are going to have to get sorted, out and i can't promise you we will never have any glitches, but that's the thing, it's a 370 billion dollar investment. it's literally changing the way the economy works for the better. that is going to upend some things. but mostly, in a positive way. and, as you know, chris, the planet is on fire. we have no choice at all. >> senator brian schatz, i agree. thank you very much for making time tonight. >> thank. you >> that's all in for msnbc. good evening mehdi. >> good evening chris, and thank you so. much >> thanks to you at home for joining us this. are in just a few minutes, i'm going to be joined live by none other than jon stewart, the legendary comedian and former host of the daily show who was in washington today, and yet blistering criticism for republican senators who just blocked a bill that would help veterans exposed to toxic burn pits while deployed overseas. the apparently blocked it out of spite, despite voting for or

for the -- last month. john so it has been a fierce advocate on this issue, and you will not want to miss what he has to say. that is coming up. but first, i want to start tonight with this really weird moment that happened last week at a house hearing. transportation secretary pete pitt a judge was testifying before the house committee, and as you would expect, for several hours, they discussed infrastructure. roads, railways, electric vehicles, energy prices, all the usual stuff. until one republican congressman on the committees suddenly took the transportation hearing off the rails. and that joke was for you, transport nerds. you're welcome. have a watch. >> we now have president biden in office for 18 months, and just recently, we now see the mainstream media questioning president biden's mental state and for good reason. sadly, he shakes hands with ghosts, and imaginary people. he falls off bicycles. even at the white house easter

celebration, the easter bunny had to guide him back into his safe place. cue cards that say sit, here or and the speech, which he actually states, that is, if he stays awake. so my question for you is, sir, have you spoken with any other cabinet members about implementing the 25th amendment on president biden? >> first of, all i'm glad to have a president who can ride a bicycle. and i will look beyond the and salting nature of that question make clear to you that the president of the united states -- >> have you spoken to any of your cabinet members about implementing the 25th amendment on president biden? >> the president of the united states -- >> have you emailed any member of -- >> the president of the united states is as vigorous and healthy abbas as i have had to pleasure of working with. >> okay, first of all. spare a thought for the poor

staff are, desperately trying to keep pace behind him with this ridiculous blown up photos. is that the one with the easter bunny or the ghost? but secondly, and if you do not know this because you are not a regular viewer of our friends of fox, the whole way biden is not mentally fit to run, this is their big push against joe biden and his cabinet to be discussing 25th amendment because he's so clearly unfit. and, boy it would be hard to find a more clear cut case of projection from this republican party. because while no one in joe biden's cabinet is thinking of invoking the 25th amendment. you know who discussed, and who considered it quite seriously? donald trump's cabinet. today, abc news a new cnn are reporting that trump chair jury secretary mnuchin has testified to the january 6th committee -- best remembered, as this guy. the guy who brought his wife to

the office one day so that they could pose with all the money. but another reason, excuse, me steve mnuchin is worth remembering his that he opened up discussions about using the 25th amendment on donald trump in the aftermath of the january 6th attack. in his book, betrayal, about the end of trump's presidency, abc news's jonathan call wrote that according to a source, familiar with the conversations, starting the night of january six quote, mnuchin talked to other members of the cabinet about attempting to remove trump from office by invoking the 25th amendment. among the committed officials he spoke to that night was pompeo, pompeo has denied the conversation, but to the, stay mnuchin has never responded to questions about it. he still refuses to say whether, heat on january 6th, thought donald trump might have been mentally unfit to continue serving as president of the united states. the new york times confirmed jonathan carleton's reporting

on january six committee vice chair liz cheney publicly presented evidence of the 25th amendment discussions had occurred. discussions confirmed by thought witnessed cassidy hutchinson. >> the committee has a learned that after the attack of the u.s. capitol, this was being discussed by members of president trump's cabinet. as a way of stripping the full power of the presidency from donald trump. we understand that this text message that sean hannity sent kayleigh mcenany on january 7th, shows what mr. hannity said to the presidents. first, no more stolen election talk. second, impeachment and the 25th amendment are real, many people will quit. >> there is a large concern that the 25th amendment potentially being invoked and concerns of what will happen in the senate if it was the 25th amendment couldn't was invoked. so the primary reason that i heard other that you know, we

do not do enough on the six, we need to get a stronger message out there and cans on this. this is will be our legacy, for that reason, that was think about what might happen the final 15 days of your presidency if we don't do this. there's always talk about about invoking the 25th amendment. we need to cover this. >> if sean hannity says it, it must be true, right? again, trump treasury secretary has never answered questions about this. but today he adds or questions about a transcribed interview with daniel six investigation in congress. i have a feeling it came up. as for trump secretary of state, mike pompeo, he has denied it. or at least an on a spokesperson as a night it. but reports suggest that he now two might be sitting for a deposition with the january six committee, before the week is out. and it wasn't just mnuchin and pompeo. trump's education secretary, betsy devos, who resigned on january the 6th, has said publicly, that she too spoke to other cabinet members about invoking the 25th amendment.

and also to vice president mike pence who shot down the idea. not for nothing, but this wasn't even the first time that senior members of trump administration discussed the 25th amendment. all the way back in the first year of his presidency, after trump fired fbi director james comey, his deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, reportedly found his behavior so erratic that he too would pointedly brought up using the 25th to remove trump from office. the fact that he took pains not to admit to, but also did not deny one question about it under oath. oh to be a fly on the wall during steve mnuchin's testimony to the january six investigation. which is showing no signs of slowing down. today, trump's former chief of staff mick mulvaney also met with a congressional investigation. nbc news caught up with him on his way to the interview. >> when i get to the committee today? >> the truth, how about that for a start. >> and where you asked to the committee or did you want terry to comment? >> i was asked to come in.

>> subpoena or no? >> i honestly was asked to come in. >> i was honestly just asked to come in. he remembered that mick mulvaney was a variety of different hats during the trump administration. setting up a director of the office of management of budget, to a short stint of trump's chief of staff. culminating being a special convoy to northern ireland. with a night of the genetics right mr. mulvaney resigned's position telling cnbc at the time that he called the secretary of state mike pompeo, and told him quote, i can't do it. i can't stay. mick mulvaney also recently said that he believes cassidy hutchinson and the other former white house officials who have testified. and it is against that backdrop that mick mulvaney testified behind closed doors for over two hours today. as vice chair liz cheney recently said, last week's hearing in fact, new witnesses a step forward, doors have opened, and the dow has begun to break. i'll go from a limb here, and say after this week's developments, it is burst.

more witnesses in fact comes forward, and not just to the committee. tonight we have learned that yet another trump administration lawyer who served on the jeffrey clark is now cooperating with the justice department criminal inquiry. cnn reports of justice department is also preparing its legal strategy to force white house officials to testify about their specific conversations with then president trump. oh, and then there's more. as we discussed before on the show, the justice department is being tried for months to get access to the january six committee's deposition transcripts. so far, they have been unsuccessful. but today, chairman bennie thompson announced that the committee and the doj have finally reached an agreement to share evidence including the interview transcripts of the committees 1000-plus witnesses. thompson told politico today, quote, we put a template together for sharing information. my understanding is, there's general agreement on it. the january six congressional investigation sharing evidence

with the justice department is a significant step. so what can all mean? joining us now is kyle cheney, senior lead l affairs at politico, he's been covering the january six investigation very closely. kyle, thank you for coming on the show tonight. you reported today that according to chairman thompson, the house investigation is put quote, a template together. for sharing information with the doj. the general agreement on its. what is the significance of sharing these transcripts this evidence, why did it take so long? >> so the committee has been extremely protective of its evidence and information. and you know, you've heard for a long time, questions about how aggressive is the justice department being. we heard criticism and content among the committee members about, is the doj taking this seriously as they should be. i think they've answer some of those questions we sadly. but, before now, the committee was a very wary of staring, just handing over all thousand transcripts when they want to see more overt science at the doj was pursuing this as

seriously as they seem to be now. and so i think until they saw that, there was some reluctance, at least just hold sail hand over their entire work product. on top of, that the air is actually a process where if doj obtain some of the committees evidence, they have to share themselves with some of the defendants on january six cases, and may have to end up revealing some of that to the committee would lose a lot of his control. i think now though, the committees are passed, as far long as they are, the committee is ready to provide that info, at least today, in a controlled way as doj needs it. >> we heard lorraine's say in the last hearing that quote, the dam has begun to break in terms of witnesses coming forward. today we learned that steve mnuchin and mick mulvaney have testified to the committee. mike pompeo may do so at the end of the week. why are these former cabinet officials coming forward? what reason do they have for coming in and sharing what they know with the committee this week? >> well i think the committee has turned its sights on a lot

of ways -- until now. we are talking about the lead out that donald trump's effort to overturn the election and then what he did on january 6th to essentially nothing while the violence you know overtook the capitol. now they want to look to the day after, the week after, and get a sense of what was really going on in the white house. and i think we've heard some testimony about the seriousness in which some cabinet members took invoking the 25th amendment, which would be unprecedented and scary in a way. but i think they want to shore up that information. how serious are these talks really get? what did these cabinet members, what was a conversation like? who was convening them? was mike pence involved in these talks? and i think that they need to talk to pretty much everyone in that cabinet who was there on january six. to fill in the blanks. >> kyle, for a committee that is investigating the insurrection at the events that led up to january six, why is it so important to get to the

truth about the 25th amendment discussion which happens after january the six? >> because that tells you a lot about how they viewed donald trump's mindset at that time. that's a lot of the committee so focus on what was donald trump's state of mind while all of this was going on. some of that could be essential if they are ultimately criminal charges against him coming from the justice department. as to what was in his head both on january 6th and immediately after. remember, he was reluctant to deliver some of those lines in the speech about saying that the election was over. that's an important state of mind evidence. i think the cabinet believe in 20 have the memos necessary with how a lot about what they thought about his state of mind. >> quick last question, kyle, you also mentioned in your reporting today that there appears to be greater urgency for prosecutors to obtain evidence. the select committee has gathered. why, what is driving that urgency? >> i think now that they know more information about the justice department just recently deposed to of mike pence's top aides.

marc short and greg jacob, who were key witnesses in the white house. while all of this was going on. and so, now that you are seeing this extent and the degree to which the doj has advance its own investigation, i think the committee now is going to see, feel more urgent need to share what they know to help this clearly more mature investigation, then they realize, as it moves forward. >> kyle trainee, will have to leave it there, senior legal affairs reporter at politico, thank you for your time tonight, and thank you for your reporting. what's acts of republican hypocrisy could have possibly prompted an appearance in front of the capitol today by legendary committee and now activists, john -- >> americas heroes who fought in our wars, outside, sweating there -- off.

with oxygen, battling all kinds of ailments, while these -- sit in the air conditioning walled off from any of it! they don't have to hear it! they don't have to see it! they don't have to understand that these are human beings! do you get it yet? ! >> i'll talk to him shortly about why he is so mad at the republicans in the senate. stick around for that conversation. conversation astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can... astepro and go. this is the gillettelabs with exfoliating bar. the bar in the handle removes unseen dirt and debris ahead of the blades, for effortless shaving in one efficient stroke.

(vo) red lobster's seafood summerfest is fire! turn up for the grilled lobster, shrimp and salmon trio ...and our hottest summer duo, steak and lobster! it's lit! don't miss red lobster's seafood summerfest.

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

was a father, a soldier and a fitness fanatic. in an interview with the columbus dispatch a few years ago,. he told people at his peak he could bench press 315 pounds, squat 400, and ran two miles and under 12 minutes. he was twice named non commissioned officer of the year by the ohio national guard for his physical prowess. in 2017, sergeant first class heath robinson, was training for a half marathon. when he began to feel weak and tired. a month later he got devastating news. he had lung cancer. that had already spread to his bones and elsewhere. doctors gave him 4 to 8 weeks to live. sergeant first class heath robinson held on much longer than that. but in may of 2020, he died. how good a healthy man contracts such a serious catcher seemingly out of

nowhere? >> his family believes it was from burn pits. toxic piles of flaming waste that heat was exposed to during his time serving in iraq. and his death was on a rare isolated case. an estimated three and a half million veterans have been exposed to toxic substances like burn pits since the september 11th attacks. that's why congress decided to do something to help those veterans. legislation giving them access to that health care and support they desperately need. the bill was called the sergeant first class, he's robinson, honoring our promise to address comprehensive toxics act. an early version of the bill to help these better once passed the senate earlier this year with overwhelming bipartisan support. the boat was 84 to 14. the senate was supposed to take a procedural vote on that legislation last night. with final passage slated for the end of the week. but then democrats announced that they had struck a surprise deal on a big budget package of climate health care, and tax policies.

and that made republicans angry. a win for joe biden's agenda, not on their watch? so apparently, they took revenge. not only did they went to vote in the house against the bipartisan bill to increase u.s. production of desperately needed microchips, which are in short supply, but it seems that wasn't quite enough to take their anger. so senate republicans, members of a party we should love to wave the flag and say they support the troops. seemed to take their frustrations out about the advance of joe biden there on sick and ailing veterans. they blocked, they blocked that bill! to help veterans affected by toxic burn pits. today, at a press conference, after the capitol, sergeant first class heath robinson's mother in law took the podium in her late son-in-law's army jacket, to offer her thoughts on the republican's brave stance against veterans. >> senator toomey, senator rob portman, is his senator.

voted no! they voted against my family! they voted for all of us to suffer! every single one has pictures with veterans on the facebook pages, on their websites. while screw that! they don't support veterans! if you vote no on this bill you do not support veterans! i am done! and the next time i come back here, it better be to sign the down bill at the white house! because i'm sick and tired of this bull -- ! >> standing alongside heath robinson's mother in law, at that press conference, is a pace you might recognize. comedian jon stewart who was used his platform and fame to push for a number of veterans help us. and he turned up on capitol hill today to call out the gop senators voting against that bill. >> i am used to the lies. i am used to the hypocrisy. i'm used to the cowardice. i've been here a long time. senate where accountability

goes to die. these people don't care. i'm used to all of it. but i am not used to cruelty. cowards all of them! cowards all of them! they haven't met a war they won't sign up for and they haven't met a better when they won't screw over! what's the -- are we? this is an embarrassment to the senate, to the country, to the founders, and all that they profess to hold dear. and if this is america's first? then america is -- ! >> joining us now in his car, parked at a rest area on the jersey turnpike, is john stewart, can media activists and probably john stewart on apple tv plus. john has that incredible coverage of burn pit exposure on a show. and he is kind enough to join us tonight on his way home from washington. john, thank you so much for being here. i said that that was a retaliatory move by republicans,

are the news outlets have reported the same. the republicans say they are only doing an issue it's not small part of the bill. can you explain to our viewers what they are arguments as and whether you think it makes sense? >> so i don't know anything about the retaliation part, when i do know is, this is the same bill that they passed 84 to 14 on june 16th. the small fix that needed to be done in the house was appreciate drought one, based on a really non material cost that was put in there. one sentence about we roll the a, the va being able to take over rural medical practices so that veterans who live far away from the eight facilities could still have access. there is a small preserve isn't, it was place and thereby the va. it was a constitutional issue with it from the house. parliamentarian i guess. so the house went back and pick states. put it back to the house, got 90 more republican votes for it

then they got the first time. and the senate was just supposed to rubberstamp it, because it's pretty much the exact same bill that they voted overwhelmingly for on june 16th. the issue rose when senator pack to me, patriot path, i like to call him. as i've been sitting in my car now for probably about 11 hours so, i'm a little punchy. he put in at an amendment that basically said, because of the version that they passed on tuesday seen on the senate, the veterans health care is mandatory spending. it's, the mandatory discretionary, these are budgetary tranches, that the government uses. the reason why it was done this way is so that the government couldn't, if they were promising the veterans that health care they need, they couldn't then go and raid money from agriculture. or they couldn't raise money

from food stamps. they can't raid other discretionary things by making it mandatory. to me is suggesting that that means it's 400 billion dollars of a slush fund. it's a ridiculous argument. it's nonsense! the va secretary still, even if it is mandatory spending, the va secretary has to submit every year, to congress, the house and the senate, both appropriations committees, what's the spending is going to be and what is going to revolve around. >> and what is so outrageous is that the same republican senators are willing to spend trillions of dollars, sending people to fight for wars but not to take care of them when they come back here and exposed burn pits. >> yep, you are seeing-ing my song brother. there's something the ceo, operations fund. and the congress has been finding it for years now. between 40 billion dollars and

70 billion dollars every year. it's a true slush fund. it goes right to the department of defense, a tiny bit for states, but there are no guardrails on it, and there is no oversight. that is a slush fund. that's a fond that can be used to spend things that none of us can have our eyes on. if that's when we never had a problem with that, and never had a problem spending trillions of dollars to send these people to harm's way. >> john, one of the things you said, today we despite you saying, you are used to the, lies the hypocrisy, the cowardice, you are not used to the cruelty. i have to ask, as someone, i watched you in the 2000s, covering the gop every night. covering george w. bush. how different, i mean that was a pretty extreme republican party, i'm not gonna get past bush's republican party. but how extreme do you believe this current republican party is compared to that one? >> i mean look, i have different issues with different narratives. what i was referring to was,

you have a group of people who came home from war. traumatizing event to begin with. and whether they fought for this country to defend the flag, or to fight for freedom, or because it was their only choice between that and prison or a drug treatment program, it doesn't matter. they lived up to their obligation in this country. they lived up to their oath. and when they came home, they found that the consequences of their heroism and their valor was their health. and then this country abandoned them. so these individuals have been fighting, by the way standing on the shoulders of the vietnam veterans, who are still fighting the same battles, and the persian gulf war veterans, who are still fighting these battles, and really every generation of veterans that we've ever had. boy we love war and boy we don't like to clean up the consequences. always money for war, never

money for the war fighting. >> yes. >> and john. >> and that's the issue. >> yes i'm sorry. >> on monday, chuck schumer said he's gonna hold another vote on this bill. do you think it will pass on monday, and if it doesn't, will the republicans claim to be the party of the flag of the military, will suffer any political consequences for this outrageous vote? >> isn't that the issue? you and i can talk about it too loyal blue in the face. they are never gonna hear this. there is an information silo. i was lucky enough to get a hold of the newsmax this morning and go on there. might have been the first time those news have ever heard about. it fox news, they refuse to put me on all day. we have been begging them to get on the air all day long. so that we can finally bring along some possible accountability to these senators. by the way, most of whom voted for the bill, and then turned around and voted against it, even though there was no material change. i've never seen anything like it. nobody on the hill's ever seen

anything like it. and the truth is, the people who have suffered the most, and had to fight the hardest, are the ones who will once again bear the brought up this you know, this betrayal. honestly, you question the very foundation. and you know they keep talking about the boy there is a recruitment problem. in the army. because of the pronouns that they are using. it's not that pronouns! it's that young people see that this government doesn't live up to its obligations to its fighters. it's just simple as that. >> it's a betrayal as you put it, john, and it is as simple as that, and i thank you so much for pulling over on your way home tonight and joining us and outlining this issue again. >> mehdi, i made to go in and get a smoothie. i'm in a restaurant. >> get a smoothly, you deserve

a smoothly, after what you have done today. we appreciate you john stewart. thank you for your time. >> thank you so much for staying on this, and please, as much as you can, keep getting the word out, we really appreciate it. >> we will. thank you. safe driving. >> much more ahead tonight. much more ahead here tonight, senator amy klobuchar joins us next. ins us next and only 24-hour steroid free spray. while other allergy sprays take hours astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can... astepro and go.

i get bladder leaks. i didn't want to feel like i was wearing the pads i wore when i was twelve. then i tried the always discreet pads. they fit perfectly in the places they're supposed to.

look how much it holds, and it still stays thin! it's the protection we deserve! ( ♪♪ ) you want me to draw ketchup? ( ♪♪ ) various: heinz. heinz. man: heinz bottle. ( ♪♪ ) cleaning spell, cleaning spell... oorrrr... this stays between us. if it's got to be clean, it's got to be tide pods. add doctor strange in the multiverse of madness to your marvel studios movie collection. seen this ad? add doctor strange in the multiverse of madness 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. >> how many of you have this on they wrote it for themselves.

your bingo cast this week? democrats on the verge of passing a major spending and tax bill that accomplished goals they have been pitching for decades. i would bet very few of you, expect for many senate majority leader chuck schumer and west virginia senator, joe manchin, who has been persistent in the democrat agenda until yesterday. this new reconciliation bill will be the largest investment in climate that congress has ever made. it's, called the inflation reduction act of 2022. the deal comes months after manchin checked the democrats original and bigger big back better plan in december, and weeks, after manchin seem to walk away from the bargaining table on this reconciliation package on his terms of inflation. so if you weren't betting on the inflation production act manifesting itself this week, i don't blame you. some have been downright shocked, that this may be the first time that this time democrats managed to do something both savvy and shrewd. maybe they out mcauliffe

mcconnell by unveiling the secret agreement only after they had secured republican votes in the senate on a china competitiveness bill. but the overall surprise reaction to the news that democrats pulled off this day, and even got to this point, it's kind of funny. a sociologist had broken senior fellow victor wray put, it it's hilarious to me that the dems might have done something strategic and everyone is shocked. keep hope alive, guys. now, the bill is expected to be at the senate floor next. weak majority leader schumer will want to pass before the august recess, but will it definitely pass? i, mean remember kissed and sinema. and even if it does pass, will democrats be able to use that to save themselves in the november midterms. joining us now is senator amy klobuchar, a democrat from minnesota, who has been publicly championing this deal. thank you for being here tonight. this is a big victory for your party this week. but a question is still on the table is this, once the bill passes, will it work to get voters to the polls, will people credit you for it? because there's a poll out from

third way which shows only one in four americans even know your party passed a bipartisan infrastructure bill, and that was last year. >> okay, mehdi, they may not know the names of these bills, but they know when you have their backs. and what's happening right now, thanks to chuck schumer's leadership and patience, and all the democrats who have come together, is not only are we making our rearview pointed out that the most made major investment and climate, just when we've seen forests burning and california and in the west, last summer, all over my state. but we also are standing up for seniors, 46 million people, who went from being ripped off by the pharmaceutical companies, who got written into law, the pharma companies, 20 years, ago a provision that ban medicare from negotiating for less expensive drugs. they thought they owned washington. and now, our party is standing up and saying, no, you don't. we are on this side of the

consumers here. so that is a big deal. not to mention finally putting in a corporate minimum tax. there's many good things in this. and your question, will it help? yes, because we are going to have their backs, and the republicans, as john stewart so well pointed out just now to you on the new jersey turnpike, that they are not even standing up for the veterans and voting down the brunt pill that they've been trying to pass for years. for our brave veterans. so i think we have some pretty good arguments to go, to bring to the voters in august. >> so it is a big deal. and we covered it last night as a big deal. what do you say to viewers at home who are saying -- they're biting their nails, watching tonight, saying, but what about kyrsten sinema? is she on board? because our office won't say she's on board. >> she said she's reviewing this, pretty normal. you know, she just got it. but when i look at her record here, she's very strongly supported the apartment.

of arizona, having their share of hot, hot weather. fires in the past and all kinds of issues. so that is going to be weigh in on her, i'm sure. as well as the forward pharmaceutical piece of, it i would've gone even further, she was part of those negotiations of few months ago, and it's basically that same plan to start negotiating ten drugs to go up to 50, more 50, more and then 20, more and 20 more. so i'm hopeful about that, but i'm sure she's gonna be looking at it. you are going to see a unified party, especially with what we are up against on the republican side. >> i am sure our viewers are crossing fingers as they hear you speak right now. >> every so often, something really good happens. and between the passing the bill today, which is going to allow us to develop semiconductors ourselves in our country, there is good news on behalf of the american people. >> so, more good news would be

if the senate can protect same-sex marriage, a fundamental civil rights that is under threat right now, thanks to the supreme court and this republican party. and susan collins, republican senator from maine, is saying today that the way in which your parties surprise her -- surprise the republicans, she's saying this deal on the climate could to make it harder to lobby fellow republicans to get that same-sex marriage bill passed in the senate. do you buy that, are you worried about that, is this typical susan collins trying to cover her, i don't know? >> okay. i have a lot of respect for susan, and i do appreciate her support for same-sex marriage. and tammy bulk lynn has been working so hard to get this done because as we know, justice thomas laid out a roadmap in his opinion that everything's on the line, not just abortion, but contraception, same sex marriage, that's why the house passed the bill under nancy

pelosi's leadership, and now it is over in the senate. but i don't think you should ever, when i think about this as a whole, and a lot of the republicans have been saying this, they are, saying we knew you were going to do a pharma deal and stand up with aarp on behalf of seniors, but we just didn't know that you were gonna be able to do something about the climate. well, we have forest fires burning right at the foot of yosemite. i actually think that's a good thing we have that agreement done. they are welcome to vote against ed. i would hope that they would be home -- doing something for the climate. but i don't think that can be used as a reason to not support gay marriage and in transom thing into law that so clearly so many people depend on. and have come to expect in terms of their rights in the country. >> i guess we will find out very soon just how cynical your republican colleagues. our thank you for your time tonight, i appreciate it. >> it's good to be, on thank you. >> senate democrats are hoping

that the inflation would come to an actual. pass but the bill can mean for manufacturing and the environment, and climate change, that is next, stay with us. xt, stay with us

>> now you are not dreaming, and it's not a sign malfunction either. you had that number right. gas amounts are under $3. >> fossil fuels are so expensive in their prices are so volatile that it is literally a new story anytime the price goes up or down. the average gas car in the

united states get under 25 miles per gallon. so at this so cheap, it's literally a new story, yeah station, and also this ever ginni a, that would mean $3 for every 25 miles. and per today's national average, that would mean for dollars and 28 cents for every 25 miles. but if you compare that to our run-of-the-mill electric car, for the sake of this example, let's say the chevy bolt, it only cost an average of 91 cents of electricity for chevy balls to go to 25 miles. literally a quarter of what's a gas car costs. and it's infinitely better for the environment. now, if the democrats knew big reconciliation bill, now called the inflation reduction act, if that bill can get passed, alexa vegas won't just be the economic imperative at the pump, but also at a dealership. if the bill passes as it is written, it would mean $7,500 of tax credits to any new electric car below 55 grand. so cars like the 28,000 nissan leave for example, it would

drop to just around $20,000 appearance. not to mention, thousands states not paying for gas every week. and the even cheaper level, disability would create a 4000 dollar tax credit for buying used electric vehicles. in other words, gone on the days of electric gate vehicles being a status symbol of seneca valley tycoons, this but would it take already the environmental imperative that we have to stop using fossil fuels, and simply make it the cheapest way to get around. and, these tax credits would also be a massive job creator. so this would lead to tons, and tons of while paying, good for the environment, jobs, and factories, in the u.s.. and all of what i just laid out is just part, just part of the massive 369 billion dollars overall that this new bill would put towards at energy and climate crisis. i know there are dozen things to talk about in this bill, including monday for the willfully irs, underfunded, tax laws, medicare to mitigate drug

prices. closing the loopholes on the corporate minimum tax. but the chunk of this bill that is truly unprecedented is just how much it is doing on the climate. so what's is the big picture here? what are we getting for the 369 billion dollar investment in this bill? joining us now is leah stokes, professor at politico silence and environmental science at the university santa barbara. and they advise it to the climate activist groups evergreen action and -- america. she is also the host of the climate podcast of the matter of the grays. thank you so much for being with us tonight. when this bill was announced, you called it the deal on clean energy and climate we have been waiting for. big picture, what is it that excites you so much about what is an on offer? >> look, senate democrats have been working really for 18 months to try to put together a big bold investment package on clean energy and climate. and yesterday, seemingly out of nowhere, senator chuck schumer, and senator joe manchin, announce that they would come to a deal.

for -- so much money in transformative clean energy investments. i think whatever american wants to know is how much money is going to help them save. it's gonna help make it cheaper for folks to buy an electric vehicle. a heat pump. for some low and moderate income folks, and induction stove. basically get expensive fossil fuels out of their lives. that is important because 41% of inflation actually driven by fossil fuels directly. so we know that this bill could help americans save 1800 dollars a year per household based on analysis from we're buying america. and for some folks, who actually use oil to heat their homes, like the northeast, the midwest, they can actually save three to $4,000 a year in home heated costs. given just how expensive oil is right now. so this is really going to be a game-changer in terms of reducing americans energy bills. >> it is a game-changer. and yet there's also a piece of this bill that ties the leasing of public -- of offshore wind projects, to

the leasing of public lands for new oil and gas extractions. something obviously put in there to keep joe manchin on board. the government affairs at the center of biological diversity called that provision quote, a climate suicide pact. do you think that compromise is worth it? >> i do think the compromise is where that. look, it's not a bill that i would have written. it's a compromise. we have to get 50 senators to vote for this thing. and we have to be clear eyed. we can't miss the force for the trades here because literally the fourth will burn down if we do. what we are talking about here is optional lease sales that companies can choose to buy into. and there are also going to be royalty increases alongside those lease sales. so it is possible that we are gonna get fewer companies wanting to actually do those leases. and as we get more people buying electric vehicles, and using heat pumps, that demand for oil and gas, it's going to fall. so it's not ideal, it's not perfect, but what we are talking about here is a really small emissions pay penalty and

payments compared to huge pollution cuts on the other side of the ledger. >> quick last question, 30 seconds left, they say that they are gonna hit 40% reduction by 2013 carbon emissions, is that a number you think they can hit based on this bill? >> absolutely! we already have several independent analyses that say that is true. energy innovations as we can get 40% below those pollution numbers, road improve as well. and that is going to put us on path to meeting president biden's goal of cutting carbon pollution in half this decade. and that is what we need to tackle the climate crisis. and that is the kind of good news that we need on this tonight. leah stokes professor of political science, and environmental science, at the university of california santa barbara, thank you so much for your time tonight. thank you for giving us that good news. >> thanks for having me. >> we have one more story to get to tonight, just when you thought sergeant republican members of congress couldn't go lower, they find a way to surprise you. that story is next, stay with us. next, stay wit us and feel just like normal. and that absorb up to 8 teaspoons of liquid.

to protect you from periods, bladder leaks, and sweat. find your leakproof underwear at knix.com new astepro allergy. now available without to pro a prescription.riods, bladder leaks, and sweat. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free spray. while other allergy sprays take hours astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can... astepro and go.

i get bladder leaks. i didn't want to feel like i was wearing the pads i wore when i was twelve. then i tried the always discreet pads. they fit perfectly in the places they're supposed to. look how much it holds, and it still stays thin! it's the protection we deserve! >> before we go tonight, one

final story out of congress that i'm going to file under republicans really did that. yesterday, the house voted on the non controversial and sensible piece of legislation that you would think would garner support from both sides of the aisle. no problem. that bill is an anti human trafficking bill, which updates an older bill that passed with virtually no opposition several years ago. the bill does things that everyone can agree is good. it bolsters resources to local agencies who deal with a high level of sex trafficking cases, and invest new funds for housing options for women to get away from abusers. you would think republicans would have no problem with this bill. but that is not today's gop. the bill passed the house yesterday with, yes, overwhelmingly bipartisan support. but, 20 republicans voted against the bill. 20. one of those congressman is this man, florida republican and die hard trump devotee, matt gifts. i just want to pause here for a second because it is interesting and of note that

matt gates voted against this anti human trafficking bill. because gates himself is reported under federal investigation for alleged sex trafficking. he is with -- sexual relationship with the 17 old and paid her to travel with. him he has denied any wrongdoing. but he made sure to go down this common sense, do good bill in congress. that does it for us tonight. now it's time for the last word, with lawrence o'donnell. good evening lawrence. last w>> good evening, mehdi, ad republicans really did that is a great title for a weekly podcast. you should get under way with that. >> sadly, it's daily these days, , lawrence hourly. we just can't keep up. >> you decide how often. but republicans really did that, that's a great title. >> it is. i will start working on that now. >> thank, you mehdi. thank you. well donald trump is now in a fight with 9/11