(vo) the network you want. the price you love. only from verizon. hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. in the wake of the final january 6th committee hearing of the summer, investigators are circling donald trump and his closest allies with reports indicating that trump world could soon find itself in imminent legal jeopardy. today new revelations from the january 6th select committee including never before seen closed-door testimony by committee member elaine luria on her twitter feed provides new insights into donald trump's state of mind when he delivered the tempered speech, wagging his finger at and not quite condemning the riotous insurrectionists who stored the

capitol on his behalf. here were witnesses including jared kushner on what was behind that statement. >> i sat and spoke to miller about putting together for draft remarks for jan 7 that we were going to present to the president that we felt we had to call for further de-escalation. >> from what i understood at the time and from the reports coming in there's a large concern of 25th amendment potentially being invoked and there were concerns about would happen in the senate if the 25th was invoked so the primary reason that i had heard other than, you know, we did not do enough on the 6th and we need a stronger message to get out there otherwise this will be the legacy and think about what might happen in the final 15 days of your presidency if we don't do this. there are already talks about invoking the 25th amendment.

>> so to be clear according to jared kushner and cassidy hutchinson, sworn testimony, it was concerns about the president's cabinet finally after years of talking about it, doing something and invoking the 25th amendment to officially publicly, finally declare him unfit for office. that was what was behind the remarks. in case it wasn't clear that the white house realized by the evening of january 6th in failing to call off the mob, he galvanized, but what might be more materiel to investigators is this, trump's edits to the january 7th speed itself, watch. >> do you recognize what this is? >> it looks like a copy of a draft of the remarks for that day. >> okay. and as you can see from the document there are lines crossed out. there are some words added in.

do you recognize the handwriting? >> it looks like my father's handwriting. >> it looks like here that he crossed out that he was directing the department of justice to ensure all lawbreakers are prosecuted to the full extent of the law. we must send a clear message not with mercy, but with justice. legal consequences must be swift and firm. do you know why he wanted that crossed out? >> i don't know. >> i want to be clear, you do not represent me. you do not represent our movement. do you know why he crossed that language out of the statement? >> i don't know. >> really? i feel like we can help you. the voice saying i don't know is jared kushner, the takeaway here, of course donald trump could not -- donald trump would not call for the justice department to prosecute or hold accountable those who broke the law, right? the criminals who violently and unlawfully and illegally carried

out donald trump's coup attempt at the u.s. capitol. even 24 hours after they committed those crimes. he refused to distance himself from the insurrectionists. he refused to say you don't represent me. the opposite of that, of course, is you do, right? the new evidence put out by the january 6th committee comes as investigators make it abundantly clear that they're moving full steam ahead even after the last public hearing had of the summer has concluded. committee vice chair liz cheney saying that the possibility of a subpoena is still very much on the table for one ginni thomas. think, ginni is the wife of supreme court justice clarence thomas. the january 6th committee isn't the only, against the twice-impeached president and his close friends. "the new york times" today highlights georgia's probe into the scheme of of the thrice-recounted vote there. georgia has been pursuing a quickening case that could pose

the most immediate legal peril for the president and his associates. it is taking shape for a broad case that could target multiple charges for racketeering-related judges for engaging in the coordinated scheme to undermine the election. >> both of these investigative fronts turning up the heat on president joe biden's department of justice and president joe biden's attorney general, merrick garland, who remains at this point very much under the radar when it comes to doj's investigations into trump and its potential next moves. a new analysis from mike schmit's reporting of "the new york times" describes it like this, the contrast between the urgency and aggressiveness of the investigations being carried out by the georgia prosecutors and the congressional committee on the one hand in a quiet and apparent plotting and methodical approach being taken by the justice department on the other hand is so striking that it has become an issue for mr. garland and is only growing more pronounced by the week. the parallel investigations

barreling ahead against donald trump and his associates in questions where doj is doing is where we start todd with some of our favorite reporters and friends. mike schmit is here, washington correspondent, and claire mccaskill and andrew weissmann and former senior member of the mueller probe. all of them, lucky for us, msnbc contributors. mike, take us through your fantastic reporting that puts it on the shelf next to each other in a really striking way. >> look, the question that has e merged from the hearings is what is the justice department going to do and the reason those questions have come out is because the committee has done such an effective job at telling their story, and that has put this pressure on garland, but as we -- as i pointed out in the piece, the gears of justice at the department always move the slowest and that pace has forced garland to have to respond as he

did last week to these outside questions about what is going on and what are they doing? look, the justice department someone once described to me was like a tank. it may take a little bit of time to move its gaze, but once it hones in on something it really goes after it. that's what we're seeing here is the justice department that took its time to get to this place is truly digging in and catching up to where the committee and the prosecutors in georgia are, and the thing about the committee to understand is that they are unbound by many, if not all of the rules that the department is bound by, about what they can talk about publicly, you know, what it can talk about in terms of its investigations and the broad strokes of it and the type of evidence that they can use. the committee can use any type of evidence that they want in a courtroom. obviously these rules are very

different. so as the public questions arise and become bigger about what the department is doing. trying to understand the differences between congress, the georgia prosecution -- the georgia prosecutors and the department. >> andrew weissmann, liz cheney seems so acutely aware of and one step ahead of these, but we can't because. we took on the issue of cross-examination and said do you really think that bill barr will wilt under cross-examination and not call it bs? do you really think i'm going to get better answers from pat cipollone than the justice department? are you kidding? how have they effectively boxed in all of those arguments that were the traditional -- i don't want to say excuse structure, but the traditional explanations for not move as quickly as a local prosecutor or congressional committee? >> so i'm hoping that mike is

right, that what we're hearing from the department that it's like a tank and be patient and we're going to get there and a lot is happening under the water and you're just seeing the tip of the iceberg. i hope that is right. i am somewhat pessimistic, although i do think the january 6th committee has sort of lit a fire under the department of justice and that's why you're seeing the heartfelt statements by the attorney general. here's a good example from the way we began, nicole, with the january 6th committee material that came out today. one of the things i was struck by was not what was crossed out and the statement that i immediately deployed the national guard and federal law enforcement to secure the building and expel the

intruders. i would view that as a cover-up that stephen miller and the former president of the united states engaged in to make it seem like the president had not engaged in a coup and he actually was against what happened on january 6th and that was actually part of the planned speech, and that's the kind of thing that we want to see the department doing is interviewing those people and issuing grand jury subpoenas and if necessary putting those people in the grand jury and forcing them to testify and account for their actions, and i think that that happened we would be quite aware of it. i think that they're not defense lawyers who would be squawking and revealing to the public and reporters that that was going on. so i'm waiting to see that kind of aggressive action by the department. >> andrew, what you said is really important to make sure that we all understand and our viewers understand, the reason that we can say with some confidence that we know that donald trump himself and his conduct and jared kushner's and

rudy giuliani is not under investigation is because they've been investigated by you and the mueller probe by two impeachment inquiries and we know what they look like and sound like under investigation. they have their right to retain counsel and their counsel has a pattern now under three and a half, i think, if you count the stormy daniels stuff as a half probe because michael cohen implicated trump in what most thought was the most egregious crimes which brought down the careers of many and not donald trump. we know what they sound like under investigation. from your expert eye do you see any signs that anyone other than jeffrey clark and john eastman who mike makes clear that the fake electors probe and some of those other schemes are very much under investigation at this point, but other than that, do you see any indication that anyone close to trump or trump are under investigation by doj? >> unfortunately, the answer to

that is no. i do think there is a certain amount that would be secret and we wouldn't know about and once you have grand jury subpoenas and you start putting relatively senior people in the grand jury that gets out and just remember the recipients of grand jury subpoena do not have to keep that secret and we're very aware from people like jeffrey clark and john eastman, that's gone on and from others. so i think that we're not seeing any sign that senior people used to be in the white house under president trump are being interviewed and being put in the grand jury. >> so, claire, let's keep this forward looking and let's keep this productive and the best case scenario is that they weren't and now they are. mike's colleagues have also reported that the twice-impeached ex-president may be contemplating a second run for the presidency and may announce, does that make it

harder or easier for merrick garland to turn up the heat on donald trump? >> i'm not sure it ever gets any harder. i think indicting a former president on crimes surrounding a political elections is as tough as it gets, but andrew, as always, is being certain and very articulate about doj. let me put it more plainly, for some reason, in a way that the federal government usually doesn't operate, they've allowed other investigations to get way ahead of him, and that was a choice they made. they allowed a house committee to get first shot at these witnesses, to get them in a deposition, but for the federal government had been down to a statement and if they were getting statements from them, we would know about it because they'd all be lawyered up. >> so what were they thinking? did they think that just by

going after the mob that would be enough until liz cheney and that committee basically tlooi open the curtains and said doj, hello? so i am very pessimistic that doj is -- because this is not the way they usually operate. they want to be first on the block, not last on the block. i know because i've been pushed down the line because they wanted to be first to the witnesses because they claimed dibs. it is very unusual for them to be last to the party, and i think the decision is always a tough one, but he took the job knowing that this was looming. he knew that when he took the job, and i hope i'm wrong, but i'm worried that a terrible precedent is going to be set by this particular attorney general. >> i want to read some new reporting that nbc has to you,

mike, because it sort of bears out claire's point. mark short who testified it would appear reluctantly by saying i'm here under subpoena and going on fox news and saying yes, i cooperated with fox news and he's the chief of staff to the vice president and his testimony was used in the taped depositions that were shown during that rarthd dramatic public hearing where greg jacobs who was his council testified to never before publicly aired evidence that the vice president refused to get in the car and basically ran the executive branch of the government from the basement of the united states capitol where he waited until it was safe to go upstairs and certify president biden's victory. a source close to the matter tells that mike short, chief of staff under mike pence appeared under subpoena before a federal grand jury investigating the january th attack on the capitol. the development was first reported by abc news.

the source wouldn't discuss details of the testimony an indication that the department of justice for january 6th his expanded from those in the so-called fake elector schemes. so maybe a brick in the wall against claire and andrew's pessimism? >> look, it would certainly be a sign that the justice department investigation being led by thomas wyndham is looking at and trying to talk to individuals at that closest wrung around the president. that has sort of been the biggest question to this point is that why is it that people like mark short had not been talked to, but they had talked to the committee. so this would certainly be a sign that the department is honing its focus directly in on those individuals and trying to get information from them. it's important to remember what short was there for. he was there for the efforts by

eastman and trump to pressure pence. he was helping to respond to that. he was helping make sure that greg jacob was coming up with a legal rationale that pence could rely on coordinating with conservative lawyers outside the administration who were trying to help pence. he was at the center of all of these things and dealing directly with pence as pence had to confront eastman and trump as they came up with this -- this bogus legal scheme to where they essentially said that pence could pick the president when he went for the certification. so it's not just that short is in the capitol on january 6th and witnesses what is going on with pence and pence's reluctance to leave and the violence there. he was directly -- a direct witness to everything that was going on in terms of the

internal pressure campaign on pence. >> andrew weissmann, i want your thoughts on everything mike is reporting, but he's also an important witness in the knowledge 24 hours ahead of time that there would be violence and the violence would be directed at mike pence. he calls in the secret service who have now become the flashing yellow light in all of the questions about who knew what and when. he knows 24 hours before january 6th goes down the way it does that pence is in danger and he calls in secret service and tells him on the 5th, hey, pence could be in a dicey situation tomorrow. talk about short's testimony and knowledge 24 hours ahead of time of violence. >> so the violence is incredibly important in terms of proving a case. particularly if you're trying to make a case on seditious conspiracy against the former president that requires the department of just toys prove that there was be on struksz of

congress by force so his awareness the day before and who he can say was also aware for sure the secret service was aware, and the president of the united states would seem laughable. so he's an important witness to that as mike points out he's also an important witness to the president lying about saying the vice president was always onboard with the fact that he agrees that the president says that the vice president does not have to count the votes, that he has the power to say no when we know that the vice president's view was, no, he doesn't have the power. he's an incredibly important witness, and we think if that reporting is correct, the fact that the justice department is in a political corruption case.

you have to lock people in under oath. there's no better way than to do that in a grand jury. so they can't later sort of wr fwshgs gle out and misinterpret what they said. the fact that they would go into a grand jury would be significant. >> it seems, claire, if the violence is under scrutiny or becomes something that's under scrutiny. the violence that is carried out with the insurrectionists are trying and winning these cases. the date on knowledge of violence, at least from short's testimony is the 5th. cassidy hutchinson testifies that on the second, that it will be wild. and it will be real, real bad. you have meadows who knows on the second and rudy knows on the 2nd it will be violent. you've got trump who knows that the weapons and wants the mags

down so the armed supporters with the ar-15 in the trees can come on in and then on the 7th you can't say you're not with us. the opposite of that is you are with us. you can't say you won't be prosecuted and the opposite is you will be prosecuted. how is trump not the beating heart of the violence? >> there's -- he is the beating heart of the violence. he's the first one who said it will be wild and then all of his minions took up the cause. i think the evidence is very clear, and i think what andrew pointed out earlier is huge, that in that statement he made he lied. he never called the national guard. he never called anybody except rudy and the senators that he got to obstruct an act of congress. >> the only calls he made was to

sycophants in congress and he never called law enforcement or the national guard. all of this is very compelling, but i would point out again, the added problem that justice has now, yes, it's great, they're getting this testimony in front of a grand jury under oath, and every single witness is key to this with another set of statements and i can assure you, every statement they give is slightly different and that is grist for cross-examination. you said this on this day and you didn't say this on this day and sometimes the differences that really didn't mean anything and get blown out of proportion in front of a jury. that's why it is so important that typically law enforcement wants to be the first one to get someone down in terms of what happened. now there's going to be a lot of different statements in front of the committee on depositionses and recorded statements and interviews that they'll have to deal with assuming they might go forward. >> andrew weissmann, let's talk

about the fbi. we talk about merrick garland and what happens happens next, it will follow, the congressional probe. it will follow. where's the fbi in all of this? are they capable of initiating and driving the need to investigate crimes? >> that is such a great question. particularly if you focus one aspect that we know is being investigated which is the sort of the department of justice scheme and that involves john eastman and jeffrey clark and the people who are not following the details, that is the scheme to lob off the heads of the justice department who are unwilling to go along with the scheme to say that there was fraud in the election and to issue a letter saying that that's under investigation. >> by all accounts, that is being investigated by the inspector general's offers which is a sort of small, unique part

of the justice department, but not by the fbi. that's very unusual, and i had thought that the inspector general would work with the fbi. when i was in the department i frequently would have an investigation with the fbi and the inspector general's office because you want those added resources and that expertise of the fbi. it's worth remembering that the fbi would report to the deputy attorney general and the attorney general. so if merrick garland wants the fbi involved he has the power to make that happen. >> just a little phone call or a little walk. mike schmit, andrew weissmann. thank you. claire sticks around. former investigator john wood is our guest on the committee's work and his contribution to the long hours of testimony that we've seen and what likely is ahead for the next phase of the january 6 committee.

plus marco rubio calls the need to protect americans' right to marry whoever they would like to marry is a, quote, stupid waste of time and we'll have pete buttigieg's clapback. how january 6th continues to tear away at the republican party with two conservative outlets slamming the ex-president, all of that and more after "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. stay with us. house" continues after a quick break. break. stay with us scale across all your clouds... we got that right? yeah, we got that. it's easier to be an innovator. so you can do more incredible things. [whistling]

i brought in ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. uhh... here, i'll take that! yay!!! ensure max protein, with 30 grams of protein, 1 gram of sugar enter powered by protein challenge for a chance to win big! wanna help kids get their homework done?

well, an internet connection's a good start.e but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.

the guy had incredible honor

of running as law clerks. another was john eastman. you've written that eastman's theory that he could determine who the next president of the united states is, is in your words, incorrect at every turn. could you please explain briefly your analysis? >> there was no basis in the constitution or laws of the united states at all. where the theory espoused by mr. eastman at all. none. >> even after eight hearings that is still one of the most memorable ones with the committee's third public hearing and our next guest john wood leading the questioning of conservative judge michael luttig who he previously clerked for was the investigator of the

january 6th committee helping build their case publicly and privately including the disgraced ex-president's pressured campaign against his vp and a self-described life-long republican and they served the republican committee vice chair liz cheney and served as senior counsel. today he's running as an independent for his own race to prevent what he describes as a dangerous republican candidate from winning office. the gun-wielding eric greatens who released the disturbing ad, so awful, we didn't play it here, suggesting people hunt their republican opponents. joining us now is john wood. thank you very much for being here. i've seen you on with my colleagues and i had guest envy and now you're our guest and it's great to see you. >> thank you. >> i want to ask you, i know your service on the committee is over. as you said you're running for office now and i wonder if we can dive right back here where it left off and ask you of what

ended off as a flashing yellow as i said at the top of the show and not just the secret service communications, but what happened to them? when did it become apparent with the investigation and what do you think is behind their deletion of records? >> yeah. it's hard to know. the only two explanations are something nefarious where they were trying to hide evidence or inkorm tense. if it was incompetence on a grand scale because by the time these were deleted the inspector general had requested the text messages and it is inexcusable for an investigations as important as what happened on january 6th that the secret service would not take appropriate steps to make sure that all of the texts were preserved and i would also add that there were suggestions that perhaps the secret service agents would contradict the

testimony of cassidy hutchinson, and if the texts were deleted that will undermine their credibility. >> you participated in the questioning of the taped deposition of tony ornato, is that right? >> i was there, but i did not lead it. >> he retained private counsel. any theory for why that came to be? >> one is he thinks some legal exposure and therefore needs counsel, and i don't know which two it is. my guess would be that it's something having to do with his failure to preserve his own text messages and he's concerned that he may have some potential exposure, but i'm not certain of that. >> you also, if i have this wrong, correct me, you also

clerked for judge clarence tom a right? >> yes. >> so let me tell you what your former colleague on the january 6th committee vice chair liz cheney said about ginni thomas on cnn this weekend. the committee is engaged with her counsel and we certainly hope that she will come in voluntarily and the committee will subpoena if not. i hope she'll come in voluntarily. we've spoken to numbers of people in terms of the discussions that she was having, as you mentioned. it is very important for us to speak with her, and as i said i hope she'll agree to come in voluntarily and i'm sure we'll contemplate a subpoena. hers is involved stoking a deadly insurrection. any prediction on how this will go? if she'll come in voluntarily or subpoenaed. >> i hate to disappoint you, but i don't have inside information on that because given the fact

that i clerked for her husband justice thomas and i consider the thomases to be my family to me, i recuse myself from everything that the committee was doing involving ginni thomas. so i actually don't have any information on that. in general, it's good when people are willing to come forward and testify voluntarily and in most cases if they decline to do so then the committee goes to compulsory such as the subpoena. >> well this is an investigative matter and as an investigator the first person who defied a subpoena is now facing jail time, steve bannon. do you think she should be subpoenaed? >> again, i don't have any information on the reasons why they want to talk to her because i was recused from that, but i hope that everybody who has relevant information will come forward and cooperate with the committee. >> what is your sense sort of having an intimacy with the evidence that maybe we don't have having seen it in the public presentations about the case that's been made so far

against the ex-president as liz cheney always describes him the person who summoned the mob, riled up the mob and when it was clear his own vice president's life was in danger and capitol police officers were being maimed and injured didn't do nothing. kicked the photographers out of the dining room, watched television, called rudy giuliani, and it sounds like one of the active threads of the investigation is still pursuing the other contacts and communications he had during the insurrection. >> so, you know, in term of the moral and ethical responsibility, clearly that falls on president trump. what happened on january 6th was an absolute tragedy and we have to make sure it never happens again and the hearings have shown that the president's actions led to what happened on january 6th and at the most recent hearing, not only did the president fail to act, he refiezed to act when his staff was coming to come asking him to

act. on the moral and ethical responsibility, no doubt about it. as far as any legal exposure that he might have such as criminal charges. >> that is not just up to the justice department and everyone is saying, what is the next step? there would be material charges and it was a difficult position, whether they bring charges or decline to bring charges as much as is to appoint a special counsel who will be as free as anybody can be from politics and make every person in your view. i mean, robert mueller was hemmed in pie the idea that you couldn't charge a president and they got wrapped around the axle of describing six criminal acts anding to nothing with them and a lot of americans lost faith that the president wasn't above the law. this president certainly thinks he's above the law and he called zelenskyy right after the

mueller testimony took place. >> yeah. so i know that the president as far as special counsel has been somewhat mixed, but it's the least bad of all of the alternatives, in my opinion. if you pick the right person and they can keep it as free of politics as possible, that i think that will give the american people the most confident is ultimately aware to charge or not to charge. >> so you know liz cheney well. she started reading from the criminal code and i believe the law she read first was obstructing an official proceeding. she started framing the committee's work and the context of proving intent in a criminal act many, many months ago. you were still on the committee then. why do you think she did that? >> well, obviously, that's an important question everyone wants to know the answer to and ultimately the committee had to make a decision rather it was more likely than not and they did it in the context of a

dispute out of a federal district court in california where he was claiming attorney/client privilege that the fraud exception apply because the president with john eastman had violated criminal statutes and the judge in that case found that it was more likely than not that the president violated two provisions of criminal law. so that by itself, while it's certainly not the same as getting a conviction by a jury by a reasonable doubt, it's enough that the justice department has to at least look at the question about whether president biden and those close to him violated criminal statutes, and as i was saying earlier, i think the best way to do that is to appoint the special counsel. >> what do you think? do you think the president committed crimes? >> you know, i think the justice department has to ultimately conduct that investigations. that's not what the select committee of the mouse's

investigation was about. the select committee was about finding out what happened and making sure it doesn't happen again and taking legislative coulds to make sure doesn't happen again and the fact that a district court finds a criminal statute has got to give this serious thought, and i hope the justice department will look into it in an a owe political way. >> i want to ask you about the witnesses who participated. it seems very important, but the chairman bennie thompson ask vice chair liz cheney and the committee members to express their profound gratitude and it's clear from the exchanges, some of the witnesses were forthcoming and bill barr enjoys sharing his experience. can you tell me what the strategy was for the witnesses that did choose to, and the rep

asians and consequences from ex-president trump. >>yia. it was important for witnesses and potential witnesses that it was really their obligation to the country to come forward and tell the truth and by and large they did. you saw a powerful testimony from a whole range of people who almost without exception were republicans. many of them served under and had been appointed by president trump and others were elected state officials like brad raffensperger or rusty bowers who were trump supporters and ultimately their obligation was to the country and to tell the truth and a lot of the witnesses were also some of the younger staff members of the white house because some of the seniors like mark meadows refused to testify and i was impressed with those like sarah matthews and cassidy hutchinson who were willing to come forward and speak the truth even if it was difficult or damaging to their careers. >> johnwood, if certainly

yielded more insights. thank you for taking the time for us to tax about it. >> thanks, nicole. >> why aren't there senators protecting same-sex marriages today. asking why his marriage and millions of others should not have the right to be, to exist. we'll have that conversation next. , to exist we'll have that conversation next even ice cream is like whooping cough, it's not just for kids. sometimes followed by vomiting and exhaustion. ask your doctor or pharmacist about whooping cough vaccination because whooping cough isn't just for kids.

look, this is really, really important to a lot of people. it's certainly important to me. our marriage deserves to be treated equally. i don't understand how such a majority of house republicans voted no on our marriage. i was in the room with a lot of them talking about transportation policy and having what i thought were perfectly normal conversations with many of them on that subject only for them to go around the corner and say that my marriage doesn't deserve to continue. if they don't want to spend a lot of time on this they can vote yes and move on, and that would be really reassuring for a lot of families around america including mine. >> transportation secretary pete buttigieg calling out marco rubio and many other congressional republicans who have refused to support marriage equality in america. the respect for marriage act passed the house last week with

the majority of house republicans, 157 of them voting against the bill making it clear to the more than 1 million americans in same-sex marriages and partnerships that their families are very much at risk now as well as their 300,000 children who risk having their lives up ended by the republicans. despite gop opposition the bill passed the house and faces now an unclear future in the u.s. senate. joining our coverage ed eddie glaude and claire mccaskill is still with us. >> i don't think as grim and bleak as the republican party's assault on democracy gets, i don't think i was prepared to see republicans roll back something that was widely celebrated, accepted and has only grown with same-sex

marriage with brazenness and absolutely no reluctance to condemn something that is now part of american life, same-sex marriage. to say that that will no longer be the law of the land or they don't care if it is or isn't is another thing that just shocks the conscience in terms of today's republican party. >> yeah. i still remember, nicole that ted larson was the solicitor general who argued the case, remember that? >> yes. >> there is a sense that just shows you the devolution of the party, and what i thought was so important that secretary buttigieg did. he took it out of the abstract political question and the callous act of a rubio and narrow faith of white christian evangelicals at the base and how that would impact his own life. the fact that he loves someone, his family could be easily dismissed. the fact that he has to demand and ask for equality as if

equality is the possession of someone else and what we're seeing in all of this, nicole, it's very clearly, to me the attempt to relitigate the 20th century. there is the attempt to re-litigate the gay women's movement and the black freedom struggle and what we see isn't so much what the republican party was in the '80s and what the republican party was prior to the significant, the seismic shifts in the country in the 1960s, it seems to me. >> and i guess what's more alarming, claire, is now they're tracking in that direction without the majority of public support. i want your thoughts on this and the house passed legislation with the right to contraception in federal law and these are all being protected because clarence thomas set hissites on them in his opinion. this is from nbc reporting. the house voted 228 to 195 along party lines to pass legislation to codify the right to birth control, contraception,

nationwide. only eight republicans voted with all 220 democrats on the bill. what? what? republicans are against birth control? what's happening, claire? >> well, what's happening is these are -- this is going to be a really tough vote for republican senators because they know, number one, that the majority of america accepts gay marriage and doesn't think the government should tell people who to love or what their family should look like. same thing with abortion, same thing with abortion, same thing with contraception and the same thing with guns. the majority of their party disagrees with the majority of america, and therein, is their struggle. i cannot get over the hypocrisy. i read my former colleagues saying this is just a political stunt. do you have any idea how many times they forced votes on things that had not been mentioned by a supreme court justice that were just designed

to cause political headaches for people like me and other democrats in tough states? so give me a break, marco rubio and ted cruz and all of them saying what a waste of time and it's not threatened. it is mistake of just sitting back and allowing this country to drift any further into the area of personal freedoms and rights. >> clair, i guess my only question is they know it's threatened. it's threatened by them. the politics on this are terrible, including for them. 75% of americans support access to contraception. there's a plurality of america that thinks it should be free. we need to sneak in a break. eddie and clair aren't going

anywhere. we'll be right back. e and clairg anywhere we'll be right back. bubbles bubbles so many bubbles! as an expedia member you earn points on your travels, and that's on top of your airline miles. so you can go and see... or taste or do absolutely nothing with all those bubbles. without ever wondering if you're getting the most out of your trip. because you are.

my active psoriatic arthritis can slow me down. now, skyrizi helps me get going by treating my skin and joints. along with significantly clearer skin, skyrizi helps me move with less joint pain, stiffness, swelling, and fatigue. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year after two starter doses. skyrizi attaches to and reduces a source of excess inflammation that can lead to skin and joint symptoms. with skyrizi, 90% clearer skin and less joint pain is possible. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections

or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. with skyrizi, there's nothing like the feeling of improving my skin and joints... ...and that means everything. now's the time to talk to your doctor about how skyrizi can help treat your psoriatic arthritis- so you can get going. learn how abbvie can help you save. research shows that people remember ads with young people having a good time. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's a pool party. look what i brought! liberty mutual! they customize your home insurance... so you only pay for what you need! ♪young people having a good time with insurance.♪

♪young people.♪ ♪good times.♪ ♪insurance!♪ only pay for what you need. ♪liberty liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ ["only wanna be with you" by hootie & the blowfish] discover is accepted at 99% of places in the u.s. ["only wanna be with you" by hootie & the blowfish] we're with eddie and clair. eddie, how do you grab -- i think democrats are wide awake. how do you grab the 75% of americans who oppose what the republicans are doing and make them part of a voting coalition to save our freedoms and save our rights? >> take the fight to the people who are trying to take it away. what we're seeing with the republican party, nicolle, is the limits of their conception

of freedom. they want freedom for themselves, freedom for their guns. when it turns to us or who they think are other, they're willing to trample upon freedoms. take the fight to them. that will galvanize the 75% of folks. >> you're giving me chills. clair, what does that campaign look like? >> contraception is something that -- health care and contraception should be two things that every democrat talks about incessantly. how do you have fewer abortions? by making sure women have contraception. they want to say you must carry a baby to term no matter what. on the other hand we're going to

make it harder for you to get what you need to make sure you don't have a baby. that's such a dichotomy. candidates have an opportunity with these votes on contraception and this vote on gay marriage. >> thank you for being here. claire mccaskill, we want to wish you a happy birthday. i hope it was a magical birthday for you, my friend. >> lots of cake. >> always cake. watch democracy go down the drain, but there's always cake. >> there's always cake. >> we love you, my friend. love you so much. up next for us, a crossroads for the gop. will they break away from the ex president or won't they? some new developments on that front. don't go anywhere. nts on that nts on that front.

hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. don't go anywhere. on miro. with godaddy you can start a stunning online store for free. easily connect it to social platforms and marketplaces. and manage all your sales from one place. because if you've got it, we've got you. start for free at godaddy.com/startfree - i'm norm. - i'm szasz. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly;

it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. this is koli. my foster fail (laughs). when i first started fostering koli i had been giving him kibble. it never looked or felt like real food. but with the farmer's dog you can see the pieces of turkey. it smells like actual food. i saw a difference almost overnight. healthy poops, healthy dog, right? as he's aged, he's still quite energetic and youthful. i really attribute that to diet. you know, he's my buddy. my job is to keep my buddy safe and happy. ♪♪ get started at longlivedogs.com

seen this ad? it's not paid for by california tribes. it's paid for by the out of state gambling corporations that wrote prop 27. it doesn't tell you 90% of the profits go to the out of state corporations. a tiny share goes to the homeless, and even less to tribes. and a big loophole says, costs to promote betting reduce money for the tribes, so they get less. hidden agendas. fine print. loopholes. prop 27. they didn't write it for the tribes or the homeless. they wrote it for themselves.

given the choice between maintaining my seat in the house of representatives on the one hand or ensuring the survival of our constitutional republic and ensuring the american people know the truth about donald trump, i'll choose the constitution and the truth every day of the week and twice on sunday. we have an oath that i and my colleagues took under god to the constitution and that is the single most important obligation we have when faced with the threat that donald trump presents. >> hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. for her part congresswoman liz cheney, the choice is clear.

one cannot defend the constitution and defend donald trump. it's a choice that rendered liz cheney a pariah in the gop. ousted from party leadership now facing a brutal battle. that's why the editorial by rupert murdoch was outstanding this week. after the final summer hearing "the wall street journal" and "new york post" came out with scathing editorials of trump. trump took an oath to protect the constitution and he had a duty to protect the capitol from the mob attacking it. trump has shown no regret. on thursday he claimed to be vindicated by a bill to clarify the electoral count act.

mike pence told me there was nothing else he could do. why are the democrats and rinos working so hard to show there's nothing a vp can do? from the "new york post," quote, there has been much debate over whether trump's rally speech on january 6th constituted incitement. it's a red herring. what matters more has become crystal clear, trump did not lift a finger to stop the violence that followed. he was the only one the crowd was listening to. it was incitement by silence. as a matter of principle and character, trump has proven unworthy to be this country's chief executive. brutal condemnations of the ex president from conservative media. "the new york times" shines a light on how far others in the right wing media have gone, have

bent over and twisted into bizarre contourtions to defend trump. even as the hearing shows trump failed to intervene, many top conservative media penalties have continued to push a sanitize narrative of january 6th. they turned the capitol police into villains and alleged the existence of a government plot. part of the right's message to trump's supporters is you may have initially recoiled in horror at what you thought happened at the capitol, but you were misled by the mainstream media. that's where we begin here. amanda carpenter is joining us,

david jolly is here and, david, i start with you and why it matters. to some of our viewers, who cares? then "the wall street journal" and the "new york post" bail on trump. why does it matter? because we have a radicalized republican party and they intersect with the violent extremism in america. in that frame, what could the outcome of the editorials be? >> for "the washington post," it's a call to the business community. "the wall street journal" a paper of record. it's a significant editorial decision.

"the new york post," it's kind of donald trump's hometown newspaper and speaks to a slightly different audience. each of those publications with a strong affinity to republican politics and trumpism. the break is notable. what's the impact for republican voters? probably very little. your typical republican primary doesn't care about the distinction between "the new york post" and "the new york times" and donald trump's m.o. is to punch the establishment in the face and when he's attacked, attack back and it's worked. what will get tested is 2024, frankly 2022 is different than 2016. at some point donald trump has to prove that his magic is strong enough to overpower this growing force of people who are saying not only is it time to move past trump, but trump did something in violation of the constitution that should disqualify him from returning to

office. >> i'm going to take a contrarian view. i don't think it's matters. what matters is the committee has revealed sean hannity and laura ingraham are laughing their asses off. what they texted to mark meadows is make it stop. here's adam kinzinger making that point. >> the state of our party is a disaster. i have people that tell me, hey, my dad was addicted to fox news. never thought anything wrong with donald trump. now he hates him because of these hearings. i hear anecdotal things like that. i think in the long term donald trump will be persona nongrada in this country.

i always thought when you got elected to congress you were coming out here to lead. what i learned is leadership is rare in this job and people are more interested in maintaining the title and getting re-elected. >> what do you think? >> yeah, i mean, the reason the party is in such a disaster, stated disaster, as i think he put it, is because it's become the establishment republican position that something went wrong with the election. right? it was either stolen or rigged or maybe just you have questions and something went wrong. that is a lie. so everything that comes after that is premised on the lie. as long as that is, like, the animating platform of the republican party, it's very difficult to get right because that means republicans of good conscious like liz cheney and adam kinzinger are on the outs. they're on the outs because they call out that lie. they explain, as you pointed

out, how these republican conservative media thought leaders actually lied to their base. they mislead them on a constant basis. until we can find a way to get right with that issue, the republican party will never be right. i'm happy -- it's great "the wall street journal" wants to write an editorial slapping trump on the wrist. it's always what are you going to do about that? if you believe he's responsible for violence, what are you willing to do? there are a lot of republicans, almost to a person, who want to move on from trump, but they don't want to put themselves on the line to help do that. >> the permission structure is so perfectly explored by your new piece of reporting, jeremy. you dive into what we know the fox anchors were texting mark meadows and what they're saying on their shows. let me play some of that.

>> as you can see, mr. hannity texted at 3:31 to say trump needed to deliver a statement to the nation telling the rioters to leave the capitol. mr. meadows responded he was, quote, on it. fox news personality laura ingraham said the president needs to tell the people in the capitol to go home. >> soon the latest obsessive anti-trump smear will come to a pathetic end. they didn't establish a criminal case or reveal new damning evidence against president trump as they had promised they would. >> this is theater and they're upset we're not running it live on fox? it's their theater. it's their production. it's their prop, their wardrobe, their make-up, whatever the hell they're doing. it's all on them. that's what they wanted. >> fox anchor talking about hair and make-up is comical. jeremy, what's going on there?

>> i think that you're exactly right, nicolle, when you point out that what they're doing essentially on the right is to ask their audience across all conservative media, talk radio, cable, the blogs, to not believe their own eyes, to disregard or unsee what they've already seen. that's pretty remarkable. even for a president and a political movement that was built on denial in many ways, to try to get people to unsee what they know to have been a horrible event, a black mark on the nation's history, is really kind of a level of delusion that we haven't seen before and i don't think that conservative media as a whole has ever really tried to pull off before. seemingly, they pulled it off

because, while you had trump's supporters like laura ingraham, sean hannity, kevin mccarthy saying on january 6th this is awful, tell him to call off the dogs, and he didn't do it, once trump denied that january 6th was first an attack carried out in his name -- he blamed antifa -- and two, started saying it wasn't that bad. they were never go to hurt mike pence as he told me when i interviewed him. it became politically unsustainable for the average republican and the conservative media who draw their ratings from trump supporters to acknowledge reality. that in essence, i think, is the modern trump movement, is to deny he's at fault for anything or that he has any flaws whatsoever. >> it sacrifices everything and anything in its way. what's so remarkable to me,

david jolly, is that in service of what jeremy perfectly describes is the sanctity of -- there were three pillars to fox news' original theory of the case. one was a reverence to the military, pre and post 9/11, one was reverence to law enforcement and three was -- it was a distant third after those two pillars. i remember when there was reporting on military bases and bring those voices out. the third, and it was a distant third, was to bolster the arguments being made by republican politicians. it was a distant third. the other two were more central. now they're willing to call cops who voted republican their whole lives to call them crisis actors.

i wonder what you make of what they're willing to sacrifice in service of one republican, donald trump. >> i think the broader team at fox news is scared to acknowledge the truth for a couple reasons. we know if they suggest there's any truth in what the january 6th committee is presenting or any truth in what we saw with our own eyes on january 6th, not only do they have to assign responsibility, if the violence occurred, then somebody was responsible for it. we naturally say, okay, that was donald trump. i think it's bigger for the people over at fox news. it's not just that if they accept the truth, they have to assign responsibility. if they accept the truth, they have to accept the responsibility. it was the voices at fox news that provided the cover to trump and to the investigation of january 6th and to their own reporting. we know the legal machinations

they had to use to unwind their reporting, the false claims about the election, but also as one of the largest pulpits if you will for half the country that subscribes to fox news. fox news provided cover and they provided an environment in which they, they at fox news, are responsible for the environment that allows donald trump to get away with this. that is why out of almost fear, terror, they have to continue to deny the truth of january 6th. ultimately there are voices in their newsroom that bear responsibility. >> it's amazing. amanda, you have some great observations. you write, general milley testified that mark meadows told him, quote, we have to kill the narrative that the vice president is making all the decisions. we need to establish the narrative that the president is

still in charge. was it possible mccarthy agreed with the meadows' point of view that it would reflect poorly on trump? what did trump tell mccarthy and why won't mccarthy tell the committee? talk about these questions about mccarthy's role in that and what andrew wiseman described as a cover-up. it talks about trump calling the national guard. we know he did no such thing. >> i didn't really -- i'm tracking the mccarthy factor. i think it's stunning that he's escaped the amount of scrutiny in his role and communications that day. think about it. he was the republican house leader. he's on pace to be the speaker of the house again. he had communications with trump on that day where he got on the phone and asked trump to send assistance. he even called ivanka and jared

trying to get the president to send help. he was scared was the quote from jared kushner. yet, kevin mccarthy won't testify to the president's state of mind that day. what is he hiding? the committee asked him to sit for a voluntary talk. he refused. they sent him a subpoena. he refused. we know it was stunning he went to mar-a-lago and helped rehab the president. i think his actions on january 6th going from the moment to where he was calling trump for help and then if you look at the photos that the january 6th committee revealed where they show congressional leaders huddling around the phone asking defense secretary chris miller for assistance, finding a way to

security the capitol, he's absent from those photos. where is he? as we all know after congress resumed business, he supported the objections. what was kevin mccarthy doing that day? it's not a question about trump. it's what the republican leader was doing. was he on board with this idea that you can't help secure the capitol because as general milley relayed from mark meadows people in the white house were worried vice president mike pence would get the credit? i would like to know. >> jeremy, do you have any insights on that? my mind keeps going to sorting the star bursts. he was afraid on that day. he has this phone call that he never had the courage to testify public to either in the second impeach of donald trump or in the january 6th private or public hearings. we know about it from his colleagues. we know what he was saying privately from your colleagues.

how important is the mccarthy piece to the broader investigation and what appears like new chunks of evidence that there was an immediate effort in the words of mark meadows to change the narrative? >> they knew how bad it was because they were there. they fled in fear of their lives as rioters smashed through the windows of the house chamber and tried to get in and kill them. people like representative ronny jackson who has been the biggest trump supporter in congress was so fearful for his life he removed his tie because he thought he would be strangled. if you hear him talk now about january 6th, it's as if it was a peaceful protest. one of the things that -- this recurring theme that comes up over and over is they knew how

bad it was. they continued to know how bad it was and privately, if you talk to them about -- like the events, the trauma they experienced that day, they all acknowledge how bad it was. i think there could be some cracks appearing in that facade because, you know, you can only be disingenuous for so long. >> that's optimistic. >> well, i'll tell you why because "the new york post" editorial we were talking about is interesting because that is the working class populous voice of trumpism. to say that january 6th is his eternal shame is a pretty damning statement. take that and couple it with something i don't think a lot of people picked up on, which is that other parts of fox news beyond hannity and tucker and laura ingraham have started to question trump.

they've criticized him or said the january 6th committee hearings revealed damning things about his character and today trump lashed out at fox for pointing out on "fox and friends" that trump's numbers in the polls have been sagging. he went through the roof and attacked them and said they had gone to the dark side. something's going on there. there's a shifting in this narrative, a realization that he's vulnerable, the revelations we've seen from the january 6th committee are just so beyond the pale that you have to acknowledge them and you have to acknowledge trump's role in helping incite this horrific event. so, i'm not saying i think that, you know, the rug is about to be pulled out from under him, but it's interesting you're seeing

subtle cracks appear there. >> part of me wants to bang my head on this table, but i've done that before on covering trump for four years and i know it hurts. i do want to show you, david jolly, president biden's comments, bringing it back to what amounts to the first victims on january 6th. here's president biden. >> on january 6th we relied on law enforcement to save our democracy. for three hours the defeated former president of the united states watched it all happen as he sat in the private dining room next to the oval office. while he was doing that, brave law enforcement officers were subject to the medieval hell for three hours, dripping in blood, sounded by carnage, face-to-face with a crazed mob that believed lies of the defeated president. the police were heros that day.

donald trump lacked the courage to act. the brave women and men in blue should never forget that. you can't be pro insurrection and pro cop. you can't be pro insurrection and pro democracy. you can't be pro insurrection and pro america. >> joe biden on day five of a positive covid case and the white house is reporting he still has a sore throat. that's apparent there. this is as sharp a message as we've heard. you can't be pro insurrection and pro cop. having the opportunity to interview harry dunn and sergeant gonell. sergeant gonell can't be a police officer anymore because of injuries he suffered on january 6th. do you think this is a case that should be taken to the country in the midterm campaigns, david jolly? >> absolutely.

as democrats continue to build their message for november and going into 2024 that's part of it. it brings home an issue that every american understands and feels and the natural contrast is that in donald trump the former president you had someone putting his own political interests above the security of law enforcement and the security of the nation. to jeremy's point about the republican caucus on capitol hill they side with donald trump. joe biden comes down with where the country actually is. it's an incredibly powerful commercial -- message. it reminds us of the singular failure point of donald trump, which is his own arrogance. he was willing to pursue family separation at the border. he lied about covid and covered up the impact of it. he was willing to create this january 6th moment, including getting in bed with white

nationalists and others intending to cause violence to law enforcement and then the republican caucus hugged donald trump tighter. joe biden's message should be part and parcel of what democrats take to the american voters. >> it has the added benefit of being true. 12 house republicans voted against medals for the capitol police officers. jeremy peters, thank you for joining us. amanda, incredible column. david jolly sticks around. when we come back, a dangerous new turn in the big lie. new reporting about how 2020 deniers are teaming up with sheriffs to investigate nonexisting claims of voter fraud. plus why beto o'rourke is

gaining in the governor's race in texas. and russia is now attacking ports that delivers food to the world. we'll be right back after a quick break. don't go anywhere. quick break. don't go anywhere. technically when enamel is gone,

you cannot get it back. but there are ways you can repair it. i'm excited about pronamel repair because it penetrates deep into the tooth to help actively repair acid-weakened enamel. i recommend pronamel repair to my patients. (jeanne) with thyroid eye disease, my whole world became about my eyes. i hid my bulging eyes, and double vision to help actively repair acid-weakened enamel. made things look like this. but then my doctor recommended tepezza, a prescription medicine that treats thyroid eye disease. with my symptoms under control, things are really opening up. (vo) in a clinical study, nearly 7 out of 10 patients taking tepezza saw improvements in double vision. and more than 8 out of 10 patients had less eye bulging. tepezza is an infused medicine. patients taking tepezza may experience infusion reactions. tell your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as high blood pressure, fast heartbeat, shortness of breath, or muscle pain. before receiving tepezza, tell your doctor if you have diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease or ibd, or are pregnant, or planning to become pregnant. tepezza may raise your blood sugar even if you do not have diabetes and may worsen ibd such as crohn's disease

or ulcerative colitis. (jeanne) my world is more than just my eyes. (vo) ask your doctor about tepezza. and visit mytepezza.com to see jeanne's before and after photos. in order for small businesses to thrive, they need to be smart. efficient. agile. and that's never been more important than it is right now. so for a limited time, comcast business is introducing small business savings. call now to get powerful internet for just 39 dollars a month. with no contract. and a money back guarantee. all on the largest, fastest reliable network. from the company that powers more businesses than anyone else. call and start saving today. comcast business. powering possibilities. with xfinity internet, you get advanced security 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. it's a very dangerous time for american democracy. consider a pair of stories in the "new york times." first new reporting on a network of conservative activists recruiting county sheriffs to investigate elections based on the fake notion that voter fraud is widespread.

it's not. quote, the push which two right wing sheriff's groups have endorsed, seeks to lend law enforcement credibility to the false claims and alarmed voting rights activists. they warn it could weaken trust in an american voting system battered by attacks from trump and his allies. the second new piece of reporting we mentioned on the hidden new threat to elections, it's been more than nine weeks since the pennsylvania primary, the election is still not certified. three counties are refusing to count absentee ballots that are valid except the voter didn't write a date on the declaration. pennsylvania attorney general josh shapiro, a democrat running for governor, is fighting those counties in court. it's just the latest example of republicans weaponizing a process that used to be

ceremonial. joining our conversation is nick corsolini, his by line is on those articles. nick, tell us more. >> we were following a group called true the vote, a group that's long spread a lot of conspiracy theories about elections. they started in 2010 in texas trying to find nonexistent noter fraud there. they're behind the documentary "2,000 mules" which spread a lot of conspiracies about the 2020 election. they partnered with a sheriff's group called protect america now, which is about 70 sheriffs across the country from some major counties and smaller more rural counties. they made a partnership about investigating elections. when we started to look into that, we noticed another group called the constitutional sheriff's and peace officer's

association, another right leaning organization, is also becoming very involved in trying to investigate elections. what this is is bringing a level of law enforcement to what's often been, you know, kind of political rhetoric. we've seen it both from the former president, from state legislators. they haven't necessarily carried the authority and even in some cases the legal means of pursuing some of these investigations. so there's now two tracks that's happening. one, this recruitment phrase where true the vote, other allies of the former president who are chasing down false theories of voter fraud like mike lindell trying to get more sheriffs involved to investigate voter fraud, specifically in "2,000 mules." then there's certain sheriffs in

these organizations who are doing investigations and led to some significant clashes with local election officials. in michigan the sheriff there has tried to investigate false claims about voting machines and has even gained access improperly to a voting machine and there's an investigation into him. in racine county, there's another sheriff, south of milwaukee, that sheriff is trying to criminally charge local and statewide election officials with felonies for allowing absentee voting in nursing homes to go off without state monitors. there's two tracts that are taking elements of law enforcement that have stayed on the outside of these political machinations and bringing them into this movement. >> it is terrifying to think

that they are weaponizing sheriffs, but it's also a pattern. i instantly thought of -- i think trump's first pardon was for sheriff arpaio, david jolly. >> yeah. it's a reminder, nicolle, at the local level and state level there's a number of efforts to ensure on the republican side that they're preparing to rig, steal or at least tilt the levers in favor of their interests in the next election. we look at secretaries of state races across the country and republicans are targeting that. in florida they set up their own police force under statute. it's very important to recognize this is a product, a clear product, of what happens when donald trump comes in and decides to break all rules, right, no conventions matter and

the republican party says we'll go along for this ride because the ends justifies the means. then it tears down the integrity of institutions that were being carefully held in place before trump, from the press, to the courts, to law enforcement. when donald trump suggests i can do anything i want, i can break any of the rules, i can break down our institutions and that's okay, that's the slide to authoritarianism. that's the premise of governing they've learned from donald trump. >> the threat to their victories, though, is it presumes no republican voter will ever forget to put a date on their absentee ballot. explain what's happening in pennsylvania. >> what's happening in pennsylvania is showing how local election officials are

starting to mess with the administration of elections by buying into some of these false claims of voter fraud. to vote absentee in pennsylvania there's a bunch of different rules, regulations, secrecy envelopes, signatures and on the mail back envelope you have to sign a declaration and date it. a few voters, it's a couple hundred in these few counties, forgot to do that. it's been fought over in the past in pennsylvania. in 2021 the third circuit of appeals ruled that those ballots had to be counted when they came to question in a local judicial election, saying you can't prevent a voter from voting on something immaterial to proving their eligibility to vote. sure a signature, verification process leads to their eligibility to vote.

these arrived on time or even early. they just forgot to put the date on it. to say those can't be counted, the third circuit said it must be counted. these three counties are decided those court decisions don't apply and they think there's an open question. in the mccormick fight the court said you have to keep two tallies. count the ballots, certify your results and keep two tallies so we know which were undated. they're refusing to do that. that's holding up the certification process. if we were in a presidential election, this could go down a dangerous path. there's time that states need to certify those electors to go to the electoral college. it's possible these three counties could hold up an entire

certification process. if you look towards 2024 where we anticipate some of these battles, at best it creates more chaos and we're stuck in the same chaotic leaning towards a constitutional crisis that we found ourselves in with the 60 some odd lawsuits from the trump campaign. we're going to see every ballot challenged and your vote isn't going to count and it's also that we'll see endless challenges to ballots even in a primary where it doesn't matter to any of the elections. >> the reporting you're doing is so important for the reasons you outline, nick. it's showing what is to come. thank you for joining us. david jolly, thank you for spending time. democrats in texas are daring to think this could be it, their break through year

after tragedy and overreach of the gop. both those things have helped boost beto o'rourke in his campaign. that reporting after the break. that reporting after the break

when i make decisions as a leader, it's not about me or the folks that are here. it's about the next seven generations coming behind us, making sure that they have the ability to move forward. prop 27 will help small rural tribes like mine get a seat at the table will be transformational for my tribal members. taxing online sports betting gives us an opportunity to really enhance the lives of our tribe and strengthen the future of our people.

vote yes on prop 27. inr race for governor there than just a few weeks ago suggesting voters may be souring at long last on republican governor greg abbott after his failure to respond adequately or in a way they trusted to the worst and

deadliest school shooting in that state's history, as well always one of the most radical abortion bans. recent poling shows a single digit contest. beto o'rourke is just six points behind abbott. exactly how beto o'rourke is building on this momentum, his toyota tundra headed deep into donald trump country. he went to a crowd of more than 400 in midland, the past home of presidents bush in a county where trump beat biden. joining me now is jasmine

crocket. it's wonderful to see you. what's going on in texas? >> listen, let me tell you what we're asking for is people to have the courage to care, to care about, you know, those children that lost their lives in uvalde, to care about those who lost their lives in el paso. just today, in my congressional district, there was a shooting at my airport, dallas love. i mean, when are we going to say enough is enough? the republicans continue to deflect and come up with whatever excuses they have, but the reality is that the republicans have been in control in the state of texas for decades, yet we have seen record loss of life when it comes to gun violence. >> we've seen record loss of life when it comes to our failing grid and obviously we had a record loss of life when it came to covid itself. >> i mean, i still read texas

coverage. it seems that the failures to prove that government can work under abbott's leadership are as much what is causing this collapse in abbott's numbers. he can't succeed in running a government that protects children from brutal, brutal slaughter. he can't succeed in convincing people that the state can keep the lights on. how much is it the failures and the tragedies and how much of it is really an appetite for partisan change? >> no, i mean, i think you're absolutely right. it's that people are finally waking up. if people just vote for themselves, if they vote for their futures and the futures of their children, there's only one option. the only option is beto o'rourke. when you look at the fact that our governor continues to talk about he's strong on the border and he shut our border down.

what did that lead to? more inflation as it relates to food. we lost billions of dollars when he shut the border down. then only a week or two later what did we see? migrants lost their lives in the back of a truck, a record number of migrants. so, it's just nothing but chaos. you asked me what's going on? it's chaotic. you were talking about voter fraud. we first began our conversation talking about the alleged voter fraud that i pointed out was voter suppression. guess what? nobody is talking about voter fraud in the state of texas. we'll see what happens come november, but the headline said voter disenfranchisement because that was the goal. we know we can win in texas. i just need texans to wake up and recognize their power. there's a reason our governor decided he was going to put arrest warrants out for our

arrest, it's because it was critical. if we can change the trajectory in texas, that changes the trajectory in the entire country, which changes the trajectory of how things are going in the world. >> i'm guessing a lot of texans didn't like becoming ground zero for the most radical abortion ban in the country. how is that playing? >> you're absolutely right. i'm having conversations i never thought i would have with people as it relates to choice and a woman's rights. people that historically would say things like, no, no, no, i'm pro-life, i'm pro-life. now they're recognizing, listen, we've got too many other things. if you're going to go so far as to say there's no excuse for an abortion and that we will arrest and lock up anyone, even if it's a child, that child may be subject to going to juvenile

because they have been raped and are now pregnant and seek out an abortion. it has gone too far for even those people that consider themselves to be pro-life. you know, i had a conversation with an ob/gyn last week. we sat on a panel and she talked about the chilling effect it's having on doctors. doctors don't know what is criminal and what isn't criminal. >> it's amazing. we should all listen to them. i've heard they're performing unprecedented numbers of sterile saigs surgeries on women in their 30s and 40s. it's stunning. it's wonderful to talk to you texas congresswoman jasmine crockett. now the brutal war in ukraine still in its sixth month and the brutal attack that

happened over the weekend. we'll have a live report after a quick break. we'll have a live report after a quick break. make your home totally you. i did with wayfair. sometimes i'm a homebody. can never have too many pillows. sometimes i'm all business. wooo!

i'm a momma 24/7. seriously with the marker? i'm a bit of a foodie. perfect. but not much of a chef. yes! ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need. ♪ your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description.

visit indeed.com/hire flowers are fighters. matchingthat's why theription. 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 [whistling] with technology that can scale across all your clouds... it's easier to do more innovative things.

[whistling] research shows that people remember ads with young people having a good time. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's a pool party. look what i brought! liberty mutual! they customize your home insurance... so you only pay for what you need! ♪young people having a good time with insurance.♪ ♪young people.♪ ♪good times.♪ ♪insurance!♪ only pay for what you need. ♪liberty liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ this weekend in ukraine, russia continued to attack cities all across that country. moscow's invasion has now entered its sixth month. saturday russian missiles hit the port city of odesa just hour after they agreed to a cease-fire to lou grin shipments

from the black sea port amid global grain shortages. the attacks were condemned by u.s. and ukrainian officials, who called the strikes a spit in the face by both the u.n. and turkish government who negotiated the temporary truce. the strikes have once again call into the question the kremlin's word to any of its commitments to any type and form of peace talks. president zelenskyy says the attack chose the kremlin cannot be trusted. joining us now, simon schuster. i feel like president zelenskyy was probably the least surprised human in the world at what was russia's failed commitment. talk about the significance of this. >> i think so, i think it wasn't a surprise for president zelenskyy, and i spent some time in recent days with ukrainian

military officers. for them, too, it was just a reinforcement of the deep belief they've come to have over the last four months of war. there's no negotiated settlement in sight with russia that ukraine, as they put it, needs to strike back as forcefully as it can. the only thing russia understands is force. that's what they were saying to me in previous weeks and months. but even more so after this attack on odesa, which to me personally did come as a surprise, because just the day before they had come to an agreement to allow this port to let the ukrainian grain go. and then less than 24 hours later, they strike that very same facility. i mean, it was such an egregious and kind of nasty slap in the face to the mediators, the united nations and turkey, who tried to make that agreement work.

so the ukrainian servicemen here are very angry, and they want revenge. they want to continue waging this war on the battlefield and not at the negotiating table. that's the mood here that i'm hearing. >> i'd like to understand the ukrainian view of the russian mind set. because it seems that the intensity and the pace of attacks on clearly civilian targets -- at the beginning of the war they'd say, oh, there was something military related nearby. they don't try to anymore. and undermining a deal they were party to in bombing odesa. what is zelenskyy's theory of the case of the russian posture right now in the war? >> i think the way the ukrainians understand it is russia's trying to remind them that nowhere is safe, that there is no corner of ukraine that

russia will not strike. it's change in the many ways the way ukrainians believe. i'm in lviv, far away from the active combat zones in the south, and here for a long time people were ignoring the air raid sirens when they'd start to sound. that usually happened frequently. it was a few times a week. people would go about their business. now after these strikes, today people -- hours ago there was an air rid siren. a lot of people went into the basement. there was a family there who had just come back, they were refugees in poland for months. they had just come back a couple kids and their mom, and they went down to the basement of the hotel where we're staying because they don't feel safe even here. when the air raid siren starts, even as far away from the combat

zone as lviv, people think it could be for real because there's just no limits to the cities and population centers that russia is clearly prepared to strike. >> it's amazing. simon schuster, we're grateful to get to talk to you today. thank you for spending time with us, and stay safe. heed those air sirens for us. >> thank you. a quick break for us. we will be right back. thank you a quick break for us a quick break for us we will be right back.s. it's not a cure, but with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to and stay undetectable. and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems.

do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your doctor. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. if you're living with hiv, keep loving who you are. and ask your doctor if biktarvy is right for you.

kids don't always take the best care of school supplies. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. while they... 0oh... uh... figure their stuff out. at xfinity, we're constantly innovating. and we're working 24/7 to connect you to more of what you love. we're bringing you the nation's largest gig speed network. available to more homes than anyone else. and with xfi complete, get 10x faster upload speeds. tech upgrades for your changing wifi needs. and advanced security at home and on the go to block millions of threats. only from us... xfinity.

white house shared a update as it pertains to president joe biden's positive covid-19 case. white house doctors saying that president biden's symptoms are almost, quote, completely

resolved. vitals remain absolutely normal. although he still has some congestion and a hoarse voice. we heard that in the video we played earlier in our program. a stage of recovery familiar to just about all of us who have contracted covid-19 over the last two and a half years. another familiar thing, how much the company of one's dog can help when you have covid. the white house tweeting this photo of president biden earlier still in isolation, taking his morning calls with commander right there on the couch. caption reads, man's best coworker. thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts now. >> sometimes the best doctor's advice is just woof woof. >> i spent a lot of the pandemic with my dog, too, when i was isolating with my family. they slept in the twin bed with me where i was -- >> right, you had -- >> where i had been exiled. >> you have to be careful with people, but then you have your best friend. it's