that the left does not have. i mean, they still have a liar in chief in donald trump who even in exile deplatformed in mar-a-lago is still calling all the shots. they have a grand pew baa disinformation chief in tucker

carlson, and it is pumped out across the country. when pete buttigieg can't do the smacking down of the lies, what do you advise democrats do ahead of the midterms. >> i think secretary buttigieg showed democrats how to handle this. there's no tension between what secretary buttigieg did and what first lady obama suggested because we're living in different eras and the truth is as the obamas were serving, yes, you had all these new media platforms emerging, but they were in their youth still. what is available to right wing republicans, conspiracy theorists, authoritarian, antidemocratic, sitting members of congress and other purveyors of mistruths is our platforms, media platforms where those mistruths go unchecked. that is appreciably different than when michelle obama made her comment. i don't believe you can let it go unchecked. there are ways to do it with grace and intelligence, and that's what you saw from

secretary buttigieg. i think michelle obama's is right, you don't have to get dirty but you don't have to accept the mistruths that republicans are laying out right now. >> david and errin are sticking around for now. up next for us, what it says about today's republican party that 157 republican house members today voted against a bill to protect the right to marry whomever you want. that's next. rrmay whomever you want. that's next. my active psoriatic arthritis can slow me down. now, skyrizi helps me get going

by treating my skin and joints. along with significantly clearer skin, skyrizi helps me move with less joint pain, stiffness, swelling, and fatigue. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year after two starter doses. skyrizi attaches to and reduces a source of excess inflammation that can lead to skin and joint symptoms. with skyrizi, 90% clearer skin and less joint pain is possible. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. with skyrizi, there's nothing like the feeling of improving my skin and joints... ...and that means everything. now's the time to talk to your doctor about how skyrizi can help treat your psoriatic arthritis- so you can get going. learn how abbvie can help you save. love you. have a good day, behave yourself. like she goes to work

at three in the afternoon and sometimes gets off at midnight. she works a lot, a whole lot. we don't get to eat in the early morning. we just wait till we get to the school. so, yeah. right now here in america, millions of kids like victoria and andre live with hunger, and the need to help them has never been greater. when you join your friends, neighbors and me to support no kid hungry, you'll help hungry kids get the food they need. if we want to take care of our children, then we have to feed them. your gift of just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month at helpnokidhungry.org right now will help provide healthy meals and hope. we want our children to grow and thrive and to just not have to worry and face themselves with the struggles that we endure. nobody wants that for their children. like if these programs didn't exist me and aj, we wouldn't probably get lunch at all.

please call or go online right now with your gift of just $19 a month. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this limited edition t-shirt to show you're part of the team that's helping feed kids and change lives. if you're coming in hungry, there's no way you can listen to me teach, do this activity, work with this group. so starting their day with breakfast and ending their day with this big, beautiful snack is pretty incredible. whether kids are learning at school or at home, your support will ensure they get the healthy meals they need to thrive. because when you help feed kids, you feed their hopes, their dreams, and futures. kids need you now more than ever. so please call this number right now to join me in helping hungry kids or go online to helpnokidhungry.org and help feed hungry kids today.

senator, the democrats are talking about bringing up a bill -- same-sex marriage, over here would you vote for that? >> i'm looking at the bill and probably will. >> it counts as an encouraging sign, right, in the effort to protect marriage equality in america. that was senator thom tillis, he's a republican suggesting that he just might vote yes on a bill that would federally protect the right to same-sex marriages. in a 50-50 senate, majority leader chuck schumer needs ten republicans to say what senator tillis just said to say yes on such a law. senators rob portman and susan collins are numbers two and three if tillis remains a yes. both of them expressing support in the last 24 hours. yesterday their colleagues in the house passed a bill with the support of 47 republicans, glass half full, a passed bill is a passed bill. however, the glass half empty part of this story, however, 47

republican yes votes adds up to 157 republican no votes on the topic of marriage equality and the freedom to live with and marry whomever you love. we're back with david and errin. i think this story is so galling and shows the sort of hostage taking nature of the far right extremist views. 71% of all americans support marriage equality, errin. >> yeah, i mean, yes maybe the bright spot is those 47 republicans who did support i in the house with that vote yesterday, but with 157 not supporting it, it really is unfortunate, one, that this is even up for legislating. i mean, seven years ago we had the obergefell decision legalizing gay marriage, loving versus virginia was decided in 1957, and here we are looking to congress to really protect marriage for lgbtq and maybe even interracial couples after the dobbs decision where you had justice thomas in that dissent

signaling that these kinds of rights could be on the table going forward and that, you know, things that we thought were settled law could be up for debate, discussion, and possible legislation. what also i think is interesting, nicolle, is that -- so you have people like congressman tillis, susan collins, rob portman saying that they may be in favor of this, but then you also have democratic leadership in the senate who are waffling on whether or not this can come to a vote amid other priorities, legislative priorities and so, you know, i think for folks for whom this feels existential, who are wanting to see their rights codified and protected in this really uncertain political and legal environment, that certainly is not a good sign for them. >> well, and i guess i would say as a woman, david jolly in post-roe america, they're coming for all of us eventually. it is existential to all of us to protect marriage equality, and i wonder what you think it

says that 157 republicans felt courageous enough to vote against something that 71% of all americans think is right. >> i wouldn't call it courage. i would call it willful ignorance, and i think it's an indication that 157 republican members of congress would i think it's an indicator of what a republican-controlled congress would look like. they would graft himself in a state's right mantra and continue to deny what should be fundamental rights by the highest court in the land. i served at a time where there were only three or four of us in the republican caucus that supported marriage equality. i'm glad to see that's grown to 40 or so. all i would suggest to those 157 is this.

people's view of marriage is informed by their basic tenants or whatever traditional practices they adhere to. that's a celebration of your faith. and to suggest that the government is going to restrict an expression of faith is actually a restriction of your freedom of religion. so to the very hard right conservatives, celebrate your faith within the church house. and recognize that the will of the statehouses to provide equality and equity to people of all walks of faith and those who choose no faith at all. this is a fundamental matter of freedom. that drew conservatives to be able to embrace and embrace robustly. >> i think ted olson, a longtime conservative, former solicitor general argued with david boyce to the supreme court. this has always had bipartisan support and a moral and legal level. david and erin, thank you so much for being part of our coverage today. a quick break for us. we will be right back. >> hi, i'm eileen.

i live in vancouver washington and i write mystery novels. it's been such an important part of my life. i have a puppy. as i was writing, i found that i just wasn't as sharp and i knew i needed to do something. so i started taking cribbage and. i realized that i was much more clear and i was remembering the details that i was supposed to. prevajen keeps my brain working right. >> excuse me. >> enjoy the menu at ihop. >> sailing, past extraordinary landscapes into the heart of iconic cities. it's a journey for the curious traveler. one that many have yet to discover. exploring with viking brings you closer to the world. to the history, the culture,

the flavors. a serene river voyage on an elegant viking long ship. learn more at viking.com. >> when you are the leader in disaster cleanup and restoration, how do you make like what never even happened happened? yes. by being prepared for anything. >> like it never even happened. >> writers, let your queries be known. >> riders is cool, but bikers, really cool. >> seriously? can we go back to the rec center ? the commute is brutal. >> how about getting a quote to see if we can save on number one motorcycle insurance? >> we got the house. >> back at your pace.

store things until you're ready and then we deliver to your new home. across town or across the country. pods. your personal moving and storage team. >> there's a monster problem and our hero need solutions. brainstorm. they shoot it. back to the board. dave says read it and just then, our hero has a breakthrough. shoot it. cameras. shoot a movie. joe our humble team how to save the day by working together on murals. >> if mega republicans get their way, abortion will be banned nationwide with no exceptions for medicare and social security will and in five years with no replacement. elections will be decided by politicians with no regard for your vote. these maga , if they get back

in power, your rights and freedoms will be in danger. democrats will protect your rights and the only way to stop maga republicans is to vote for democrats. >> is this where your grandparents cut a rug with the jitterbug or return from your, dreaming of the possibilities ahead? this adds new detail to your family story. explore it free on ancestry. the international climate scientists call the latest climate report nothing less than quote, code red for humanity. let me say it again. code red for humanity. i will not take no for an answer. i will do everything in my power to clean our air and water . protector people's health. the clean energy future. again, sounds like hyperbole but our children and grandchildren are counting on us. not a joke. not a joke.

if we don't keep it to 1.5 degrees centigrade, we lose it all. we don't get to turn it around. and the world is counting on us. that was president joe biden earlier today sounding the alarm at an event to announce new executive action to combat climate change. comes as the world is experiencing record temperatures this summer with parts of europe engulfed in wildfires. the executive action contains $2.3 billion for disaster preparation and funding for low income families to help them withstand extreme temperatures. the white house says the moves of the first of several buying plans to take efforts as congress trek to deal on climate change failed. we will be right back. an i back. e >> when you have technology that's easier to control, that can tail across everything,

it's easier to be an innovator so you can do more incredible things. . >> now is the time for cleaner indoor air with an air duct cleaning from stanley steamer. you had us for carpet cleaning but we've been cleaning air ducts for over 20 years. we do things the right we are cleaning your entire system so if you need an air duct cleaning, call one 800 steamer today. >> vacation. look at priceline because when you save more, you can know way more. >> no way. >> no way. >> no way. >> no way. >> priceline. every trip is a big deal. >> inflation is the worst it's been in 40 years.

american families are struggling to make ends meet, but instead of controlling costs, congress is pushing anti- innovation legislation that will destroy american jobs, we can our national security and empower china at our expense. 84% of americans say this is the wrong agenda at the wrong time. tell congress to focus on getting inflation under control . tell them to stop undercutting america's tech innovators. >> if you have disease, your eyes can be something more. the itchiness may just be scratching the surface. that gritty feeling may not be so cut and dried. and you need to put the pain behind your eyes front and center. up to 50% of people with graves' disease will

i'm a member of american home shield. they cover items no matter their rates. >> to anyone who thinks they know what it's about, okay.

it is so hard to predict the mind of jordan. >> rated r. strohm i thank you so much for letting us into your home is during these extraordinary times. the beat with ari melber starts right now. strohm i thank you to you. we begin with breaking news. in a clear display of legal confidence that we can report tonight, the justice department is formally resting his criminal case against trump aid, steve bannon. this is a very deliberate legal strategy and we have it covered for you. they called only two witnesses or prosecutors laying out the case in just two days. that's fast, even for simple case. political josh gerstein with inside the courtroom. he's been covering all of this and has first and reporting from outside the court about all of this including the late- breaking news. he joins me in a moment in the en