you know -- it might be enough to sway a general election contest, but a republican primary contest is an entirely different story. you're really going for the base voters who remain firmly in donald trump's camp. the odds are in his favor, despite all this. >> interesting, though, if it provides an opening for another republican to say, i'm going to challenge him in 2024, even if the former president runs again. laughlin, thank you for being here. 8:00 p.m. eastern will be the hearing. thanks for getting up "way too early" on this thursday morning. "morning joe" starts right now. >> 6:00 on the east coast, as we look live at capitol hill this morning. the january 6th committee will bring more evidence to a primetime audience tonight. what we're learning about tonight's testimony and the possibility of some

never-before-seen video. plus, attorney general merrick garland is pressed about the justice department's response to the attack on the capitol. we'll show you his response to a question about prosecuting former president trump. and concerns about the next election have the senate taking rare, bipartisan action. there is promising progress on a bill to prevent future coup attempts. good morning. welcome to "morning joe." it is thursday, july 21st. big night tonight. with joe and me, we have the host of "way too early" and white house bureau chief at "politico," jonathan lemire. former chairman of the republican national committee, michael steele. good to have you both. we begin with a new development surrounding those deleted texts from the secret service from the day before and the day of the january 6th attack on the capitol. a senior secret service official tells nbc news that employees

received at least three emails, including one before the insurrection -- >> wow. >> -- instructing them to preserve all records on their electronic devices. that's as clear as it gets. the first came in early december of 2020, according to the source, ahead of a pre-planned data migration that would essentially restore all devices to their factory settings. the next came in january, though the exact date is unclear. both emails reportedly included reminders that federal employees have a responsibility to preserve their records and included instructions on how no do so. though neither email mentioned the insurrection, a third email on february 4th reportedly instructed all employees to preserve communications specific to january 6th. by that point, several congressional committees had already requested secret service records from that day. but the agency claims the data

migration had already taken place by then. and all relevant text messages were erased for good. >> mika, this is absolutely outrageous. michael steele, three warnings. they received three warnings and, yet, they still erased all the messages. i mean, man, i -- >> yeah. >> this was not a mistake. i mean, people saying, well, maybe it was a bureaucratic snafu. that was not a bureaucratic snafu. it was an intentional trashing of historical documents that needed to be saved for criminal probe that they knew would be coming. >> yeah. no, i couldn't agree with you more, joe, on that point. and the reality of it is, i think we just need to call it what it is, as you just have. this was something that was done deliberately. they had the warnings. i mean, irrespective of the

warnings, you're a significant law enforcement agency within the federal government. you know damn well what the processes and procedures are with respect to the retention of documents. you know there's a federal document retention act that you're subject to, just like every other organ of government. so the fact they're hemming and hawing and talking about, oh, well, the process had started and it was underway, no. >> that's nonsense. >> that's nonsense. so they've got a lot to account for here. there should be some heads that roll. there's something -- i mean, look, what are you trying to hide here? what should we be knowing that is related to those documents, and now you're telling us they're gone forever? well, we'll see just how gone they are, but the reality of it is, the secret service is in the middle of this right now. >> well, and the real problem here, jonathan lemire, i mean, there's so many problems here, but michael beschloss,

presidential historian, underlined it well last night, because these are law enforcement officers that were a part of, that were in the middle of a planned coup against the united states of america. so they knew that information needed to be protected. and as law enforcement officers, especially around the president of the united states, who was trying to succeed in running a fascist overthrow of an american election, and by extension, the american government itself, they knew they had a higher responsibility. this is what presidential historian michael beschloss said. disappearance of the requested secret service records, no matter what explanation, is a disgrace to our country. this is a point he made that i thought was a bit frightening. runaway and lawless law enforcement and security

agencies have at times historically been a feature of impending dictatorship. coup d'etat attempts in world history have often gone hand in hand to assassinate and detain top leaders who might stand in the way. what was so chilling is what he is saying. you know, if you want to pull off a coup, you need some arm of law enforcement with you. the mere fact, i mean, of course, trump failed in his fascist attempt to overthrow an american election, an american government by extension, but there are members of law enforcement -- and you said this yesterday -- who were sympathetic to his coup attempt. i mean, i heard that. you've heard that quietly. a lot of people have been talking about concerns inside the secret service about these people being more loyal, some of them, to donald trump than to

the united states, to the united states constitution, to american democracy. i brushed it off. every time i see secret service members, i thank them for their service to america. but, my god, there's a cancer, to borrow a phrase, there's a cancer growing inside the secret service, and it needs to be ripped out. this shows just how dangerous things have got inside the secret service. >> yeah. let's start here, secret service is a law enfocement agency. what is one of the top jobs of law enforcement agencies? preserve evidence, period. they didn't do that. there was obviously everything surrounding january 5th and 6th, some of those important days in the history of the secret service. but it's more than that. it is routine matter of course. government employees preserve records. it's part of the law. there's a suggestion here there's a volation of the

federal preservation act. that would be a crime. they got an email initially in december to preserve records ahead of this phone migration, and that part was scheduled. no one is disputing that. but they should have preserved it. they got a warning in december. more in january. we know that about ten days after the january 6th riots, they heard from inspector general of congressional investigators to preserve records. they went ahead and, ten days, a week or so after that, went ahead with the migration that erased all that data. they had adequate time to preserve it. they needed to preserve that evidence, which is what it was, of donald trump's behbehavior, whereabouts, and actions that day, but also what was happening with the vice president who was at the capitol, mere feet from where the rioters were. certainly, there have been whispers in washington for a long time about pro-trump elements within the secret service. to underscore your point, most agents, of course, do they job with great professionalism. dangerous, hard jobs, and they should be thanked. but there have been questions raised about some loyalties here and about the conduct of some secret service agents, one of

whom, of course, tony ranaudo, became a top adviser to the president inside the west wing. there is an extraordinary amount of frustration from the january 6th committee, law enforcement, other agencies and democrats on capitol hill and the white house about how the service conducted itself during those trying days. >> jonathan lemire, i -- i hesitate because this seems so obvious, but i think it is worth stating, january 6th was a very important day. it was a day, if you were a member of the secret service, you would have to be under a rock to not know what happened on january 6th. and in the days leading up, you might have heard a thing or two about what might happen. to get the emails and say maybe you missed them or -- how could you miss a throng of people, a mob of criminals storming the capitol, wanting to hang mike pence and kill members of

congress, desecrating the capitol, breaking windows, leaving feces in the hallways? you're not going to preserve your data? that just seems like personal irresponsibility on the part of a person serving the united states secret service. >> i don't think it is personal irresponsibility. i think it is criminality. that's what, unfortunately, one more thing the department of justice has to look at. >> you can't miss what happened that day. >> there was an attempted fascist coup of the united states of america, the american government, of an american election, and the secret service is covering up -- >> a potential fight in the beast with president trump lunging at someone's neck, you're going to erase your texts? >> they have effectively been a part of the cover-up. i mean, in '70s parlance, they burned the tapes.

>> right. >> whoever did that, whoeverfors to pay. >> let's bring in the reporter who broke the story, julia ainsley. new development brought to us by you, julia. if you could add any more reporting to this or context? and am i off to think, you're a member of the secret service, on a day like january 6th, you'd think, instinctively, i need to preserve everything, and not need to be told? >> yeah. i mean, you're absolutely right, mika. i have to say, i'm down here at grandma's house with the kids this week. when i got sources, i had to call in grandma for backup because i knew this would take everybody by surprise. i started talking to sources. you have the timeline exactly right. at first, there was an email sent december 9th, telling them we're going to do this data migration. you need to preserve all of your records. anything you would think is material. if it is a text you're sending

about a starbucks order, you don't need to preserve that. otherwise, according to the national records act, you need to start preserving this. and as a federal employee, you're trained on what is important to keep. they get another email sometime in january. i'm not told the date of that. i have to point that out. then they get another one february 4th that is specific to january 6th, saying, because we already have these requests in from congress -- remember, the dh aig request didn't come until december 26th -- and, obviously, as you point out, the significance of the day, january 6th, you need to preserve a all records, all communications, including text messages, specific to january 6th. what i'm told is perhaps many of them had already been lost or deleted by that point, but if you look at the overall timeline, it looks like this migration happened from january to april. let's just look at that. is it possible that every text from that day was the very first

to be deleted? that's also hard to get your head around. of course, we don't know the exact detail of exactly what was deleted when. i also have to point out, you know, if you're looking at intentionally here, it can be hard to put the tea leaves together. overall, this is what we expect the national archives to get to the bottom of. i think you're going to keep hearing this argument from secret service. i'm pointing it out because it's the argument i'm hearing from sources and i think we'll hear from the secret service, and they think that, culturally, they don't text very often. really, they do emails, do radios, make calls. it is not common for them to text. i don't think there would have been much material in text massages from that day. of course, we don't know until we can see it. unfortunately, now, we'll never see it. i have to say that because it is something that kept coming up on conversations i was having. look, we hardly ever text. i'm pointing that out because you'll hear it later. >> interesting. >> i'm not defending it though. >> makes sense, they're busy. at the same time, the fact they're gone is practically

impossible to conceive. nbc's julia ainsley, thank you. and your grandma for your reporting. >> thank grandma. >> my mother, yes. >> your mother. >> oh, your mom. >> thanks for stepping in in the clutch. >> appreciate it. >> michael steele, we don't text much. yeah, no, that doesn't work. one of the reasons it doesn't work is, yesterday, we had a "washington post" reporter on, carol lenning, that talks about one scandal after another, just personal scandals the secret service has had. she said it always seems to be the text messages that would get them in trouble. they would be talking about other workers in a derogatory way. they would be talking about women who were subordinates in a derogatory way. she said it was always, you know, the text messages that got them in trouble. so this whole thing, like, oh,

you know, come on, we don't text that much, it's complete b.s. >> got to get his sound up. >> yeah, we lost -- >> i was going to say -- >> there we go. >> the history, as carol and others pointed out, is right there, we know what that is. we know how the secret service has, you know, performed based on those -- that type of evidence, those texts, for example. here's the thing that i'm curious about, and i'm curious about for you, joe, what you think about it. the fact that he was brought in as department chief of staff, from the secret service, and is now a director of one of the divisions. how do you take someone who played that kind of role inside the administration and still

retain them in some capacity, particularly given the biases that were clearly exhibited by this individual in working with donald trump? it just speaks to the culture that you were referencing a moment ago, that seems to really drive a lot of what's happening here. so i think there's a lot more cleaning up and cleaning out to do with respect to not just these texts, but what is the culture inside this institution, that they think it's okay to take that individual, who has shown clear bias in his preferences politically, and still think that he works in an organization that should be very clear of something like that? >> yeah, he's shown clear bias. time and time again, he's been caught lying.

his word, according to others s no good. he is lying again through the secret service, saying that cassidy hutchinson is making things up under the testimony, when everybody else around is saying that's not true. so, yeah, again, it's a real problem with the culture. it is a real problem when you politicize a culture like that. it just can't be that way. we have, by the way, coming up, we're going to be looking at another january 6th hearing, a blockbuster january 6th hearing tonight. we'll be looking at the 187 minutes that the capitol was under siege by the trump rioters, and donald trump refused to do anything to stop that riot. other than rewinding his television and being encouraged by the most violent aspects of that riot. we're also going to be talking about steve bannon, the prosecution. they didn't really break a sweat. >> no. >> put two witnesses up, okay, i think we're done.

bannon, we're going to check out his fashion statements, how many shirts he wore yesterday. i'm curious how medieval we went with the pen statement, ballpoint pen statement in the shirt. >> wait, there's more. >> yeah. also, if it were scarborough country, we'd be playing "devil went down to georgia" and have a picture of rudy giuliani, who is being forced to test in new york. but we won't do that. we'll be right back. n new before discovering nexium 24hr to treat her frequent heartburn... n new claire could only imagine enjoying chocolate cake. now, she can have her cake and eat it too. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. york but we won't do that we'll be right back.

for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis who are positive for acetylcholine receptor antibodies, it may feel like the world is moving without you. but the picture is changing, with vyvgart. in a clinical trial, participants achieved improved daily abilities with vyvgart added to their current treatment. and vyvgart helped clinical trial participants achieve reduced muscle weakness. vyvgart may increase the risk of infection. in a clinical study, the most common infections were urinary tract and respiratory tract infections. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or if you have symptoms of an infection. vyvgart can cause allergic reactions. the most common side effects include respiratory tract infection, headache, and urinary tract infection. picture your life in motion with vyvgart. a treatment designed using a fragment of an antibody.

ask your neurologist if vyvgart could be right for you. dad! a dinosaur! ask your neurologist it's just a movie. no dad, a real dinosaur! show doorbell camera. the new xfinity video doorbell works with your xfinity home system for real time alerts no matter what's at the door. get off the car... it's a lease! jurassic world dominion, available now on xfinity. rule your home security with xfinity home.

22 past the hour. a live look at the white house as the sun comes up over washington. 187 minutes of donald trump's inaction. that's the focus of tonight's eighth hearing from the house january 6th committee

investigating the attack on the capitol. the hearing will convene at 8:00 p.m. eastern time and is expected to last around two hours. committee chair bennie thompson will lead the hearing remotely after testing positive for covid on tuesday. the committee will present evidence of what it calls former president trump's dereliction of duty, with a minute-by-minute account of what happened inside the white house between trump's rally at the ellipse and his tweet, telling the capitol rioters to go home. the "washington post" reports the public could see outtakes from trump's january 7th recorded address, in which he attempted to condemn the rioters. former aide to chief of staff mark meadows, cassidy hutchinson, testified to the committee that trump had to be convinced to make those remarks, and that there were, quote, several lines that didn't make it in there about prosecuting the rioters or calling them

violent. she said, quote, trump didn't want that in there. he wanted to put in there that he wanted to potentially pardon them. the "post" says the commit thee plans to drive home a key point, not only did trump doing in to stop the violence, he also sat back and enjoyed watching it. two military veterans, congressman adam kinzinger and congresswoman elaine luria are set to lead tonight's questioning. two witnesses will appear live. former deputy adviser pottinger and former press secretary sarah matthews. both resigned in the aftermath of the insurrection. barbara, give us a sense of what you expect for tonight and what you've seen so far.

does anything lead to beyond the hearings? >> tonight, this three hour of inaction is going to be very important to the case. because, unlike most of us who have no duty to get involved when there is a crime occurring, citizens don't, the president does, as the commander in chief of our armed forces, who has the duty to take care the laws will faithfully executed, his inaction can amount to a crime. if people died because he was failing to exercise due care while he was aware that violence was occurring at the capitol, that could cause legal liability for him, mika, even beyond what is going on at the committee, at the department of justice. i imagine they're looking at things like conspiracy to defraud the united states and obstruction of an official proceeding, but this could land evidence to even charges of manslaughter. under federal law, a death, even an unintended death that occurs on federal property, can be charged as a manslaughter.

for someone like a president who has an affirmative duty to intervene, his failure to call up the national guard or to even go on video or to tweet that they should stop could be the kind of omission that could amount to manslaughter. >> yeah. you know, michael steele, i talked to committee members early on in this process when they were under criticism, and they said, "be patient. we're putting things together." i asked a few of them, what's the most compelling part of the evidence that you've looked at? they said, "we can't go into the details." the fact you had kevin mccarthy and other republicans calling donald trump, screaming that they needed help, telling him to call his riot off, call his mob off. they especially talked about that moment where trump said

it's antifa, and mccarthy yelled back, "no, these are your people." he swore at the president. the fact that the president had been warned by his own political allies that people were going to die, and he sat back and did nothing for 187 minutes, when he could have stopped it with a tweet. we heard the testimony before the january 6th hearing last week. they asked, went in the capitol? yeah. i thought the election was stolen. when did you leave? he said, when president trump told us to leave, we all left the building. donald trump could have stopped all of this. it's all in the record. i do think -- i mean, how damning is that going to be tonight, that 187 minutes where he just sat back and reveled in the violence in his name? >> oh, i think it's going to be absolutely damning. particularly, if you couple it with the video evidence that they accumulated from january

7th, trying to get the president to speak to what had happened on the 6th and not being able to do that. not wanting to do that. i think it really sends out a very clear message about the one thing that everyone keeps claiming, you know, it's hard to get evidence of. that is mens rea, the president's mindset leading up to january 6th, on the day of january 6th, and after january 6th. i don't know how much more you need to understand exactly what donald trump thought about the events of that day. he enjoyed it. he reveled in it. he rewind the tape to see it over again live. he's watching it live and pushed the rewind button and watched that part over again. so you have a very clear example of where the president's mind was.

i don't know how the justice department ultimately looks at that. i know how the american people are looking at it. it's revealing itself not polling, revealing itself in the interests they have in this committee, and it's been an essential part of how this story has been told, joe, to make that point very clearly. i get the whole thing, oh, my god, he is a former president. we've never done this before. what do we do? well, you do what you do to any american who commits a crime. and you have evidence, sufficient evidence of that crime. it doesn't matter the position. because you keep telling us, no one is above the law. yet, you consistently give us an invitation that maybe some people are. that could be a real problem once all this evidence is in. >> well, to that point, and, michael steele, you know, i think there's more dangers at this point if someone clearly attempts to damage our democracy, and that is putting it lightly, there's more danger in not having accountability at

the very top. >> yes. >> the person who allegedly said mike pence deserved it. so it's not just sitting back and enjoying it. also confirming, reinforcing that the violence is deserved. here's attorney general, to your point, michael steele, merrick garland in a news conference yesterday when asked about the justice department's perceived inaction when it comes to the january 6th investigation. >> there is a lot of speculation about what the justice department is doing, what it is not doing, what our theories are, what our theories aren't, and there will continue to be that speculation. that's because a central tenant in the way in which the justice department investigates, a central tenant to the rule of law, is that we do not do our investigations in public. this is the most wide-ranging investigation and the most important investigation that the

justice department has ever entered into. and we have done so because this effort to upend a legitimate election, transferring power from one administration to another, cuts at the fundamental of american democracy. we have to get this right. and for people who are concerned, as i think every american should be, about protecting democracy, we have to do two things. we have to hold accountable every person who is criminally responsible for trying to overturn a legitimate election, and we must do it in a way filled with integrity and professionalism. the way the justice department conducts investigations. both of these are necessary in order to achieve justice and to protect our democracy. no person is above the law in this country. nothing stops us -- >> even the former president? >> i don't know how to -- maybe

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 is criminally responsible for an attempt to undo a democratic election. >> that was about as straightforward as you could be. no person is above the law. and i must say, yesterday, i was quite critical of the attorney general. even before i saw this tape, i read an article in "law fair" by ben wittes. by the end of that, i felt badly about screaming from the cheap seats about what an attorney general was doing in a federal investigation. i mean, here's the thing, while it's been frustrating, and i understand it has been very

frustrating for all of us, to see prosecutors that worked with mueller and prosecutors that worked in the manhattan d.a.'s office say donald trump is guilty of a crime, they waived it off. they said they believed he was guilty but didn't do anything. ben wittes was right yesterday, that people like me should not criticize the attorney general prematurely. federal investigations are long, laborious efforts. and given the gravity of the possible prosecution of a former president, you know, the pros of the doj, the fbi need to move with great caution, even while they're pursuing justice. we remain a nation of laws, even if donald trump, time and time and time again, tried to politicize the department of justice. it's something his opponents should not do.

and i will say, it's very easy for me, it's very easy for other commentators, it is very easy for democratic politicians, it is very easy for people on twitter to criticize merrick garland and federal prosecutors. but, again, jonathan lemire, and i'm sure barbara can underline this, sometimes federal investigations take a very, very long time. you had the democratic candidate for governor, jonathan, in the state of florida who almost beat ron desantis, who was recently charged in a federal investigation. i think that took five -- i don't know, four, five, six years for that investigation to run its course. there are other investigations of politicians, people saying, what's going on in that investigation? why is it taking so long? federal investigations are long, laborious efforts. they want to make sure they get everything right. so, i mean, it would be,

obviously, disturbing if merrick garland were moving too quickly on something as volatile as a possible indictment of a former president. >> your points are well-taken. but, certainly, it is true that there has been a lot of frustration from democratic lawmakers and many of those inside the west wing about the pace of this probe. but, barbara mcquaid, joe just hit it, sometimes the wheels of justice move slowly. further complicating matters is not just that donald trump is a former president, he could be in a matter of weeks an announced candidate for president again which, of course, plays into it, as well. give us a sense here as to what you perceive the department of justice is doing, and how, what we've heard from the january 6th committee so far, culminating, for now, in the hearing showed necessar to the department of justice, with due diligence, to bring justice?

>> the committee has shown a compelling narrative about what happened on january 6th and leading to that. but the justice department's job is very different. i think merrick garland doesn't want to just charge donald trump, he wants to convict him and have that conviction sustained on appeal. the committee has shown us one side of the story without any cross-examination of witnesses. the justice department needs to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury, which will include some people who are sympathetic to donald trump. to prove that, they have to do a lot more than what we're seeing before the committee. they have to put everyone in the grand jury. they have to review the text messages. they have some tools that are available to them that are unavailable to the committee. things like search warrants to get some of these phones and encrypted chats that maybe the committee has not had access to. the ability to flip defendants, which they are now doing with four members of the oath keepers who had contact with roger stone. and exploiting their phones. they've got the phones of

enrique tarrio of the proud boys and stewart rhodes of the oath keepers. they can get into the friends of stone group chat, things the committee doesn't have. it isn't that it goes slowly b b, but there is more to do. merrick garland listening to the uninformed theories of reporters, what they're doing and not doing, they need a luther the translator. remember him from "key and peele"? he patiently answers the question, instead, and repeats they're looking into anyone who had anything to do with upending the peaceful transition of presidential power, and no one is above the law. even when asked, even a president? yeah, no one. i don't know how to say this more clearly, no on. they're on it. >> it was a very strong statement yesterday. thank you so much for being with us, former u.s. attorney barbara

mcquaid. >> thank you. >> greatly appreciated. mika, it was -- i mean, it was very strong. it was to the point. the things i've heard not just from democratic politicians, but i've heard from some republicans, some independents, some former republicans over the past year or two, they're saying, oh, donald trump will never be convicted of anything. he gets away. he's the guy that gets away with everything. for anybody that saw "l.a. confidential," he is rolo. he gets away with it. even people with trump laughed through the years, that trump gets away with everything. so when you have the investigation of the mueller report, and you have ten examples of where prosecutors could bring obstruction of justice charges. when you have mueller testifying

in effect, that charges probably would have been brought against trump were he not president of the united states, but, again, he gets away with it. i say this whether there is a republican in there or democrat in there, it is ridiculous. this guidance from the justice department, from the 1970s, presidents should be able to be indicted, whether they're republicans or democrats, if they break the law. they should be able to be indicted by the justice department. it's that simple. but you have that. then you have manhattan d.a. you have prosecutors developing their case. i can't wait to hear why this investigation was killed. and these prosecutors who were ready to move forward suddenly are cut off at the knees and told, "you know what, we're not going to pursue the investigation of donald trump anymore." really? these prosecutors telling everybody, he's guilty of

crimes. they're not letting us go after a former president who is clearly guilty of crimes. so, again, frustration has built up. yesterday, though, merrick garland spoke to some of those frustrations. >> i think barbara put it best when she said, he's on it. for whatever it is. i would say two things, though. just randomly, keep your eye on fulton county. my instincts tell me that there will be a story out of georgia that will be fascinating to watch. but it's a complicated time when you're dealing with a former president for a number of reasons. it only gets more complicated as we head toward the midterms. pause those who are still very misled by this former president will claim and follow his claims of a witch hunt, which will no doubt happen if we get closer to the midterms. and merrick garland's job is to not listen to any of the noise out there and to focus on justice. which is often a slow roll. so, you know, stay tuned.

>> you know, mika, the thing is, we were critical time and time again of donald trump and barr for politicizing the justice department. and so if we're critical of -- >> right. >> -- republicans politicizing the justice department and leaning in, we certainly don't want joe biden, we don't want democrats or others trying the to put pressure on the doj in any investigations they may have of republicans, independents, or democrats. because, again, you've heard me say it time and again, we are a rule of law. we are a nation of laws. governed by the rule of law. what separates us from other countries constitutionally, i've seen through the years, i believe it to be the legislative -- or the judiciary branch. i think our federal courts did just that during all the election challenges. >> it did. >> you're seeing trump-appointed

judge doing it again in the steve bannon case. he's not cutting steve bannon any slack because he was appointed to the bench by donald trump, nominated to the bench by trump. so, again, we're a nation of laws. that's something we should celebrate. it is something we should remember, too. whether democrats are running the justice department or republicans are running the justice department. coming you, while investigators continue to probe for potential interference in the 2020 presidential race, members of congress are moving to stop candidates from stealing future elections. >> this is good news. >> senator amy klobuchar joins us to talk about that development next on "morning joe." tha we've still got the best moves you've ever seen good for you, but shingles doesn't care. because 1 in 3 people will get shingles, you need protection. development next on "morning development next on "morning joe.

so, what can protect you? shingrix protects. you can protect yourself from shingles with a vaccine proven to be over 90% effective. shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your pharmacist or doctor about shingrix. shingles doesn't care. but you should. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. [ sfx: submarine rising out of water ] minions are bitin' today. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ minions: the rise of gru, only in theaters.

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

i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today.

mom: how was school? dad: wow! ♪ vo: music can help you express how you're feeling. when you can't find the language, find the lyrics. 46 past the hour. there is new movement of reforming the electoral count act. after months of negotiating, a bipartisan group of senators announced two proposals yesterday to close the gaps in

federal law and prevent future candidates from stealing elections. specifically, the bill seeks to close loopholes in election law that former president trump and his allies tried to exploit to keep him in power, despite the fact that he lost the 2020 election. the first bill would clarify the vice president's role in counting electoral college votes, raise the bar for members of congress to object and try to prevent fake slates of electors from interfering in the process. the second bill is aimed at protecting election workers. joining us now, democratic senator amy klobuchar of minnesota, a member of the judiciary committee, part of the rules committee. senator, you expect to hold a hearing on these proposals soon. >> yes. >> tell us how it is going in terms of republicans and democrats working together on this, and what does that tell us? >> everyone that came out of

january 6th understood that we had to get to the bottom of what happened. that's what the january 6th committee is doing right now, including tonight. we had to fix the security at the capitol, something senator blunt and i took very seriously. we have new police chiefs, new sergeant in arms, you name it. the third piece was not allowing procedure set in 1887, rutherford hays, antiquated law and updating it. one person can object. i don't think they knew ted cruz. one person can object, and you can throw the whole thing for each state they can object to. so what can group has done here, and we'll have the hearing august 3rd, senator blunt and myself, hear this legislation and take testimony from witnesses, is to suggest some changes to this. up the ante on how many people have to object and make sure you

clarify the role of the vice president, you make it. because i was the one with, you know, senator blunt at 3:30 in the morning walking through the broken glass with the two young women with the mahogany box. i know very well this proceeding has to be changed. >> senator, it's great news. i'm glad that republicans and democrats are working together on it. and one of the things i like so much about the bill is that it is going the require, i guess, a fifth of members in each chamber to raise an objection and start the process. in the past, of course, january 6th, 2021, is standalone. there's no moral equivalency here. that said, it seems every four years, there will be a democrat objecting when a republican wins, a republican objecting when a democrat wins, and it's really disgraceful. it's nonsense.

even when it is peaceful and brushed aside. i love that you all are raising the level for those objections. >> yes. so senator king and durbin and i had one bill. we gave it to in committee. susan collins and others on the committee have taken this and really got an agreement between a bipartisan agreement. i know everyone is going to want to look at it. it'll take a few days, as i said. this is a big deal, to change this, but we have to do something. you can't allow each state -- you're right about the one person objecting. they can literally do it to each state, joe. they could do it for all. each time they do it taks 3 to 4 hours. we anticipated it'd take 24 hours through the night, without the insurrection, to get through this. then you have the fake electors slate.

something has to be done so that never happens again. american voices need to be heard so they can dually elect their president. this procedure needs to be reformed. >> michael steele has the next question. but, michael, i just want to say, if this is brought in for a landing, and it looks like it is going to be, we talk about the vision in washington all the time. but there are obviously, as you know, a lot of bipartisan bills that pass every day that nobody pays attention to. i mean, this would be the third really significant piece of bipartisan legislation. you, of course, had a massive transportation bill that passed with bipartisan vote. you had the gun bill which, again, yeah, it didn't go far enough, but it was the first safety, gun safety legislation in a generation that passed both chambers and was signed into law. now, something that you have "the new york times" and "wall street journal" editorial pages saying for a couple years needs to be reformed, this electoral act count. this is an insurance policy

against the next january 6th. that would be three bipartisan achievements from the house and the senate. i say good on them. >> yeah, i would, too. and this, i think, of those bipartisan achievements is probably one of the most fundamentally important. because if this process doesn't work, then it doesn't matter whether you have a bipartisan infrastructure bill because you're sitting there in the courts and in the congress trying to figure out who the president is. to that point, senator, it is very good and very important to know senate minority leader mitch mcconnell is on board. he's clearly working to get this passed. do you have the sense that this legislation, a, will go through -- you already referenced people are going to take a look at it -- will go through a lot of markup and changes, or do you think the members have gotten it to that

sweet spot? two, when you get to the final push, how much are you really counting on republicans to deliver more than just five votes, nine votes, ten votes to get it through? >> well, i hope they would deliver more votes. as has been pointed out, this has been a brewing problem for years. i also think that you have to allow all members to look at these bills. because this is complex, as i said. one of the reasons we're having the hearing, we're going to agree on witnesses, is to explain this proposal as well as what the problem is. i wanted to add one more bipartisan bill that is coming our way, joe. that is the computer chip bill. the semiconductor bill. >> oh, yeah. >> that's really important for our competitiveness. we've been working on it now for weeks with senator schumer and young and cantwell over in the senate, many others in the house. i'd watch for that, as well. so through all of this, and we know that it's been a trying time, there continues to be good

work in passing bills and sending them to president biden's desk. >> that would be critical. what about the china competitive bill that seemed to be going in the right direction? i know that we've had senator young on several times from indiana to talk about it. he's been working with chuck schumer. is that going to pass? is that going to stay basically held up? >> it's basically being divided out now. the computer chips, the science piece of it, is what is moving ahead, but the conference committee is going to continue on the other pieces. i'm hopeful. i know many republicans and democrats want to get that through, that that'll go through, as well. i care a lot about some of those pieces, including our favorite subject of antitrust. there's funding in there. >> yes. >> anyway, we must move forward. i do think -- i'm looking forward to watching the hearing tonight. you know, the 187 minutes of what he didn't do. your viewers should be aware, you know, he takes a special

oath, man. the president takes an oath not just to protect the constitution but to faithfully execute the laws of the united states. so was he doing that in those 187 minutes when he was watching tv, refusing to calm, when mayors are calling him, party members and his own family and staff are asking him to do it. as we found out in our security hearing over in the senate, that blunt and portland and peters and i did, the national guard is sitting there on a bus. they arrive while all of this is going on. people have already died, and they finally get to the capitol at about 5:20. hours and hours and hours after the insurrection started. it is hard to believe a president couldn't have changed that. >> all right. senator amy klobuchar, thank you very much. never stops working. good to see you. >> thank you. still ahead, ukraine's first lady takes an urgent message

straight to congress. the war is not over yet. we'll show you her plea for more aid and more weapons. plus, the contempt trial for stevespeeding along. the federal government only needed two witnesses to make its case. we'll go through the latest testimony next on "morning joe." e (emu squawks) kevin, no! not today. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ testimony next on "morning joe."

flowers are fighters. that's why the alzheimer's association walk to end alzheimer's is full of them. because flowers find a way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk ♪ ♪ fall in love with the new minions inspired menu from ihop. and earn double pancoins on the app. let's put a smile on your plate. for a limited time, kids eat free! and catch minions-- the rise of gru, only in theaters.

a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose. or... his nose. mom: how was school? dad: wow!

♪ vo: music can help you express how you're feeling. when you can't find the language, find the lyrics. it's the top of the hour. welcome back to "morning joe." 7:00 a.m. on the east coast. we are 13 hours from tonight's primetime hearing on the attack on the capitol. in a few moments, we'll hear from one of the lawmakers who will take the lead in presenting evidence on trump's dereliction of duty. plus, a legal loss for rudy giuliani has judges ordering him to appear before a grand jury. today, the white house

unveils president biden's plan to reduce crime and gun violence. we'll be joined by a senior adviser to the president, the former mayor of atlanta. keisha lance bottoms will join us later this hour. also ahead, we'll have new reporting on the health of russian president vladimir putin and troop losses for russian forces. a lot going on this hour. jonathan lemire and michael steele are still with us. along with msnbc contributor mike barnicle, who joins the conversation this hour. >> yeah, mike, i wanted to talk to you about merrick garland yesterday. quite a statement. he had come under criticism from a lot of democrats, a lot of commentators, i certainly, yesterday, questioned whether he was awake at the wheel. and i thought he gave a very impassioned, understated but impassioned defense of what he does and what the professionals at the department of justice do,

saying, you know, federal investigations take a long time. we can't rush this. our goal is to make sure that we do it and we do it right. no man is above the law. he's asked again. he says, i don't know how many times i have to say this. alex told me we have it cued up. let me play it, mike. >> it's strong. >> i think it's strong, yeah. >> there is a lot of speculation about what the justice department is doing, what it's not doing, what our theories are, what our theories aren't, and there will continue to be that speculation. that's because a central tenant of the way in which the justice department investigates, a central tenant to the rule of law, is that we do not do our investigations in public. this is the most wide-ranging investigation and the most important investigation that the justice department has ever entered into. and we have done so because this

effort to upend a legitimate election, transferring power from one administration to another, cuts at the fundamental of american democracy. we have to get this right. for people who are skoerned, as i think every american should be, about protecting democracy, we have to do two things. we have to hold accountable every person who is criminally responsible for trying to overturn a legitimate election, and we must do it in a way filled with integrity and professionalism. the way the justice department conducts investigations. both of these are necessary in order to achieve justice and protect our democracy. no person is above the law in this country. nothing stops us -- >> even a former president? >> i don't know how to -- let me 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 that prevent us from investigating anyone, anyone who is criminally responsible for an attempt to undue a democratic election. >> you know, mike, whether the attorney general was working for a republican or democratic administration, that is what i would want to hear. i mean, he said that they're engaging in the most wide-ranging and most important investigation in the department -- that the department of justice has ever engaged in. we have to get this right. merrick garland sent a message, not just to political commentators and op-ed writers and to politicians, but also, i suspect, some people in the white house who also are growing increasingly frustrated,

wondering whether he is moving forward with these informatio investigations or not and in an appropriate manner. >> joe, you're absolutely correct. to me, the strongest part of that statement that we just saw was when the reporter off camera shouted the question, even a former president of the united states, and the attorney general of the united states, with his hand over his heart, paused for a breath and said, nobody is above the law in this country. you know what is a reflection on the impatience of the united states of america, most people in the united states of america? most of all, people like us, people like me, being impatient about the pace of this investigation. but when you consider the weight of the investigation and the job of the attorney general and the justice department, in going after what happened on january 6th, who is culpable, who is legally culpable, who can be brought to trial, what they don't want to do is to short-handed have it overturned

on an appeal if they, indeed, get a guilty verdict. they need a guilty verdict, they have to make sure the verdict is appeal proof. that takes a lot of time. we don't pay enough attention here in this business, not just us, but i think nearly everyone in our business, don't pay enough attention to the weight of discovery, the weight of testimony, the weight of interviewing hundreds of witnesses, i'm sure. we have to be as patient as everybody else has to be patient. >> yup. yeah. you know, there has been a frustration, and there's been a growing frustration because, jonathan lemire, you look at the mueller investigation. i believe in the first part of that investigation, in the report, there were ten instances where donald trump may have committed obstruction of justice, likely committed obstruction of justice. i know there were things that he did that we've talked about on this show repeatedly, that would

have sent any member of congress to jail. but, again, it seemed that he was above the law. then, of course, you have the manhattan d.a. brag, for whatever reason, he had two prosecutors, professionals who had been investigating trump, thought they had him dead to center on criminal charges, and then the manhattan d.a. cut them off at the knees, killed the investigation. so there's been this growing frugs frustration, that in america, maybe it's not true anymore that no man is above the law. it has seemed, and even donald trump's people have gleaned that he is able to get away with everything. merrick garland said yesterday, not so fast. no man is above the law, even a sitting president. and i suspect he may not have just been talking to political

commentators yesterday. he may have been talking -- and i know your reporting has shown -- there's a growing frustration in the white house he may not be moving forward on investigation of the former president. >> first of all, for those who oppose donald trump for years, have been so frustrating with his ability to get away from it. first politically. i remember the 2016 campaign. the top republican strategist marveling to me, and he was not a trump supporter, that donald trump would do three things by noon that would have ended mitt romney's political career, any of them, and he moved forward. the shamelessness was almost the appeal to trump the candidate. trump the president, a different matter. we know there have been issues, including the mueller report, where it seemed he came extraordinarily close to breaking the law, maybe did break the law, and mueller, in the report, found the ten

instances where it appeared trump did obstruct justice. but because of a guideline in the department of justice, he was not able to do anything about it. he left it open. we know how bill barr, the attorney general, spun it and, therefore, got trump off the hook again in the public eye. this one does feel different. we're seeing, first of all, the fulton county district attorney relentlessly pursuing, with haste it seems, potential criminal charges against trump and his allies. then to hear this from the attorney general yesterday. you're right, the grumbles in the west wing have been there. they've been loud and persistent for months. this belief that garland was maybe more of a judge than a prosecutor and was tooslow to move. i do think his message yesterday aimed at the west wing, aimed at democrats saying, look, we're doing this. this is important. he's a former president. he's a potential presidential candidate again. trust us, we'll get there. >> let's bring in state attorney for palm beach county, florida,

dave aronberg. there is this focus on three words, dereliction of duty. the hearing members are talking about the 187 minutes of inaction they'll focus tonight in primetime. can you explain the term, whether or not it's a crime, or is it the only way they can truly move the president did something wrong, where they have the most clear evidence? there is evidence here and there that he wanted this. there is evidence of intent, that he felt mike pence deserved to be hung, things like that. but they're focus on what he didn't do. can you explain that? >> good morning, mika. dereliction of duty is something you see mostly in the military for court marshals. you'll see it during impeachment. but there is no standalone federal statute of dereliction of duty. what they're talking about is criminal intent. i think tonight will be really important. you're going to have matthew

pottinger and sarah matthews, who are long-time trumpers. these were not individuals from the so-called deep state who were loyal to trump until january 6th when they resigned in disgust. they are going to talk about the 187 minutes of silence. that's where you get to dereliction of duty. it is trump's alleged inaction. their testimony will be very credible for many reasons, but also because after they resigned, they didn't just stay silent and wait to make money off a tell-all book, like others like bill barr, for example. pottinger was in the west wing on january 6th. he can testify about his discussions about sending in the national guardapparently, he an cipollone ran into the oval office at 3:00 p.m., shocked the guard had not yet been deployed. matthews, according to reports, previously testified that trump knew about the violence at the capitol before he sent the incendiary tweet about mike pence. that also goes to criminal

intent. matthews said that his tweet was like pouring gasoline on the fire. lastly, mika, these two witnesses are really powerful because they had high-level positions within the administration. trump is not going to be able to say he didn't know them or they were the coffee boys and girls. >> right. as we have been reporting, tonight's eighth hearing from the house january 6th committee investigaing this attack on the capitol will focus on those 187 minutes of donald trump's inaction during the riot. joe, i remember us staring at the tv going, where is the national guard? i mean, that was the obvious question. >> and, you know, we were -- we obviously weren't alone. i think all good americans were -- >> horrified. >> -- asking that question. i remember interviewing colin powell, and colin powell saying, where the hell were they? he said, i was in my home going, where the hell is the national guard? where are the police? >> the people in there, how

frightening. >> defend our capitol. >> the committee will present a minute-by-minute account of what happened inside the white house between trump's rally at the ellipse and then his tweeting, finally telling the capitol rioters he loves them, to go home. driving home the point that not only did trump allegedly do nothing to stop the violence, he also sat back and enjoyed watching it. two military veterans, congressman adam kinzinger and congresswoman elaine luria are set to lead tonight's questioning. joining us now, capitol hill correspondent ali vitali, who spoke to congresswoman luria ahead of tonight's hearing. what'd you hear, ali, to add more to what we can expect at tonight's primetime hearing? >> reporter:mika, you laid out what we're expecting. a full view of the roughly 3 hours the congress was under attack and the former president did nothing to stop what was

happening here. i have to tell you, in walking into congresswoman luria's office yesterday for our exclusive interview, the first thing you see is her dedication to service. this is someone who served in the armed forces herself. who has the seals of the branches of the military around her. when he says this was a dereliction of duty by the former president, it has a fully weight when she uses the word duty. listen. >> this is a dereliction of duty of the president. we're going to talk in depth about the events that happened, almost minute-by-minute, in the white house that day. >> how will you do that? is it a juxtaposition, a split screen between chaos here and nothing happening at the white house? explain that. >> we'll tie it into the events of the day. what would he have been seeing on fox news? what would the rest of the country have been seeing? then tie it into the conversations that were had. if you were president, wouldn't you jump into action? wouldn't you call everyone in

your administration, your cabinet, who could come in and help quell this and monitor the situation carefully? i wonder if president trump has any emotion about it at this point, or if he is -- you know what i mean? it is so raw and visceral for people who were there. >> reporter: mika, certain will i, that rawness is still here on the capitol. when i talk to members of congress who were in the house chamber, in the gallery, they're expecting to see potentially themselves as pieces of evidence on the screen as the committee details what was happening at the capitol. then it ties into what was playing on the networks we know the former president used to watch ad nauseam, things like fox news. then the way trump spent the hours watching the insurrection, he did so gleefully. they'll be able to draw the explicit and direct line between

what was happening at the capitol and what was not happening there. they'll do it through witnesses. people who served, in the case of matt pottinger, all four years of this administration, and ultimately found their breaking point with what they saw happen on january 6th, and the role of the former president in that day. but there's also questions at this point about what comes next. because the way i've been talking about this hearing is that it is more the season finale than the series finale for the committee. they expect when they release their final reports, for example, they'll be doing final hearings around that. there's also open questions because it is an active investigation. who else might they call? they are still in active deliberations around the former vice president or even the former president. but in talking with congresswoman luria, was question was, how do you not know if you need these people yet? in the case of pence, what she told me was interesting. >> does it make it harder because he is an active political candidate at that point. >> for the committee's work?

>> perception wise. >> you know, the purpose of our committee is not explicitly to, you know, go after the former president. it's to lay out the fact. this is just an incredibly dangerous event that happened in our history. when i think about it, one of the takeaways is it is not just about the events on january 6th. it's not just about all of these different stages of an attempted coup and the levers that were pulled. it's about what still persists. you know, our committee has a congressional purpose, to provide recommendations, legislative recommendations for the future so this can't happen again. so keeping our focus on what the purpose of this committee is, it would be sort of chaff, i think, but it wouldn't necessarily have an impact on our work. >> reporter: of course, there she's talking about what could happen if former president trump announced his run, as we expect he play, in the next few weeks, running for president again, but

in regards to pence, the difference between calling in trump versus pence is that most of the people in trump's orbit have stonewalled the committee. you see some of them in court this week. others in pence's orbit have been cooperative. it's why we could still see the committee move in that direction as they try to balance the presentation of facts in real time with the gathering of facts in real time, mika. >> nbc's ali vitali, thank you. great job. we appreciate it. >> michael steele, how important is tonight's hearing? >> it's very important. i mean, you know, a lot of folks are sort of referring to it as, you know, the climax of season one. i think there's a lot of elements of truth to that. i think we have the opportunity, joe, for the first time, to be a part of the tiktok, those 387 minutes, just kind of get the feel of what was actually happening real time, in that

moment. and as a narrative, it's incredibly important because it will give us a glimpse of a lot of aspects of this thing all in that timeframe. what people were trying to do to get the president to move. what the president wasn't or was doing to engage in solving the problem in front of him and addressing the riots on the hill. so i think it'll be very important. i think the audience for this night going to be very big nationally. i think fox is going to probably sneak a peek, you know, try to cut in here or there. you know, try to play it off. but everybody wants to know and everybody wants to get a sense of this, and i think to further ali's reporting, it is important that this committee not put up the, you know, we're done sign at this moment. i say they push right to january 3rd. don't let the obstacle of this

upcoming election stand in the way of completing the work. if after the election the republicans have control, you know it all ends on january 3rd. if they don't, you know you have maybe some more runway. so the reality of it is, shape the narrative, you know, the end of season one as your effectively doing in a way that lets us know, there may be more to come, and move toward that into season two, if necessary. >> all right. steve bannon's team will present its limited legal case to jurors today in his contempt of congress trial. the prosecution rested yesterday after calling only two witnesses. a staffer for the january 6th committee and an fbi agent. the staffer testified that the committee believed bannon's claim of executive privilege, quote, was not a valid rational for refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena. the judge has already ruled that

it's not a valid defense. bannon's legal team has repeatedly argued that he has been negotiating with the committee and did not refuse to cooperate. meanwhile -- >> yeah, dave aronberg, let's talk about that. only two witnesses. you're a prosecutor actively. why just two witnesses? >> they're confident about their case, joe. when you have a misdemeanor case, it is very common to have a trial that's one or two witnesses. i had a felony trial myself. that was just one witness. if you have a good case, that's sometimes all you need. when it is a misdemeanor trial, these cases are usually done in one or two days. i'm not surprised by that. >> yeah. >> i think yesterday, though, something to keep an eye on, joe, is that judge nichols, who has disallowed most of bannon's defenses, did allow him to present the letter, the offer that he made the committee at the 11th hour to cooperate, for the sole purpose of showing he

may not have understood that the deadline was firm. well, you know, the judge said, "hey, you can't look at that letter as the defense because whether or not he complied at the beginning had nothing to do with today." meaning that if he ignored the committee a year ago, this letter doesn't clear that. still, the letter gets in. i'm worried that one member of the jury may say, hey, look at this letter. may find some reasonable doubt, and it'd lead to a hung jury. by the prosecution had a great moment yesterday. they showed steve bannon's words on social media, where he was bragging he was not going to comply with the subpoena. that was the drop the mic moment for the prosecutors. perhaps it is steve bannon's bluster and bravado that is going to do him in. >> like you said, though, i mean, if somebody wants to let him walk, if somebody wants a hung jury, they now have a letter that they can wrap that

decision around. there was also, of course, another legal loss yesterday, mika, for former president trump's personal lawyer rudy giuliani. >> yeah. a new york judge has ordered giuliani to appear before the special grand jury in fulton county, georgia. that is investigating possible interference in the 2020 presidential election. the order was issued after giuliani failed to show up to a hearing last week on his challenge to a subpoena. after the new york judge's ruling, a georgia judge ordered giuliani to make his appearance before the grand jury on august 9th. a lawyer for giuliani did not immediately respond to a request for comment. this is all connected to georgia district attorney fani willis' investigation, which this week subpoenaed a dozen of georgia's fake electors. giuliani played a key role in the efforts to try to overturn

the election in georgia, not only being a part of the scheme to create false electors in a number of states, but appearing in front of two georgia legislative committees in december 2020, pushing false conspiracy theories about secret suitcases full of democratic ballots. >> my god. >> and corrupted voting ma shone machines. this man. >> all repeated on religious cult websites that people eat up. trumpers would eat up and believe. mike barnicle, what we've seen with lindsey graham trying to b.s. his way out of the subpoena, trying to stop from going to testify, same with rudy giuliani, this is so par for the course of what's been going on. rudy giuliani would hold a press conference outside of the federal courthouse, talk about how, you know, there was widespread voter fraud, then the

judge would say, are you alleging there is widespread voter fraud? giuliani would go, "no, your honor." again, the saying, you know, money talks, b.s. walks. well, you know, these trumpers, all their press conferences, you know, that walks. it's once you get inside of a courtroom, you see they lose time after time after time, where the judges were appointed by donald trump or appointed, you know, by bill clinton. >> you know, joe, looking at rudy giuliani, even now in the clips that we were just showing, there's a sadness to rudy giuliani that's almost mystifying. you wonder, what happened to this guy in the course of several years in his attraction to donald trump? was it a search for relevance? is that what giuliani was looking for? >> just grotesque. >> for prominence again?

i mean, clearly, something is off there and has been off with rudy giuliani for quite some time. i mean, running around the country proposing, you know, fraudulent electors in different states, pennsylvania, wisconsin, georgia, things like that, the mystifying press conference in front of a porn shop, you know, in philadelphia. >> oh, my god. >> trying to cling to the myth this election was corrupted by venezuela and other countries, just crazy, literally crazy, crazy stuff. this guy has put so much distance between himself and his behaior in new york city on september 11th, where he was legitimately acknowledged to be heroic in terms of his response to what happened that day, you just wonder, what in the world happened to rudy giuliani? >> well, there is no answer to mike's question there, but to underscore that, as someone who

was in new york city on september 11th, people forget just how poorly giuliani polled the day before that attack. new york was ready to say good-bye to him. within 24 hours or so, was indeed transformed a hero. even those who don't like him now still are grateful to his performance in those hours after the attacks. but he finds himself now, david aronberg, in some legal peril. walk us through here just what he faces, you know, in this particular case, and if you see other legal trouble on the horizon for the man who used to be known as jonathan, i think o people who are being targeted by the grand jury in fulton county, it is rudy giuliani who is most likely to be prosecuted. that's because my counterpart up there in atlanta, fani willis, previously said she is reviewing the making of false statements to state and local governmental bodies. as you and joe said, yeah, he went before the committees in

the georgia legislature and lied to their faces. we went on a misinformation tour around the country. but in georgia, he said that more than 10,000 dead people voted. he said that poll workers were counting fake ballots out of suitcases. those false statements made to those legislative bodies could get you up to five years in state prison under georgia law. so that's what he is facing, and that is why, if he doesn't comply with the subpoena, he gets criminally charged for that. or if he doesn't take the fifth amendment before the grand jury, he is also in a whole lot of trouble. let me tell you, rudy, they don't have hair dye in prison. he needs to be calling a defense lawyer really fast. >> okay. state attorney for palm beach county, dave aronberg, thank you very much for being on this morning. >> how do you know that? i'd think maybe they don't. i don't know. >> i don't think it is a vital necessity. >> it's not. ahead on "morning joe," the administration just announced a brand-new plan to reduce crime and gun violence.

white house senior adviser keisha lance bottoms will join us to explain what exactly is in the plan. and later, an exclusive interview with cia director william burns. the former u.s. ambassador to russia gives his assessment of the war in ukraine. plus, the recent move by putin that burns says is only intended to kill ukrainian civilians. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're we've still got the best moves you've ever seen good for you, but shingles doesn't care. because 1 in 3 people will get shingles, you need protection. we'll be right back. shingrix protects. you can protect yourself from shingles with a vaccine proven to be over 90% effective.

shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your pharmacist or doctor about shingrix. shingles doesn't care. but you should. ♪ it wasn't me by shaggy ♪

you're never responsible for unauthorized purchases on your discover card. - as someone with hearing loss,

i know what a confusing and frustrating experience getting hearing aids can be. that's why i founded lively. high-quality hearing aids with all of the features you need, and none of the hassle. lively offers bluetooth, fda regulated hearing aids delivered to your door for thousands less than you'd expect and remote access to an audiology team seven days a week. better hearing has never been this easy. try lively risk free for 100 days. visit listenlively.com. ♪ there's a reason comcast business powers more businesses than any other provider. actually, there's a few. comcast business offers the fastest, reliable network... the protection of security edge... and the most reliable 5g network. want me to keep going? i can... whether your small business is starting or growing, you need comcast business. technology solutions that put you ahead. get a great offer on internet and security, now with more speed and more bandwidth. plus find out how to get up to a $650 prepaid card with a qualifying bundle.

as president, you have a responsibility to act with urgency and resolve when our nation faces clear and present danger. that's what climate change is about. it is literally, not figuratively, a clear and present danger. the health of our citizens and our communities is literally at stake. leading environmental scientists call the recent report nothing

less than, quote, code red for humanity. >> washington democrats are frustrated by the pace of the radical green transformation they envision for our country. they're having trouble getting enough senators to agree to make the most reliable and abundant forms of american energy more expensive for working americans. prices are rising faster than any point since 1980. >> that's senate minority leader mitch mcconnell criticizing climate change measures democrats are trying to pass. michael steele, certainly understand there have been some things that have been proposed in the so-called new green deal, that even nancy pelosi sort of brushes away. but the republicans do the same thing on health care and climate change. they say no. that's all they do. they say no.

i still find it breathtaking that there is a party that may actually take over congress who said no to the affordable care act and said, oh, but we're going to reform it. we're going to change it. we're going to come up with our own plan. and they've gone over, what was that, 12 years, a dozen years, and they haven't put forward one serious health care proposal that all republicans support. so they do nothing on health care. they propose nothing on health care. they just attack democrats. and on climate change, a crisis that is growing by the hour, that more and more voters understand is growing by the hour, all they do is say no. they have no solutions. they have nothing to offer. and this is not -- you know, you look at george h.w. bush. he signed into law quite a few

significant environmental pieces of legislation. that is a republican party dead and gone. >> in fact, joe, to your point, george bush, w. bush, was the last republican president to put together a more comprehensive strategy on climate, and it was, at that time, the fledgling conservative part of the caucus that wound up killing that effort shortly before the president's term ended. so you're right, there has been no substantive or even a framework of where the republican party stands on issues like climate. it is easy to say no. it's easy to say the democrats just want to spend all this money. it's easy to say a whole lot of things about democrats and their climate policy proposals. but, oh, i used the word,

proposal. at least they have -- they're putting something out there you can say no to. so, you know, if you want to be in the game, if you want to lead, if you want to be a governing majority, you at some point have to tell the american people whatcconnell, when asked earlier this year, if the republicans take over the house and the senate, what are you going to do? what are you going to do for the american people? his response, well, you'll have to put us in power first. you have to give us the power first before we tell you what we're going to do. that's not what a bargain for exchange, the contract with the american people is act. you need to lay it out now. but they won't because they're caught between their own internal self-interest and the special interests that do not want to see this agenda move. whereas, the american people clearly do. this is going to be a choice among many. the american people have to

decide whether or not they give power back to a party that doesn't have a plan for anything, not even a proposal. you may not like what the democrats put on the table, but at least it gives you something you can argue against. >> yeah. on an issue that you can feel and see happening. we're going to be talking to the newly minted white house bureau chief for the "washington post," ta lou, in a moment for more about this. first, today, the white house is expected to unveil president biden's plan to reduce gun violence. the safer america plan will include a 2023 budget request of $37 billion to help prevent crime. they'll train 100,000 additional police officers for accountable community policing. invest nearly $3 billion to help communities clear court backlogs and take criminals off the streets. it will also impose tougher

penalties for fentanyl trafficking. joining us now, senior adviser to president biden, keisha lance bottoms. she's the former mayor of atlanta, georgia, and knows a things or two about managing a city that's going through a crisis with policing and members of the community and how to navigate it all. if you could tell us more about the president's, the white house's intentions with this money, especially as it pertains to policing. >> i'm so excited that the president has listened to mayors across the country, governors across this country, in rolling out this plan. because we know one of the biggest challenges facing cities right now is this everyday crime problem. so when we have resources in cities that allow us to hire police officers, properly train police officers, and hold police officers accountable, it's a game-changer. but the reality is this, police officers respond to crime.

what we have been asking for in ciies across america is more funding to help us put in place those crime intervention programs, so that we can touch people before they enter into this life of crime. you know, i served as a magistrate judge for many years, and what i saw is that many people coming into the criminal justice system just did not have the tools and access to job training, education, mental health services, substance abuse services. this funding allows cities to put things in place that we know make a difference, and we can also have well trained officers on our street who want to do right by all of our communities. >> yeah, sounds like you're doing just the opposite of de-funding the police which, of course, democrats like jim clyburn, nancy pelosi, others on the hill have said for several years that it is a nonsense concept that republicans are pushing on democrats.

you proved that here. i want to talk about something that, as a parent, hearing stories, it just causes increasing concern. that is fentanyl. we're reading one story after another story of people dying of fentanyl, taking a pill or taking a recreational drug, a small dose, and dying of that. of course, we -- it affects all of us. every community. the deaths are skyrocketing. talk about the tough measures you're taking on the issue of fentanyl. i mean, it is such a growing crisis for young and old alike. >> it is a growing crisis. what is so frightening, we know there have been children across america who come into contact with fentanyl unknowingly,

ingested it or touched it, whatever the case may be, and these children have had tragic consequences as a result. so the president is taking a very close look at what is an epidemic across our country. he is making sure there are the appropriate penalties in place. but, again, going back and also making sure that people who are struggling with substance abuse have access to resources. we have the funding in place to make sure that the resources are available. but this is an ongoing crisis in our country. the president is very aware of the fentanyl crisis, and he is going to continue to keep it top of mind as he continues to look at policies that can make a difference in our communities. >> all right. senior adviser to president biden, keisha lance bottoms, thank you very much for being on the show this morning. >> thank you. >> let's bring in white house bureau chief for the "washington post," author of the book entitled "his name is george floyd." let's they onexpertise, the wor

you've done. what do you think the challenges will be in putting this money, as it heads to different cities across the country, to use as it pertains to policing, and the struggles that police forces are facing right now with their own credibility on the job? >> yeah, this is an incredibly important challenge that the president has faced since he was elected, in terms of figuring out how to deal with the crime challenge the country faces, while also addressing the fact that there are a number of people who think that there are too many police. people protested the police and said we should take away their money and put it towards other services. biden always said it is not a smart political move. he's always said let's put more money into policing and do community policing. but one of the challenges that's going to come along with this order, with this activity from the executive power the

president has is that he is going to be able to put more money into policing, but he does not have the legislation that he called for and others called for, to ensure that there is community policing, that people are held accountable through restricting the use of the choke hold and making sure no-knock warrants aren't being used. the president faces the yes, he can put more efforts and money into making sure there is less crime, but activists will say you have to make sure the policing is done in a way that is not abusive or discriminatory. it'll be a challenge when you don't have legislation the president can say, i signed. this is now the law of the land. the police cannot abuse communities the way some communities have experienced in the past. >> toluse it is jonathan. congratulations on the new gig. the president will make this announcment near scranton, his

neck of the woods. this measure has become a significant issue for the upcoming midterm elections. folks you've talked to, democrats, whether on both sides of capitol hill, congress and white house, how concerned are they that -- about the momentum violent crime has as a november issue? >> it is an important issue amid a number of other important issues. you've got inflation. you've got the fact that it is hot around the country, and people are dealing with climate change. there's obviously the ruling that happened out of the supreme court and a number of different rulings out of the supreme court that makes a number of people worried about whether or not their vote actually matters. whether or not this democracy is working the way it should. violent crime just adds to the fact that, you know, people who believe that, you know, electing joe biden would have made everything normal and all of the chaos we saw during the trump presidency would have ended, we're still dealing with the aftermath of a pandemic, the inflation we have going on, and the fact that a number of communities are dealing with violent crime, it is a sore

point for a number of democrats in some of these communities who are worried their voters are going to stay home or say, "maybe we should take a chance on a republican, especially in the spring swing districts," because they're not seen an equilibrium on crime. biden knows democrats are vulnerable, especially with the lingering aftermath of the de-fund the police, you know, the whole phrase being politicized. that is something that biden and the white house and democrats across the country are very aware of. >> white house bureau chief for the "washington post," toluse olorunnipa. thank you for being on. we appreciate it. joining us from the annual security forum in aspen, chief washington correspondent and chief foreign affairs correspondent, host of "andrea mitchell reports," andrea mitchell. andrea, you had a rare and

wide-ranging interview with the head of the cia. tell us about that. >> reporter: good morning, mika. well, cia director williams burns who, as you know, is a former u.s. ambassador to russia and is really one of the world world's top experts on vladimir putin, the last u.s. official to meet face-to-face with the leader before he invaded ukraine. i spoke with director burns about putin's state of mind and his goals now as russia is expanding its military efforts in ukraine. nearly five months into this brutal war on ukraine, russia's military assaults on the country remain relentless. saying it will move beyond the donbas region in eastern ukraine to threaten other areas, including odesa, with a grinding war of attrition. >> so he can strangle the ukrainian economy. he can wear down european republics and leaderships, and he can wear down the united states. putin was wrong in his assumptions about breaking the

alliance and breaking ukrainian will before the war began. i think he's just as wrong now. >> reporter: russia's cost is high. around 15,000 troops dead. three times as many injuries. so this week, moscow turning to iran for armed drones. what are the implications of this new, stronger alliance of adversaries? >> the purpose of those drones is to kill ukrainian civilians in a brutal and unprovoked war of aggression. >> reporter: as he's waged war, putin has been plagued with rumors about his health. would you describe him as unstable? unhealthy? >> as far as we can tell, he is entirely too healthy. >> reporter: against the backdrop of war and america's support for ukraine, his wnba superstar brittney griner, detained in russia more than five months. overnight, a tribute for her at the espy awards. >> we cannot stop fighting for her. we cannot stop believing for

her. we will not stop hoping for the day when we can welcome her home safely. >> these are awful and shameful steps to hold american citizens for political leverage, as well. i mean, in brittney griner's case, my heart goes out to her wife and her family, as well. >> reporter: in addition to all of the other global crises, the cia is now also assessing how climate change will create new conflicts over food and water. this on top of covid. i also asked director burns on the possibility of china invading taiwan. he believes xi jinping is determined to take control of taiwan, but has learned from russia's experience in ukraine that a quick victory will only come by using overwhelming force. he said it is not a question of if, it's a question of when. >> andrea, did director burns get into at all his counsel, who

is around him, who is close to him, who is advising him? apparently, sergey lavrov is no longer as close to putin as he used to be. but did director burns get into that at all? >> reporter: >> yes, indeed. he talked about how when he saw him in november and basically to warn him against the invasion, he is now become very isolated. we certainly saw that, you know, during covid. he was sitting at the long table. he's not listening to very many people, listening to his defense minister. few other people. and he is hardened. he is just completely consumed with his own legacy. and with his idea that he has to restore imperial russia and that is essentially including ukraine. but ukraine is not a country, he kept saying. ukraine is part of russia. and that's -- that is his goal.

now he is making judgements and taking risks we've seen were wrong and immoral and horrible and that though burns says were completely misguided and he thought he was going to overtake this country in days. burns thinks he is still wrong but now he does think this war of attrition will work for him if he can get to winter then europe will will cave in with the high energy prices. but that, you know, bill burns' judgement is that he is wrong again and that europe will remain united. ukraine is resilient. but it's obviously a huge cost to both sides. >> nbc's andrea mitchell, thank you for that report and interview. we appreciate it. coming up, the race for pennsylvania's u.s. senate seat is heating up on social media. a super pac is going after dr. oz with some help from a classic story. we'll play that ad for you just

ahead. meanwhile, in washington, d.c., former vice president mike pence returns to a hero's welcome. how the reception could impact his political future. "morning joe" is coming right back. joe" is coming right joe" is coming right backine enjoying chocolate cake. now, she can have her cake and eat it too. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. fall in love with the new minions inspired menu from ihop. and earn double pancoins on the app. let's put a smile on your plate. for a limited time, kids eat free! and catch minions-- the rise of gru, only in theaters.

up next on the third hour of "morning joe," we focus in on arizona. as overnight the state republican party centers rusty bowers, the house speaker who testified on the january 6th committee. >> there is so much crazy going on in arizona. i mean, the republican party doing everything they can do to lose. i mean they're working really hard. they're breaking a sweat. >> i know. >> it's one of the reasons why you look at a generic polls that keep coming out, echelon insights yesterday which, by the way, it's a republican polling

unit. have the democrats up seven points in the generic ballot test. joe biden is mired in the 30s. >> also a look at how carrie lake -- >> she sports obama she is a big barack obama supporter. >> how she became trump's pick for governor. >> wait? donald trump supporting somebody who is a big fan of barack obama? >> and whether or not the state's establishment gop can stop her. later, a will positive of people that participated in the january 6th riot reveals what motivated them to be there on that day. those important revelations are all ahead on "morning joe." >> we have this incredible dr. oz ad coming up. we'll be right back. dr. oz ad coming up. oz ad coming up. we'll rbeight back. it smells like actual food.

as he's aged, he's still quite energetic and youthful. i really attribute that to diet. get started at longlivedogs.com flowers find a i really attribute way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk the minions are coming to ihop. with an all new menu you're going to love. ♪ ♪ excuse me! enjoy the minions menu at ihop. for a limited time kids eat free! and catch minions: the rise of gru. psst. girl. you can do better. and catch minions: ok. wow. i'm right here. and you can do better, too. at least with your big name wireless carrier.

with xfinity mobile, you can get unlimited for $30 per month on the nation's most reliable 5g network. they can even save you hundreds a year on your wireless bill, over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. wow. i can do better. yes, you can. i can do better, too. break free from the big three and switch to xfinity mobile. as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to $500 a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers. so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities.

welcome back to "morning joe." 8:00 on the east coast. 5:00 out west. so great to have you with us. and we got a lot to talk about, obviously. the finale of what some people as we've been saying this morning jokingly season one of the january 6th hearings. the finale tonight. expecting to see perhaps some of the most compelling information coming out about, well, what donald trump did not do for over three hours. republicans were begging him to take some sort of action. also rudy giuliani, of course, giuliani being forced to actually comply with the subpoena. something that's interesting that he said bill clinton had no choice but to comply with the subpoena that he received back in the late 1990s. well now he's learning that lesson again. he has to comply with the subpoena. we're going to be talking about steve bannon with how many

shirts he wore, how many pins, how medieval he went yesterday. actually the prosecution rested after calling just two witnesses. they're feeling pretty comfortable about their case. and also, we have -- it's very interesting. we're going to be talking just about -- i just -- how crazy the republican primaries are playing out. and i've said it before. and the polls are showing it now. that if you have a party and you have a former president that are dedicated to helping get through the primary process, whackos and freaks and insurrectionists, you're going to do poorly in the polls. we're seeing it in pennsylvania. dr. oz, my god. we're going to show you third party ad that takes us through his sorted history. you see it also what's happening in ohio right now.

a state that's getting redder by the day. and, yet, democrats doing well there. same in georgia. and, you know, mike barnicle, yesterday, a poll came out that was echelon insights. it is a republican polling outfit. and despite the fact that joe biden is in the low 30s in the quinnipiac poll and bleeding across the board, of course, he still wins head-to-head matchups in many polls with trump. but despite the fact his numbers keep falling, democrats' numbers keep rising in the generic ballot test in this republican poll, a seven point lead, mike. i mean, how hard are republicans having to work to blow their opportunity in 2022? >> well, joe, clearly the republicans and specific primaries around the country that we'll talk about a couple coming up are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

they're going out of their way to corrupt their chances of winning in a year when they ought to be winning. now that's good news for anybody interested in common sense. of that's the down side for a lot of republican candidates. they bear no relationship to common sense and voters perceive that. >> now there is a reason that the hearings are in prime time tonight. we will find out in less than 12 hours. the january 6th committee's prime time hearing will begin. nbc's senior washington correspondent has a look at what we can expect tonight and going forward. select committee to investigate -- >> reporter: high stakes tonight and high drama expected with the committee in prime time set to lay out what former president trump did and maybe more importantly did not do during those 187 minutes when the capitol was under attack. mr. trump waiting more than three hours before delivering a message to his supporters.

>> so go home. we love you. you're very special. >> reporter: mr. trump releasing a message with a different tone on january 7th. >> to those who engaged in the acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country. >> reporter: committee members saying they have outtakes of that later speech that will be shown at the hearing. >> the president displayed extreme difficulty in completing his remarks. >> it will be significant in terms of what the president was willing to say and what he wasn't willing to say. >> reporter: their goal today, to go through all of mr. trump's decision making as the riot unfolded. congresswoman elaine luria who will help lead the hearing speaking with our reporter. >> this is a duty of the president. we're going to talk about the events that happened. >> reporter: it comes as the january 6th committee chair is now criticizing the secret service, suggestsing the agency might have broken the law by not doing a better job keeping

records of text messages from employees related to the attack. message that's the committee wanted to see. but that were deleted in 2021 when the secret service says agency phones were reset as part of a planned migration. some lawmakers frustrated that the agency didn't do more to preserve the records even after three reminders to do so including at least one before january 6th. now as the committee starts to wrap up this round of public hearings, attorney general is pledging the investigation will follow the law. >> no person is above the law in this country. >> even a president. you know it is so extraordinary that even a day after january 6th, the president had trouble, extreme difficulty in condemning the violence. >> it seems that we might actually sort of get a visual sense of that tonight. i mean, you know, who knows what they really will show. but outtakes of that would

definitely give us a sense of what he was really feeling versus what he said on camera. and that will probably be pretty revealing. it was just 18 months ago when loyalists of former trump called for the hanging of then vice president mike pence at the riot of the capitol. but now the vice president's welcome is very different and might signal the start of a run for the white house. pence was in washington yesterday meeting with the republican study committee, the largest caucus of conservatives in congress. several lawmakers who attended the committee tell nbc news pence was cheered. congressman chip roy of texas who refused to challenge president biden's win thanked pence for his "courage and standing up for the constitution." several lawmakers were reportedly pushing pence to announce a 2024 presidential

bid. >> we heard that he was also encouraged to run in 2024. >> well -- >> you would describe that? >> i think the vice president said it best. he is focused on 2022. >> was he thanked for courage on january 6th? >> yes. let me just say, you know, the vice president is a real moral force in our party. he's a real true leader. he's earned the respect of republicans and other americans all over this country. >> people say they hope he is a big voice in 2024. it was -- i think he was being encouraged. we need more of new 2024 and i would agree. >> joe, just in terms of the concept of mike pence making a run for 2024, this would pose some major complications for donald trump. he was his vice president. and that sort of as close as can you get, obviously, to the

presidency that trump oversaw. and, yet, he's going to run against him. that could be -- that could make trump very angry. >> i mean obviously can't get much angrier than trying to whip up a crowd that is already calling for the lynching of mike pence. but it is fascinating that, again, we're starting to see republicans who were not afraid to say things that are going to upset donald trump. you look at the polls. he is still ahead. but there is no doubt -- >> pence could turn page and get more republicans to do that. >> you are starting to see, again, when i first heard about this story, i asked alex. i said, yeah, what is this more behind the scenes talking and then they go out and stonewall in front of cameras? alex said, no. clips of them talking positively about mike pence in front of cameras. which, again, thanking him for

what he did on january 6th. so there is a growing split. let me say a healthy split in the republican party here. and more and more members of congress understanding just how bad january 6th was. let's bring in matt lewis to the conversation. he's a senior columnist for "the daily beast." matt, i want to talk about all of of that we just saw. also, i've been talking about this echelon poll. again, it's a republican polling outfit that we're both very familiar with that has the democrats up by seven points in the generic ballot test. i wouldn't be saying it if it were a stand alone poll. it seems like one poll after another after another shows that republicans are bleeding support and in a poll that we saw from cnn a couple days ago, they're bleeding massively the support among senior citizens, people with highest propensity to vote

in midterm elections. what's going on? >> you tell me, joe. this is so weird, right? i mean, i could provide you data points that would show that republicans are ascendant and democrats have no chance. look at joe biden's approval rating. look at the history of the party in power with mid terms. history would suggest that republicans obviously ought to do very well in these mid terms. and then you have polling like that. and it's a really bizarre thing. we're seeing the same thing in the republican party. really depressing things happening like, you know, censuring people for saying and doing the right thing. and then optimistic things happening like people speaking out on behalf of mike pence. it is really hard as an analyst to wrap your head around this. what is happening? are we poised for a wave where republicans are going to exploit, you know, inflation and

joe biden's approval ratings or are democrats going to defy expectations? and i can't remember a time, joe, where we've been at this point in a midterm cycle and things have been so in flux. >> and you know what is so fascinating, let's bring in hilliard here. what is so fascinating is the very states that republicans need to be the least crazy and most mainstream, and by the most mainstream, i'm talking about mainstream republicans, mainstream conservatism. the states where they need to keep it in, you know, keep it in sort of the middle of respected bounds are the states where they're the craziest. you look at pennsylvania and look what they did in their primary process. they could have picked a senate candidate that would have walked away with a general election win this fall. but they decided not to.

pennsylvania's gubernatorial candidate that, is another race they could have won. they picked a guy that was actively involved in january 6th and out and out election denier. you have that in pennsylvania. you look at wisconsin, the same thing there. and then you go out to arizona where right now, again, i'd say some of the most extreme party officials, some of the most extreme candidates that are going to win primaries are in a state where republicans should be cleaning up. and right now, they're going so far to the radical right. i just -- i think they're really damaging their chances this fall to take an easy win. >> it's reality. we're talking about true believers here. people that led and evolved over the last six, seven years to have these convictions. election denialism goes beyond donald trump. we have j.d. vance.

we have dr. oz. we have carrie lake and these individuals that were thought to be more mainstream political americans who have shifted to the far right and evolved to the points and places because donald trump has propagated these election conspiracies and elevated the relevancy in the parties. and yet at the same time that is where this question is really dug down for a lot of us here and each individual is their own. but i went to arizona because i wanted to figure out that question. carrie lake, right, just over a decade ago she was an obama donor, a local news anchor. i talked to more than a dozen of her friends who described her as liberal and yet you saw her shift slowly and gradual over the last decade. leader to this point where she is an accolade of donald trump and the front-runner for governor in arizona. take a look at her evolution.

>> you're watching the best. >> we begin with the fox 10 news alert. >> reporter: carrie lake used to be known as a charismatic newscaster. a staple on tv for more than two decades. but then -- >> i'm carrie lake and running for governor. >> it all changed. >> these media giants -- >> reporter: last summer she separated from the tv station to run for office. >> the media isn't just corrupt, they are anti-american. >> reporter: she is now one of trump's closest allies. >> carrie lake, i'll tell you, she is incredible. >> reporter: and promoteors of 2020 election conspiracy theories. >> anybody who was involved in that corrupt, shady, shoddy, election of 2020 -- lock them up. >> it's difficult to understand that it's her, the same person that was the person that i knew before she became a candidate. >> reporter: former governor jan brewer, a staunch conservative

herself now puzzled by lake. >> she never seemed extremist like what we're seeing now as when she is running for office. >> reporter: brewer endorsing her gop primary opponent. >> i do more than talk for a living. >> reporter: we spoke with 12 of lake's one time close friends and colleagues. they asked for anonymity. several of them saying they feared being targeted. but each of them said her transformation was gradual. >> i'm carrie lake -- force. >> reporter: in 2015, several friends say she found trump to be funny and defended him. she began spreading internet conspiracy theories. >> can you take this as a sprentive. and then refused to acknowledge biden as the winner of the 2020 election. one thing that hasn't changed according to lake's former colleagues, her stubborn combative style. you were her h.r. manager. >> yes. >> reporter: how was she to work with when there was tension? >> she wouldn't work with you.

she would leave. kari wants what kari wants. that's what she wants. >> reporter: arizona's most prominent drag queen befriended lake 20 years ago. >> i was star struck when i saw her the first time. i'm like oh, my god, there's kari. and we became friends. >> reporter: but last month during pride month, lake tweeted, they kicked god out of schools and welcomed the drag queens. they took down our flag and replaced it with the rainbow. >> i'm a friend of yours for 20 years and i'm disposable now. >> reporter: can i ask you one question? >> she declined request for interview when we caught up with her, she said she had no interest in talking. >> how is kari lake evolved here? what would you tell the people close to you in their life that are wondering who that kari lake is now? you were friends with these people and they say they don't recognize the per you have become. >> there are a lot of people in the media. i worked for the media for 30 years. i'm sorry they can't handle someone being conservative. >> reporter: the question is has

enough of the arizona electorate evolved with kari lake? i want to be clear, we made multiple attempts as you saw to talk to kari lake about this evolution here and we also reached out and lisa, the other woman there in the elevator is a paid campaign adviser for lake here. she's been a long time friend of kari's. i wanted to have that conversation from her point of view about this evolution. but again, talked to more of the 12 close friends and colleagues who have been cut off from kari over the last two years here. this is a situation, again, is an act or a true believer? all of the conversations kept coming back to the fact that kari lake has transitioned and effectively transformed into a true donald trump accolade and can very well pull off the republican nomination for arizona governor. joe? >> i mean -- thank you. stay with us. great reporting. you know, mika, as we're watching this, she said it's sad. it is. it is sad. it is sad for american democracy.

she is says media is unamerican. somebody who is running around trying to overthrow supporting the overthrow of the american government. i guess benedict arnold said the same thing. i'm sure he called george washington unamerican. it is fascinating that these people who were trying to undermine democracy, trying to overthrow an election of the president of the united states are saying that others are unamerican. but think about this. and this is, again, this -- file this under the jim and tammy fay baker file of the politicians that will do anything -- anything to, i don't know, get the spotlight, win election. look at the key characters right now in 2022. the ones that are the most extreme on the facist right. the ones the most extreme supporting a facist takeover of the federal government on january 6th.

the ones that will actually be running this fall and be talking about a stolen election when, of course, they were the ones trying to steal the election. if kari lake, a barack obama supporter, a barack obama supporter. somebody that befriended for a long time drag queens and now she's attacking drag queens and now, of course, attacking barack obama and now saying that the election was stolen. yet here she is on another extreme. it's, again, it's john lennon saying it's all showbiz. you have dr. oz, dr. oz, a democrat, a liberal even at the beginning of covid. i mean, he was anthony fauci's biggest defender. so the guy just decides he wants to get in politics so he jumped onboard the trump train. he's unrecognizable. you have, of course, one state over in ohio.

you have j.d. vance. i love silicon valley. i hate silicon valley now. i love san francisco, i hate san francisco. >> that's not how he talks. >> i love venture capitalism. i hate it now. i hang out with the elites. oh, i hate the elites. seriously! it is a south park episode waiting to be written. it is such a joke. again, he's doing the same thing that all these other people are doing. so where does it all begin, mika? it all begins with donald trump, who you and i both have known for a very long time. donald trump who had no use for conservatives. >> he's a democrat. >> mocked religious conservatives behind closed doors. mocked every republican leader. i mean criticized ronald reagan. criticized george w. bush. attacked republicans left and

right. had no use for people like mitch mcconnell. had no use for people like paul ryan. had no use for conservatives. like a guy is as pro-choice as it gets. he's for gun control. you go down the list. he was a liberal's liberal and decided now i'm going to switch. i'm not only going to switch to the republican party, i'm going to transition to the most extreme version i possibly k you're right, it is sad because, you know, a sucker is born every day and millions and millions of suckers right now who are voting for liberals who are voting for left wingers who decided as a marketing tool that they would be the jim and tammy fay baker of the hard right. >> i think his piece really showed the evolution or transitioning of that one candidate. matt lewis, your latest piece is about the battle for governor in

arizona. and it's entitled "gop candidates can't stop trump but they can beat trumpism." and yet, there seems to be such crazy in the republican side of this race for the governor. can they? >> they can. there are a lot of fires to put out. once you get to this point in a disaster. there is no quick fix. honestly, right now if you care about the republican party, if you care about liberal democracy, you have to defeat trump and defeat trumpism. i think these are two related but different things. donald trump wins the presidency but doesn't have enough accolades in there. he's got too many people in there to do so much damage. there is a scenario where donald trump loses the presidency. but his accolades kind of carry it forward. say you have a ron desantis replacing him and then a bunch

of kari lakes in the senate, hard to say where that would end up. the worst case scenario is donald trump wins and he ushers in all of the accolade who's are advancing trumpism and carrying that into the future. that's the worst case scenario. i think the way to stop it, since there is really two different front that's we're fighting, you have to have multiple strategies. so i think the january 6th committee and liz cheney employing a confrontational approach. i that i is needed. it really wouldn't work in republican primaries like in arizona. where you have to get republicans to vote for you and so you have to meet them where they are. so when you're going up against kari lake, you have doug deucy and mike pence. they're doing passive resistance or warfare and this worked. we have seen it in happen in places like north carolina where

the establishment like tom till is took out madison hawthorne. we saw it happen in georgia where governor kemp defended himself against trump's candidate david purdue. so we're now at a point where there is no quick fix. it is going to be multiple confrontations. and this could be a generational struggle or at least a decade's long struggle. i do think that there are signs of hope. he came and testified before congress about the pressure campaign that was applied on him to overturn the arizona election results. and just two nights ago the arizona republican party censured him. and said he is no longer a republican in good standing.

he could be booted from office two weeks from now. he has a trump backed primary challenger against him. you know, actually bowers is just talking with a good friend over at our sister station in phoenix last night and he referred to this apparatus around donald trump as the orange mafia. he said he will not be bullied. i think that's where all of this comes down to. frankly, it's easier to be a kari lake republican. it is easy to be kelly ward. it is easier to work under the assumption of politics as chaos that it is facts, it is moderation. it is, frankly, decency here. for rusty bowers, he has been targeted. nobody in arizona questions the east valley mormon conservatism of rusty bowers. but look what happened to him. he may be booted from office. tomorrow donald trump is coming to arizona campaigning alongside kari lake and supporting the individual that is running against him here. you know, i was talking to folks

in arizona, those that have known kari for a long time. i said what ultimately triggered her from being news anchor to running for governor? and essentially taking the chains off of who she was? it was the moderation part of it. when you're in journalism, right, you have to have some form of self reflection, humility, being open ears and helping a conversation and dialogue take place. but when you run for political office, you can be whoever the hell you want to be. you can say whatever. and guess what? controversy stirs up engagement. she now has more than 300,000 twitter followers. she is a right hand to donald trump. somebody if she wins this primary ultimately the general election her rise in this republican party will only continue to climb and she's going to prove to other republicans ahead that that's sort of conservativism, that works. >> what a future. >> conservative doesn't apply. thank you. that was absolutely fascinating your report on kari lake.

and you can read more. >> barack obama supporter. >> can you read more about kari lake's evolution in a new piece out this morning on nbcnews.com. >> still ahead on "morning joe," the very latest on the missing secret service missing text messages. it turns out the agency was told to preserve records at least three times. so how did those texts end up being deleted plus amy klobuchar tells us about bills that are being introduced to stop stealing elections. and one of our next guests asks is the fed moving fast enough? "new york times" opinion columnist joins us with his new piece which he calls some good news you may not have heard. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. watching "" watching "" 'll be right back.

for people of any age. and it can cause violent uncontrollable coughing fits. ask your doctor or pharmacist about whooping cough vaccination because it's not just for kids.

flowers are fighters. whooping cough vaccination that's why the alzheimer's association walk to end alzheimer's is full of them. because flowers find a way to break through. just like we will. join the fight at alz.org/walk

deleted texts from the secret service from the day before and the day of the january 6th attack on the capitol. a senior secret service official tells nbc news that employees received at least three e-mails including one before the insurrection instructing them to preserve all records on their electronic devices. that's as clear as it gets. the first came in early december of 2020, according to the source, ahead of a preplanned data migration that would essentially restore all devices to their factory settings. the next came in january. though the exact date is unclear. both e-mails reportedly included reminders that federal employees have a responsibility to preserve their records and included instructions an thou do so. though neither e-mail mentioned

the insurrection. a third e-mail on february 4th reportedly instructed all employees to preserve communications specific to january 6th. by that point several congressional committees had already requested secret service records from that day. but the agency claims the data migration had already taken place by then. and all relevant text messages were erased for good. >> so, mika, this is outrageous. michael, three warnings. they received three warnings. and yet, they still erased all the messages. i mean, man. this was not a mistake. i mean people saying oh, well maybe it was a bureaucratic snafu. this is not a bureaucratic snafu. this is intentional trashing of historical documents that needed -- that needed to be saved for a criminal probe that they knew would be coming.

>> yeah. i couldn't agree with you more, joe, on that point. and the reality of city think we just need to call it what it is as you just have. that this was something that was done deliberately. they had the warnings. i mean irrespective of the warnings, you're a significant law enforcement agency within the federal government. you know damn well what the processes and procedures are with respect to the retention of documents. you know there is a federal document retention act that you're subject to just like every other organ of government. the fact that they're now himming and hawing and saying the process was underway. that is nonsense. they have a lot to account for here. there should be some heads that roll. there is something -- i mean look. what are you trying to hide here? what should we be knowing that

is related to those documents and now you're telling us well they're gone forever. well, we'll see. they're in the middle of it right now. >> the real problem right here, jonathan, there are so many problems here. but michael beschloss, presidential historian underlined it well last night. these are law enforcement officers that were a part of, that were in the middle of a planned coup against the united states of america. so they knew that information needed to be protected and as law enforcement officers, especially around the president of the united states who was trying to succeed in running a facist overthrow of an american election and by extension the american government itself, they knew they had a higher responsibility. and this is what presidential

historian michael beschloss said. disappearance of the secret service records no matter what explanation is a disgrace to our country. this is a point he made. run away and lawless law enforcement and security agencies have at times historically been a feature of impending dictatorship. coup d'etat attempts in world history have gone hand in hand with plots to kidnap, detain, assassinate top leaders who might stand in the way. and what was so chilling is what he saying is, you know, if you want to pull off a coup, you need some arm of law enforcement with you. and the mere fact, i mean, of course, trump failed in his facist attempt to overthrow an american election, an american government by extension. but there are members of the law enforcement and you said this yesterday who actually were

sympathetic to his coup attempt. so i -- i mean i heard that. i know you heard that quietly. a lot of people have been talking about concerns inside the secret service about these people being more loyal. some of them to donald trump than to the united states, to the united states constitution, to american democracy. i brushed it off. every time i see secret service members, i thank them for their service to america. but my god, there's a cancer to borrow a phrase there. there's a cancer growing inside the secret service. and it needs to be ripped out. and this shows just how dangerous things have gotten inside the secret service. >> what is one of the top jobs of law enforcement agencies? preserve evidence. period. they didn't do that.

there was everything surrounding january 5th and 6th important days. it is routine matter of course. government employees preserve records. it's part of the law. there is a suggestion here, there's a violation of federal records preservation act. that is a crime. >> coming up, a new harvard study is taking a look at what motivated rioters to take part in the january 6th attack on the capitol. the most common response -- donald trump. >> surprise. they didn't spend a lot of money on this stuff. >> we're breaking down the findings ahead on "morning joe." e for people of any age. and it can cause violent uncontrollable coughing fits. ask your doctor or pharmacist about whooping cough vaccination because it's not just for kids. findings ahead on "morning joe." that's why i founded lively. high-quality hearing aids with all of the features you need,

and none of the hassle. lively offers bluetooth, fda regulated hearing aids delivered to your door for thousands less than you'd expect and remote access to an audiology team seven days a week. better hearing has never been this easy. try lively risk free for 100 days. visit listenlively.com. ♪ in three seconds, pam will decide... i'm moving closer to the grandkids! wait. i got to sell the house! don't wait, just sell directly to opendoor. easy as pie. piece of cake. whichever. when life's doors open, we'll handle the house.

♪ you're a perfect 10 ♪ ♪ you're a perfect 10 ♪

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. when you need help it's great to be in sync with customer service. a team of reps who can anticipate the next step genesys technology is changing the way customer service teams anticipate what customers need. because happy customers are music to our ears.

genesys, we're behind every customer smile. there is new movement on reforming the electoral count act after months of negotiating, a bipartisan group of senators announceded two proposals yesterday to close the gaps in federal law and prevent future candidates from stealing

elections. specifically, the bill seeks to close loopholes in election law that former president trump and his allies tried to exploit to keep him in power despite the fact that he lost the 2020 election. the first bill would clarify that vice president's role in counting electoral college votes. raise the bar for members of congress to object and try to prevent fake slates of electors from interfering in the process. the second bill is aimed at protecting election workers. joining us now, democratic senator amy klobuchar of minnesota. she's a member of the judiciary committee. and chair of the rules committee. and senator klobuchar, you guys expect to hold a hearing on the proposals soon. tell us how it's going in term of republicans and democrats working together on this. and what does that tell us? >> everyone that came out of january 6th understood that we had to get to the bottom of what happened. that's what the january 6th committee is doing right now

including tonight. we had a fix of security at the capitol. something senator blunt and i took very seriously. we have new police chiefs and sergeant of arms, you name it. the third piece of it was not allowing procedure that was set in 1887, you have to think rutherford hayes, we're not going to go there, antiquated law and updating it. literally one person can object from each chamber. one person can object. and then you can throw the whole thing for each state that can object to. and so what the group has done here and they were going to have the hearing on august 3rd, senator blunt and myself, hear this legislation and take testimony from witnesses is to suggest some changes to this. up the ante on how many people have to object and make sure you clarify the role of the vice president, you name it. because i was the one with, you snow, senator blunt at 3.

of. 30 in the morning walking through the broken glass with the two young women with the wood box. i know very well this procedure has to be changed. >> you know, senator, it's great news. i'm glad that republicans and democrats are working together on it. and one of the things i like so much about the bill is that it's going to require, i guess, a fifth of members in each chamber to raise an objection and start the process. in the past, of course, january 6th, 2021, is stand alone. i'm not -- there's no moral equivalency here. that said, it seems every four years there will be a democrat objecting when a republican wins, a republican objecting when a democrat wins. and it's really -- it's disgraceful. it's nonsense. even when it is peaceful and it's brushed aside, i love that you all are raising the level for those objections.

>> yes. so senator king and durbin and i had one bill. we gave it to this committee. susan collins and others on the committee have taken this and really got an agreement between a bipartisan agreement. i know everyone is going to want to look at it. it's going to take a few days, as i said. this is a big deal to change. this but we have to do something. you can't allow each state, it's no the just you're right about the one person objecting. they can literally do it to each state, joe. they can do it for all. and each time they do it takes three to four hours. we had anticipated without the insurrection it was going to take at least 24 hours through the night to go through this. and then you have the other piece of it. the fake electors slate. something has to be done so that never happens again. and we just have to make sure that the voices of the american people are heard and they can duely elect their president.

>> ukraine's first lady addresses congress and makes an emotional plea for more help in the fight against russia. >> i have to say, the ukrainians, what heartens me is the ukrainians understand that americans have gone above and beyond. but they desperately need our help. and that's who we are. that's who americans are. we have been the guarantors of freedom for over 100 years. and so it's a role we have to step into even if allies like the french are still trying to make nice with putin. >> and ukrainians say rightfully that they're fighting for the future safety of the world. >> they are. >> admiral james devritas joins us to weigh in on mrs. zelenskyy's message and the new push to extend the military ambitions beyond the donbas. "morning joe" is coming right back. "morning joe" is coming right "morning joe" is coming right back

zero lace model. adjusts to low light. and pans and zooms to keep you in frame. ay, let's get you some feedback. i'm impressed. great, loving your work. meta portal. the smart video calling device that makes work from home, work for you.

♪♪ my relationship with my credit cards wasn't good. i got into debt in college and, no matter how much i paid, it followed me everywhere. between the high interest, the fees... i felt trapped. debt, debt, debt. so i broke up with my credit card debt and consolidated it into a low-rate personal loan from sofi. i finally feel like a grown-up. break up with bad credit card debt. get a personal loan with no fees, low fixed rates, and borrow up to $100k. go to sofi.com to view your rate. sofi. get your money right. ♪♪ with xfinity internet, you get advanced security sofi. get your money right. that helps protect you at home and on the go.

you feel so safe, it's as if... i don't know... evander holyfield has your back. i wouldn't click on that. hey, thanks! we got a muffin for ed! all right! you don't need those calories. can we at least split it? nope. advanced security that helps protect your devices in and out of the home. i mean, can i have a bite? only from xfinity. nah. unbeatable internet. made to do anything so you can do anything.

welcome back to "morning joe." we're just a few minutes before the top of the hour. and ahead, in the fourth hour of "morning joe," we have new reporting on the next hearing of the house january 6 select committee. it is back in prime time tonight. despite the chairman's covid diagnosis. we'll have the latest on this evening's focus. what exactly donald trump was doing in the white house on january 6th. as his supporters overran the u.s. capitol. plus, quote, president trump is calling us to fight, we'll tell you what the largest study yet found to motivate those january 6th rioters. also ahead, the prosecution rests its case in the steve bannon trial after calling just two witnesses. and, rudy giuliani has been ordered to appear before the special grand jury that is

investigating possible interference in the 2020 presidential election. we'll bring you the latest in that investigation. and an impassioned plea to congress as ukraine's first lady asks for weapons to protect her homeland. james stavridis will break do you know -- break down the latest. and we're joined by paul krugman. an opinion columnist for "the new york times" and he has two now pieces about two of the most pressing issues facing the country and the world right now. on climate change, he said climate politics are worse than you think. and on inflation, paul says he was wrong about the issue. paul let's start with that. welcome back to the show. tell us about your piece and what did you think -- what did you think you got wrong?

>> well, partly it is there is stuff that i didn't -- that nobody saw coming. >> right. >> nobody saw putin invading ukraine. i think nobody thought about logistic supply chains or any of that stuff until suddenly it became a big problem. but part of it is that we did in fact end up with what is clearly an overheated economy. and the effect of that overheating on inflation was bigger than this past experience would have led us to believe. so, it is always dangerous to extrapolate from the past and in this case i thought it was possible that we offer heat, i didn't think given the historical relationship that it would lead to this much inflation. but the really important thing, i had another article this week about where do we go from here. the big question is not did we overshoot, did we overheat, but how bad is that? is it going to be a really difficult problem getting

inflation back down again. and that really comes down to the question of whether high inflation has gotten entrenched in people's expectations. do people -- is there likely the end of the 1970s when everybody expected 10% inflation as far as the eye could see when corporations were giving 10% wage increases figuring well i won't have any problem passing that on to consumers because everybody else is doing the same thing and we have a series of new numbers coming out, all of which say hey that is not happening. this does not look like 1970s. the public does not believe that inflation is going to be a problem that goes on for years and years. so, it is a peculiar thing. the price of gasoline is down. but that is really relatively unimportant. what is really important is that long-term expectations of inflation are, if anything, falling not rising. so we're in actually better

shape. the fear that we have gotten too far behind the curve and this is really, really hard to get rid of inflation, that fear has been receding quite a lot. >> so, a couple of questions following up here. i just saw a for sale sign in the video that we're playing's speak. housing, how does that play into this? it seems like it is a dire situation for potential homeowners, people just trying to find a place to live, find a house or find a place to rent. >> yeah, this is an ongoing problem. i mean, this is -- it didn't start recently, we have a problem of excessively restrictive zoning which has limited the housing supply. that is one of the cases where blue states are actually getting it wrong and red states to some extent get it right. we had a surge in demand for rental housing during the pandemic. >> right. >> and so those pace of rent

increases seems to have slowed quite a lot lately. but that will take a while to filter into the official inflation numbers. and so that is an ongoing problem. but you just want to step back and say, okay, yeah, housing is a really big problem. and it is a long-term problem. we need to build more housing. but are we seeing something that is a -- basically is it 1979 all over again and the answer is overwhelmingly not. >> okay. and then finally your piece about climate politics, being worse than you think. i don't know how much worse it could get. but go ahead, tell us. >> well, it turns out to be the optimistic view is that it is all about money, it is all about fossil fuel interests and people making money off the current situation that don't want to do anything. but unfortunately, what we're seeing is that it runs deeper than that. what we're seeing is that even when there are no large

financial interests at stake, that it basically, the entire republican party and occasional democrats named manchin are opposed to doing smig about climate no matter how bad the realities are, and the real tragedy here is that technology has been a godsend here. the price of alternatives to fossil fuels have plunged. we're in a situation where coal doesn't want to exist as an industry independent of government policies and yet a blocking coalition in our political system that is discouraging what -- at this point an energy transition. that would protect the planet and looks remarkably cheap, looks like the cost of the economy, and even the cost of fossil fuel industry couldn't be that large but we have people that don't want it to happen. >> but just in closing, to end where we began which is an inflation. with all of the conflicting

issues and conflicting indicators on the economy, is there any clear way to navigate through and beyond inflation and get these numbers back down, is the fed acting fast enough and robustly enough, or is it, as you said, something that in the beginning you might have misdiagnosed the issue as well and we need to wait and see how this works out? >> yeah, all of the indications are now that the fed is doing the right thing. in fact, at this point the risks have tilted toward the overdoing it. and there is all kinds of -- my in-box filled up every morning with new indicators that say that inflationary pressures are abating. now that doesn't mean that fed was wrong to raise interest rates. they need to do it and probably need to do a few more hikes. but it is -- the chance of a soft or soft-ish landing maybe with a mild recession with inflation coming down to

acceptable levels fairly soon, look far better than it did just two or three months ago. >> paul, joe scarborough here. i want to ask you about something. this is your life. you've been working this for years now. but it seems to me every 20, 30 years we hear a country is going to overtake the united states. i always laugh when i think back to 1987, '88, '89 and japanese are going to turn america into its grainery. we heard the same thing about china. and yet we get a report that u.s. dollar is stronger now against all other currencies than any other currency. you could talk for a moment about the resilience of the united states economy through the years and how we're -- it seems we're always underestimated and the economy keeps doing very well relatively