ree ♪♪ ♪♪ hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in the east and the mystery surrounding the deadly capitol insurrection appear to be growing as the twin investigations into january 6th expand their reach deep into trump world and brand-new reporting raises questions of a potential, possible cover-up by a whole host of trump officials and allies tied in one way or another to the deadly insurrection. "the washington post" today is reporting on yet more missing text messages, this time from the department of homeland security's two most senior officials that would be acting secretary chad wolf and acting deputy secretary ken cuccinelli. "the washington post" says messages from both officials from a, quote, key period leading up to the january 6th attack are gone and that while the inspector general was told

that the messages were missing back in february the ig didn't push the department on why the texts were deleted nor did he try to retrieve those messages. these missing records are just a part of a mountain of missing pieces of the puzzle related to january 6th that pose a challenge for the january 6th select committee as well as the justice department's probe into the insurrection. that poses a -- to investigate the actions of the inner circle. a spokesperson for the select committee telling nbc news that the panel is sharing 20 witness interview transcripts with the department of justice. that news was first reported by politico which adds this, quote, the committee did not indicate which transcripts would be part of the initial tranche provided to the justice department, however prosecutors recently deposed two top aides to former vp mike pence, mark short and greg jacob who both had

previously interviewed with the committee and it would be of high interest to investigators. just 20 transcripts, and it is yet another sign that the doj probe for its part is moving slowly and we hope methodically where the unprecedented nature of its investigation and the potential of the probe leading the entire country into uncharted territory given that no ex-president has ever been charged with a crime in u.s. history. "the new york times" reports that the ghosts of the russia probe and hillary clinton's email server loom large over the investigation. attorney general merrick garland is intent on avoiding even the slightest errors which could taint the current investigation, provide trump's defenders with reasons to claim the inquiry was driven by animus or taint the

reputation in the trump years. garland never considered on trump from the outset as they had done with trump and mrs. clinton during her email investigation people close to him say. as a result, his investigators have taken a more methodical approach, carefully climbing up the chain of personnel behind the 2020 plan to name fake slates of battleground electors that had been won by joe biden that has led them to trump and his innermost circle. brand-new reporting on the thoughtful approach of investigating the twice-impeached president is where we start this hour. in s nbc contributor betsy woodruff swann is back and mike schmit, washington correspondent and msnbc national security contributor and dan goldman is here to keep us honest, former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and the

lead counsel for the democrats during donald trump's impeachment trial and is now running as candidate for congress from new york. take us through this piece of reporting from you and your colleagues about garland's probe into the insurrection that now at least seems to touch on questions about trump's conduct? >> my colleagues write about today is the concern in the department about how it was drawn into partisan politics in extraordinary ways all of the way to 2016, and whether the department did the right thing or the wrong thing or whether the attacks on it were justified or not, the department found itself in the midst of politics in ways that basically led joe biden to run on a platform of trying to re-set the department and depoliticize it and it led to merrick garland. he wanted to choose someone that

was seen as a political and someone that would take a slow and megged on cal approach, a slow and very plotting pace and this has raised questions for garland which he's been forced to confront in recent weeks, but at the same time, this is what -- this is what biden wanted when he ran. this was the politicized justice department that he wanted and there may be frustration with the speed at which it is proceeding at and the biggest goal that i think i'm a part of the attorney general, is to keep the department out of partisan politics. that's obviously, incredibly difficult to do when you're investigating someone like donald trump. >> you know, dan goldman. i'm curious about your reaction to this because i think of the mueller probe that went on

during the trump years and mueller wasn't political. what was political was attorney general barr's decision to smear it and make sure it never saw the light of day. >> jeff berman at fdny seemed to not be influenced by politics and what was political was the man at the top and he's gone. does this feel like an overcorrection and learning the right lessons or was this what what he should have done in. >> i also dispute the notion that the mueller investigation originated as an investigation with trump. it didn't. it ultimately rose to whether trump and the campaign were involved and it started with lower-level staffers and it wasn't just bill barr. it was donald trump himself who pardoned michael flynn and pardoned michael stone and pardoned steve bannon.

these were obvious pardons for not only his political allies, but potentially people who had incriminating information about donald trump himself. so donald trump abused the department of justice and politicized it and that's more what merrick garland is pushing back on. on the other hand, any time you're investigating a former president of the united states it is going to be a hyper, hyper political investigation, and i think what merrick garland is trying to do and frankly part of the reason why he was selected, he had no history of being associated with either party and he's trying to make sure there is no credence of partisanship coming from donald trump and his circle, and if he can maintain the neutrality and the objectivity that the department was known for prior to donald

trump's presidency, then he can rest assured that they're doing the right thing no matter what allegations are flung at him from trump and republicans. >> mike, let me read more of what you and your colleagues are writing. if a decision were made to open a criminal investigation into trump after he announced his intention to run in the 2024 election as he suggests he might do, the department's leaders may have to sign off under an internal rule established by bill barr and endorsed by garland. wray appears to be proceeding with the same level of caution in hopes of armoring the bureau against future attacks to make sure his agents operate by the book and keeping the justice department leadership, it used every investigative tool in its arsenal had not even opened the case targeting fake electors and months after details of the wide

ranging steam to federal legislators. if you put this up everything that we've seen against what liz cheney put, if the 1/6 select committee didn't exist under the stewardship bennie thompson and liz cheney, would they have even gotten to this point? >> that's really the question. what was the delay? was the delay simply the department operating in a methodical way? we know that off the bat in the days after the january 6th attack that the department concentrated on the rioters and the militia and they spent a lot of time as people fanned out across the count rye. donald trump was still in power. it was unclear what was going to happen next. his supporters had shown a willingness to show violence.

they had used violence to interfere in the lawful day to day operations of the federal government. it is clear that that had some bearing in what happened in the days that followed. they had big conspiracy places that were made against the militias for sedition and that was a very important part of the investigation and what we don't totally have a full picture was why was it that other aspects and the scheme to overturn january 6th or i'm sorry, overturn the 2020 results. were they being book at. how were they being given. >> you saw it in the face of an almost uniquely basis that led

the public to wonder what is the justice department degree then? >> betsy, i want to put up a time line on what we know. which the is the time line of what we know and it has it there nearly the bottom, outreach of the justice department in late june, early july with cassidy hutchinson and her testimony was a sorry prize to them and they found it horrific that they weren't aware of the substance to what she testifies to. she ties trump directly to every prong of the insurrection including the violence. what do you make about where doj is making? >> i think one example, perhaps the single biggest example of the impact that the committee is having on the justice

department's probe was securing cassidy hutchinson's cooperation and broadcasting it publicly in full. >> yeah. >> it seems given the time line and what's known about the time line of the justice department reaching out to hutchinson, it's not crazy to think that it would have taken doj much longer to reach her if they reached her at all had the select committee investigation not happened. there's just no question whatsoever that their broadcasting of her testimony had a big impact in addition to securing her full cooperation was also was not a foregone conclusion. in addition to that, i think, we also have to keep in mind when it comes to this time line is that the select committee and doj seemed to have been starting in opposite places and not necessarily a bad thing, but there is a bit of an inversion here from day one that they were interested in trump himself.

trump's specific role while the just from day one was focused on the violence. the first charges that they brought, the first hundreds of cases they got were targeting people who violently attacked law enforcement officers around the capitol building who ransacked that building itself and now we know both investigations are looking at both topics, but because they've come at it from different vantage points you've had the time line and quite frankly to the comments she made, there are things that congress doesn't find. anything that congress fiends that, and they're operating in different modes, different perspectives and in the long run,ings this is a more contrast where i could be a little bit jarring. >> i guess, dan goldman, that

would make sense if our country had a select committee. they started with trump because the chair and the vice chair saw him as the biggest threat to our democracy and see trump was pursued in the same way as the top of the food chain and not simply the people carrying outside the terrorist acts, and i wonder if you think there's any scenario where the national security division at the justice department could or should have been playing a role earlier? >> well, i think they were playing a role in the domestic violence extremist groups, and i believe that the doj felt like the most immediate and urgent threat were the domestic violence extremist groups like the oath keepers and the proud

boys et cetera. those were the people who were using violence and they then worked their way out. they were, though, very slow, too slow, in my opinion in expanding the investigation beyond the events of january 6th, but they will move now, and it's clear that they are targeting much of the same conduct that the january 6th committee revealed and they started with the fake electors and any time they start with one aspect of it. they will invariably spread to other aspects and what is so helpful and why it is so powerful and compelling is we actually got to see what happened on january 6th in so many different ways. so as the department of justice starts investigating and as the information is trickling out and

even if we were to see an indictment, we can picture what it is talking about and what that indictment is talking about. it is helpful to the public and it is helpful to the department because they are able to frame their work in a way that the american public can understand. i expect it won't be 20 transcripts litted toon one aspect of the investigation, and i will image know you're looking at different things and they're asking about mark jacob and prance others. so they recognize that while on january 6th the threat were the domestic violent extremists, right now the biggest threat to the country is donald trump, and the biggest threat to democracy is donald trump and the republican party that he controls and they need to make

sure that he is not able to do it again. >> mike, there's some new information. cnn is reporting that former trump doj official and he was one of the most curious characters, if you will, to come out in that january 6th public hearing that focused on the plot within doj and sort of the coup within the coup. this is cnn's reporting. former justice department staffer kenkkluowski. we've been cooperating with the select committee and we will continue with the cooperation and that's according to a statement to his lawyer. just to your earlier point, we know that's happening now and here's what liz cheney had in terms of the evidence that the committee produced and generated in that process in that public

hearing. >> let's take a look at an email recommending that mr. klukowski and mr. eastman brief mike pence and his staff to congressman louie gohmert. the email says as stated last week i believe the vice president and his staff would benefit greatly by a briefing of john and ken. as i mentioned i want to make sure we don't overexpose ken given his new position. this email suggests that mr. klukowski was working with jeffrey clark to overturn their certified election and working with dr. eastman to help pressure the vice president to overturn the election. >> now, mike, we'll never get that kind of readout from the justice department in terms of why witnesses of interest, but we know at least to the select committee mr. klukowski was of interest because of his nexus

both with eastman as well as to trump and republican members of congress. what does that say to you that he's now a cooperating witness for doj? >> i think the committee has been very effective at using public pressure and trying to push people to, you know, get on what they think is the right side of history to cooperate and threatening to charge people with contempt in the way that bannon was, but you see in a justice department investigation going forward that the department is able to pierce and reach deeper into inner circles. in this case, the inner circle of trump because of the powers that it has. the department executed a search warrant to obtain klukowski's information and now he's cooperating. it's a sign of the leverage the department is able to use

because while people did fear meaning referred to the department for contempt, the department itself standing in front of these witnesses is going to get more information, and if you think back to pat cipollone's testimony where he cited privilege over and over again, if the department operates effectively and gets its ducks in a row it will be able to pierce that privilege and there won't be the ability for witnesses to use executive privilege as a shield from having to answer questions. so it just shows the differences in power and the severity of what it means to have a justice department investigation that those who have badges and guns the ability to get a search warrant. it's just different from a congressional investigation. >> it is an interesting dynamic and maybe it would feel good the other way it renters it remarkable what the committee has accomplished.

everyone is staying with us. when we come back, the hearing that talked about a damn dam breaking and just about everyone in trump's world is talking to the select committee and how that probe continues to accelerate. plus casual cruelty and indifference to their suffering. that's how jon stewart described the 41 republicans who voted against expanding medical coverage for millions of men and women who have been exposed to toxic burn pits in the u.s. military. we'll look at where he and the veteran community are taking their fight next. later in the program, the u.s. is waiting for response from russia after proposing a deal to free wnba superstar brittney griner and other americans and they are looking to make a deal along with businessman mike whelan, the national security

spokesman will be our guest later in the show. all of these stories and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. ues after a q. don't go anywhere.

which side are you on? americans who believe liberty and justice are for all, or traitors inciting violence against our country and trying to take away our freedoms? which side are you on? people who work for a living and care for our families, or the trump republicans who block everything our families need? this november, it's time to show which side you're on. vote for democrats. ff pac is responsible for the content of this ad. 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.

okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ [zoom call] ...pivot... work bye. vacation hi! book with priceline. 'cause when you save more, you can “no way!” more. no wayyyy. no waaayyy! no way! [phone ringing] hm. no way! no way! priceline. every trip is a big deal.

it's like a waterfall of truth at this point. i mean just as there was a dynamic of lies and deception by donald trump starting with the big lie, we have turned that around and when you have more than a thousand witnesses coming in and telling you what had happened, it's the tiny handful of people who are either lying or refusing to participate who begin to feel very nervous about the situation because we're filling in the details of what took place. >> a waterfall of truth. thanks january 6th committee member jamie raskin telling my colleague chris haze that the committee have been hearing from multiple, important witnesses in the wake of that blockbuster series of public hearings. we are back with the panel. betsy, i want to read you some reporting in the a.p. about what

that looks like and what he's talking about. the committee asked secretary mnuchin about discussions among cabinet secretaries to possibly invoke the constitutional process in the 25th amendment to remove trump back to the capitol according to one of the people. they're in active talks to interview former secretary of state mike pompeo. they're in discussions with john ratcliffe, that's according to two of the people and they're seeking interviews with several senior intelligence officials who had contact with the white house around that time. ratcliffe delivered a classified briefing in late december 2020 at the request of jeffrey clark, a justice department official who promoted trump's false claims of election fraud. this jeffrey clark-eastman piece seems to be the piece that could make every single one of those names i just mentioned of interest, never as targets, but as subjects or witnesses to the

justice department as well. talk about the significance of basically the entire national security cabinet being in the sights now of the select committee. >> it's pretty wild to see this playing out, the extent to which the select committee is just rounding up all these people who were so close to trump not just on january 6th, but in the years proceeding the attack. i spoke to a person yesterday who's close to ratcliffe who said while there are conversations ongoing, nothing has been decided yet. this person suggested that ratcliffe would not necessarily be someone who positioned himself to help the committee as this person suggested ratcliffe would be disappointing and think, that's something that the committee itself would need to decide, and i'm sure it wouldn't slow down their interest whatsoever in the former dni during the trump administration. what's valuable and what's likely to be valuable for the committee is they'll get a

360-degree view of what was going on in the white house, not just january 6th, but the week after and the question why the cabinet decided on invoking the 25th amendment and why they chose not to is something that we've come up in the hearings thus far and the fact that mike pompeo and ratcliffe and they were key players in the trump administration points to the fact that they've talked to literally four figures and witnesses and there's still a lot of very interesting, powerful people who are on their wish lists who they haven't gotten to yet. >> it does corroborate what we've been hearing, dan goldman and i'm sure we cringe, those of us that watch it on television opine on these aspects, but if you look at building out. it's jared kushner and cassidy hutchinson who testified on the conduct and statements of these

individuals as well as kevin mccarthy who talked about the 25th amendment. how instrumental is getting people like the family and the inner circle for the most senior advisers to figure out what to even ask people like mike pompet on and john ratcliffe? >> oh, i bet they have a very, very long list of questions they want to ask because of the testimony and the documents that they've already gotten where i'm sure witnesses have talk about other conversations or communications with each of those cabinet members and that's the danger that these cabinet members have in going in and trying to play it both ways and to cooperate enough so that they don't get charged with contempt, but actually not help the committee and the committee has a lot of information and the committee will know if they're being forthright or not based on the information that they have, but it also goes to show the power of these hearings, nicole,

because pat cipollone as one example was rebuffing the committee since april to come in and actually give a deposition. once cassidy hutchinson testified about cipollone's central role all of of a sudden he came right in. now that we've had these powerful hearings and donald trump is on his heels, all those people who were so close to him are starting to wonder whether they're going to be on the wrong side of history if they rebuff this committee and now they seem much more interested in coming in. so we cannot underestimate the power of the congressional investigation and if did well, it can move people and it can move the public and it can have a significant impact. >> you know, mike, it also brings sort of back into focus the big pieces that they don't yet have in their sights and i'm thinking of people like mike pence and they seem to have a

trove of both documents, texts and realtime contemporaneous understanding of everything mark meadows was saying and doing from his own phone records as well as cassidy hutchinson's lengthy testimony, but i wonder who you make of how locking in a pompeo or locking in a ratcliffe helps him push through to those things still on the other side, things like pence. >> it just gives a fuller picture and a fuller understanding of what was going on. you're going to go inside the room with two other individuals who were confronting trump and as much as the disclosure is about trump's potential criminality has informed the public and put pressure on the department, it's also been just some of the basic observations of what trump's behavior was like in the period around and up to and during and after january 6th that had been most revealing. those examples and not every

single one of them would be looked at as the criminal act themselves and it gives the public a greater sense of how determined trump was to overturn the election and how far he was going to push his own behavior on his own people just looking at cassidy hutchinson's description of what goes on inside of the car is one example. so not everything is going to be a building block for a criminal case. this is a congressional investigation that's trying to inform its own body about whether it needs to bring legislation. it's also trying to expose as many facts as possible about what happened. pompeo was not, as long as i know of involve in the efforts of states and he was secretary of state and his sense of trump and how concerned he was and coming from someone like him who was a trump loyalist will go

very far to giving the public just a greater appreciation. >> betsy woodruff swann, mike schmit, dan goldman, thank you very much for starting us off today. up next for us, 41 republican senators, 41 of them voted against aid to veterans this week playing politics with the americans who have given arguably the most to our country. we will name names of those lawmakers celebrated after -- they celebrated after killing that bill. we'll talk to veteran turned advocate paul rieckhoff next. don't go anywhere. l rieckhoff nt don't go anywhere. totaled his truck. timber... fortunately, they were covered by progressive, so it was a happy ending... for almost everyone. a monster was attacking but the team remained calm. because with miro, they could problem solve together, and find the answer that was right under their nose. or... his nose.

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. ♪ the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers.

mayo clinic. you know where to go.

i am so tired of the real-life costs of their casual cruelty and indifference to the suffering of the men and women that fight for this country. if we can't take care of people that take care of us then we're

on nothing. >> we're nothing. wow. that was jon stewart. he's a longtime advocate for veterans and first responders on ground zero. that was him on fox news calling out shameless republicans for in his view outdoing their own petty politics this time at the expense of life-saving relief for u.s. veterans. 41 republicans on wednesday tanked a bipartisan bill that would expand health care benefits to millions of post-9/11 veterans who have been exposed to deadly toxins in overseas burn pits. right here you are seeing republican senators ted cruz and steve danes celebrating while fist bumping while dane's no vote was being read on the senate floor. there was no shock that veterans, many of whom are sick and they're blaming these

senators for playing political games and a vote of 784-14 and after some minor changes in the house they reversed their position and are now blocking it. joining us now, paul rieckhoff host of the independent americans podcast and founder of the group iraq and afghanistan veterans of america. hi there, friend. i have missed you, and i know you've been talking about this issue on this show for as long as i've known you. first tell me what's in the bill and then tell me what's going on. >> good to be back with you, nicole. in the bill is the most comprehensive veterans legislation we've seen since the bill passed in 2008. this is transformative, this will provide screening, support and care for one in five veterans in america. it's veterans who were exposed to toxins in iraq and afghanistan and around the world post-9/11 and it goes all of the way back to vietnam era, generation veterans that were exposed to agent orange.

this is transformative and we've been fighting for it for almost 20 years. it's taken way too long and we got to the 5 yard line and now a hand grenade was thrown on it by a handful of republican. it's being led by one ringleader, republican pat toomey from pennsylvania and we have to make sure it's a focus him because it's a play republicans have called before. they did it for 9/11 and last time it was rand paul and mikely and they did it on the clay hunt suicide bill in 2014 and that was tom coburn. so this is a power move. it's not just about petty politics and it's about power and senator toomey who never served in uniform screwing my friends who were dying and sick right now. >> so i heard in interviews that you and jon stewart have done what this is about. i don't want to repeat the falsehoods about the bill, but i

do want to give you a chance to set the record straight about what the phony attacks are on the right. it's about how some of the money is spent. can you talk about that? >> yeah. i'll tell you it's crap and i won't spread misinformation and carrying water for pat toomey. does anyone come on your show? he's not going on "morning joe." he's not available publicly and he's issued one statement and he's hiding and this is the tactic and it's what coburn did years ago when he was dr. no and he put anonymous holds on bill, toomey is retiring this fall. there are no consequences for him and his seat is given to someone else and that's why they're picking him because there are no political consequences he can face and i've said this on other interviews. the consequences have to come from the public. you have to make pat toomey's name mud and you have to shame

him into oblivion and when he wants to roll into some cushy, corporate jobs corporations say no, lobbying companies say no. pat toomey needs to be the guy who pays the price for this because he's the one leading it and he won't even make the case to the public which underscores the cowardice. he's a coward in a suit in air-conditioning. veterans who are dying, some of them with oxygen tanks are doing a sit-in on the capitol. they've been there since last night and they'll be there until it's passed and he won't even go out and see him. you have to call him out and make him pay a political price for his shenanigans. >> can we talk about the substance of the bill and who it helped. we talked about your friends and the oxygen tanks. talk about the burn pits and how and why they're so sick. >> so anybody who tracked on the 9/11 first responders story can kind of understand this and that was part of the momentum here.

after we got the 9/11 first responders bill done and after thousands of people breathed in all of that crap in ground zero including myself. i was down there as a first responder. after we got that through, after we got it through, okay firefighters, jon stewart, we need your help to make this case to america about veterans and when i was in iraq and when i was in kuwait and when many of us had been deployed they didn't have garbage dumpsters where the garbage truck would come through and take everything away and they would dig holes into the ground and throw in medical waste and plastic and set it on fire and they would burn it and sometimes acres long and we would be downwind from that. we'd breathe it in. we'd get sick and now many of my friends have already died and i said this on the show last night, i don't know how long i'm going to live and i'll probably die something from something i ingested either at ground zero

or iraq and every time i cough my wife says, should you get screened? beau biden's cancer was caused by a burn pit and that was critical to getting us to this point and telling these stories was critical in getting us through monday. schumer says he'll bring it back up on monday and then we have to get to work on. >> what does the hand to hand bill look like to get this bill done on monday? >> it's shame. it's, like, total shame. schumer says he's going to re-introduce it. i think schumer's going to have to do some back door dealing with the republicans to see if maybe he can get them across the line, but if i were schumer i'd bring the same bill forward every day and make the republicans vote no because there's a political component to this. in every crisis there's an opportunity and i'm an independent, but if the democrats are smart they will weaponize the hell out of this in the midterms.

you've seen one candidate, evan mcmullen who is running as an independent in utah and he's gaining ground and weaponizing it against trump apologist and election denier mike lee. if i was at the dccc supporting primary candidates from the gop, i'd be focusing on this and i would give it to every candidate running this fall and make these 41 people pay a price because it does move independents and it will get through. it might take us this week and then they'll go on vacation, by the way. they'll go on a big, long, august recess and more of our friends will die and they'll have to pick it up in the fall or maybe even in the lame duck. while that happens, there is blood on pat toomey's hands. every day this takes longer, more people get sick and more people die. there is a human price to this. jon's putting a great face to this. these are real people suffering right now and now they're experiencing the insult of feeling like their country doesn't care about them and the mental health anguish of not

knowing when health will come. we wonder why we have a recruiting problem in the country right now? it's not about the woke crap from tucker carlson. this is what hurts the recruiting and our enemies are celebrating and it's much bigger than one bill. >> what is it that republicans hide behind to vote against our veterans? it seems like such a hypocritical posture for them to make. >> they hide often behind anonymity. i don't think most people know who pat toomey is. he's a back bencher and not in the media much and he's the perfect guy to put it on until fetterman in the fall. a lot hope you won't notice and that you're not paying attention and you'll think the democrats are making something out of nothing here. every major veterans group, the

dov, and many of them that lean right have been out in front of this and have been supporting this and i believe six republicans also supported this, so i think we have to make him famous and ted cruz is a great example. ted cruz, i mean, his brand equals cowardice and time and time again he shows us that he doesn't give a damn about everybody and i'm baffled that texas can't find anybody better than ted cruz in the senate. that's who they have to work on, in my opinion. >> we all are. i want to ask you to in back monday whether schumer brings it up again or not because you've been talking about this really for as long as you've been coming on and some of this is on us for not focusing on it a head of this bill. so why don't you come back monday and we'll talk about where things stand and we'll stay on this with your help. >> any time, nicole. thanks for keeping the focus. we appreciate it. >> thank you so much, my friend. so paul's got a great new podcast episode out. it's, of course, called

independent americans and senator john tester, the chair of the veterans affairs committee will be his guest. listen to that. we reported earlier this week on a story that was reprehensible, frankly. comments about violent marriages from senate candidate jd vance. we've got a first look at a brand-new ad on that topic dropping in ohio slamming jd vance for making those remarks. we'll show it to you next. ks we'll show it to you next. ♪♪ i got into debt in college and, no matter how much i paid, it followed me everywhere. so i consolidated it

into a low-rate personal loan from sofi. get a personal loan with no fees, low fixed rates, and borrow up to $100k. sofi. get your money right. ♪ ♪ ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪♪ for too long, big pharma has been squeezing americans for every penny, and inflation has only added to the pain. but congress has a historic opportunity to deliver relief, by passing a bill to let medicare negotiate lower drug prices and put money back in the pockets of seniors. 87% of americans support the plan, and applaud the senators who are standing up to big pharma. let's make history. vote yes to let medicare negotiate lower drug prices. i typed in grandma's name and birth year... and there she was, working at the five and dime.

my dad's been wondering about his childhood address for 70 years... and i found it in five minutes. ...that little leaf helped me learn all the names from the old neighborhood... it felt like a treasure hunt. the 1950 census adds vivid new detail to your family story. and it's available now on ancestry.

the 1950 census adds vivid new detail to your family story. in a recent clinical study, patients using salonpas patch reported reductions in pain severity, using less or a lot less oral pain medicines. and improved quality of life. that's why we recommend salonpas. it's good medicine. okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ kids, one year they want all dinosaurs stuff the next, camels. - llamas. - llamas. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. you sure that's not a camel? yeah. whatever you say.

earlier this week, we played you a clip of republican candidate for ohio's senate seat, jd vance, saying that families were better off when women stayed in instead of leaving violent marriages. now, a brand-new ad with the lincoln project, which you will see here for the very first time, hopes to show ohio voters exactly what that means for women. i want to warn you that this is graphic. >> better tell the cops you fell down. >> can't tell anybody, and you're dead. >> i'm going to teach you a lesson. >> these are the threats millions of women trapped in abusive marriages hear every day. now, jd vance says women in abusive marriages should not divorce their abusers. >> my grandparents had an incredibly chaotic marriage in a lot of ways, but they never got divorced. >> that they should just endure the violence. it's not that jd vance doesn't

understand what happens to american women in violent relationships. >> these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy. >> it's that he just doesn't give a damn. >> that ad will soon be up on cable and online in ohio. let's bring in the cofounder of the lincoln project, rick wilson. the ad is hard to watch, but the most excruciating thing is to listen to jd vance, who actually writes about abuse in ""hillbilly elegy,"" say that even violent marriages are ones that women should stay in. >> you know, nicole, in our organization, it's run by a bunch of women, and they all were -- every one of us was horrified, but everyone had a story of someone they knew or some friend they had who was trapped or had been trapped in some sort of violent or abusive relationship, and hearing jd vance say those things out loud, unself-consciously, it really betrays a giant moral vacuum in this guy who does not understand

that just saying, for the good of the institution of marriage, women should be beaten or abused or even killed in these relationships, it's shocking, it's horrifying, but it tells you all about why jd vance, you know, is trailing in ohio against tim ryan, and it shows you he does not care about a very fundamental question, so we're asking republican women and democratic women and independent women in ohio, think hard about this guy, and understand what his values are before you consider casting a vote for him. >> i think you could make the appeal to men as well. i think -- >> of course. >> -- it's sort of a human horror. when we covered this story at the beginning of the week, we reached out to, and we named all of jd vance's major donors. i want to do it again. it's the american petroleum institute, exxonmobil, general dynamics, the international franchise association, koch industries, marathon petroleum, the national association of wholesaler i.

we'll tweet this list out as well. we reached out to all of his bi. we haven't heard back from them. we reached out to all of them again before we aired you ad and so far, only general dynamics and phillips 66 have responded to our inquiries, and their response was to, quote, decline to comment. >> of course. >> i wonder where you think we are in america when those major companies are supporting someone with a position as reprehensible as supporting violent marriages. >> you know, nicole, it really has come down to the fact that a lot of these companies, you know, they all said they weren't going to back any of the 1/6 insurrectionists, and yet within a few weeks they had drifted back into the embrace of kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell. people should be asking, mitch mcconnell, are you really serious about supporting this man? do you really believe that other candidates across the country should share this position? it's outrageous.

and of course, there's peter thiel, who's one of vance's largest super pac supporters who should also be asked this question. it is a sign, again, that the pursuit and retention of power has become vastly more important on that side of the political fence than any other factor. >> yeah, i mean, i think it's also, rick, a sign of how sick our -- the politics are on the right. i mean, i do remember when a candidate like jd vance with public statements like these that are captured on film and as you said, that he utters without any shame, would color the entire cycle for the party that hosts that candidate. but you're right. so far, a lot more of the same. thank you for -- >> thank you, nicole, great to be with you. >> debuting it here. spending time with us to talk about it. >> any time. when we come back, there are more missing text messages from and around and about january 6th. the committee investigating the insurrection is vowing to get to the bottom of it. we'll bring you that story next. t wel 'lbring you that story next.

moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 2 days. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections,

including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation. an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go.

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.

♪♪ coming from a technology background like i am, i think we can say at an over 70% clip that there is no text messages really to get. i know homeland security individuals that text with the secret service, but they don't text. they use encrypted apps. they use signal. >> right, signal, right. whatsapp. >> but this is a low-tech thing, so if you're not following the coms or the processes identified in your standard operating procedure, there's sometimes no texts to get, and it's much easier to guard your data on a specific device than people

think, so if they're using personal phones with signal rather than government phones or not following the protocols, nobody would know anyway. >> hi again, everyone, it's 5:00 in the east. i heard it there first. there's sometimes no texts to get. that warning came from former january 6th committee advisor denver riggleman on this program last week as we were discussing those missing secret service text messages from the days before and during the capitol insurrection. guess what? now there's brand-new reporting in the "washington post" that adds more missing texts to that already troubling picture. "text messages for former president donald trump's acting homeland security secretary, chad wolf, and acting deputy secretary, ken cuccinelli, are missing for a key period leading up to the january 6th attack on the capitol. that is according to four people briefed on the matter and internal emails." it is a scenario that so closely resembles what happened with the secret service messages.

"the department of homeland security notified the agency's inspector general in late february that wolf and cuccinelli's texts were lost in a reset of their government phones when they left their jobs in january '21 in preparation for the new biden administration. that is according to an internal record obtained by the project on government oversight and shared with the "washington post."" all of it, of course, raises more questions about why congress was just now notified of these missing text messages now. dhs's internal watchdog has known since february. as "the post" lays out, evidence from both of these former officials could have been a huge help to the select committee's probe. "the telephone and text communications from wolf and cuccinelli in the days leading up to january 6th could have shed considerable light on trump's actions and plans. in the weeks before the attack opt capitol, trump had been pressuring both men to help him claim the 2020 election results

were rigged and even to seize voting machines in key swing states to try to rerun the election. both wolf and cuccinelli say it was dhs, not them, who wiped their phones when they turned them in." all of this adds to the increasingly disturbing picture of a very large and growing amount of missing stuff, missing evidence from the former administration surrounding january 6th. our friend and former doj prosecutor, andrew weissmann, points out there are likely more still to be uncovered. he tweeted this, "deleted and missing, white house call logs, secret service texts, dhs texts, rampant use in white house and other agencies of apps like signal that are impermissible for feds to use for business. confident january 6th committee will find more." it's where we start the hour. joining us, neal katyal, former acting u.s. solicitor general, now with georgetown university. and former rnc chairman michael steele. both are msnbc contributors. michael steele, my son already makes fun of me, and he's only

10, for saying, when i was young, but i'm going to do it just this once. when i worked in the white house, we had a computer that the rnc, i think that would be you, paid for, and if we ever turned and wrote a single message that was political in nature or could be, we typed it from that computer, but that, too, was considered a white house record. and i wonder how is this -- how have we devolved to such a degree that acting secretaries, secret service agents, people with national security jobs, people whose jobs in communications had national security implications,have just, you know, incinerated their records. it is -- there are these flash points where you see how far things moved when trump became president from the people around him taking their cues from him. he shoved things in toilets. he shredded things. meadows burned things. it seemed that that conduct was contagious. >> not only was it contagious,

nicole, it was probably required, because this rot starts in one place and one place only. we cannot get confused or mix up what we're talking about here. this flows from the president. if the president has an attitude about such things that is cavalier, a disregard for protocol, procedures, a disregard for maintaining the records that recount to the public at a certain place and time, what this white house was saying, communicating, and doing, if there's disregard for that, then guess what? that's going to bleed down. and when you bring in someone from the secret service and make them your deputy chief of staff, that's -- that speaks to that corrupt sense and purpose, so it's not surprising that these records are missing. it's not surprising that there's this general attitude, and when i think andrew's right about

what the january 6th committee not only has found but now will find more of. it is interesting to me that suddenly, now, we're seeing that it wasn't just secret service. it's this agency over here, it's that department over there, and i think you're going to find more of that rot, because the word had gone out that certain behaviors and certain things that they were being asked to do, there should be no conversation or record of, and that's what we're going to see more of. >> neal, is "rot" the right word or could we start asking about a cover-up? >> definitely start asking about a cover-up. did these trump white house folks keep anything at all? it's like that arcade fire song, "burn it all down." all of this destruction to me has to be deliberate. even the trump administration can't be this incompetent, because remember that these new texts that we're learning about from the department of homeland security today, this isn't like the first rodeo where stuff has

gone missing. the secret service texts we learned about last week, those were all gone. we learned that mark meadows literally burned documents in the white house fireplace about his meeting with representative perry. we also learned that he was using signal, an encrypted app, to communicate with representative perry about the coup and stuff like that. we learned that the photographer on january 6th was banned from the oval office, even though the photographer protested, saying, look, this is important, mr. president, for the history -- for history and our archives. and to say nothing of the white house call record, which, on january 6th, shows no calls made for seven hours. and we also learned -- i mean, i can't even keep track of all this, but we also learned highly classified documents left the white house and just all of a sudden showed up at mar-a-lago after inauguration. so, something has gone seriously wrong when it's harder to keep track of the evidence that we don't have than the evidence that we actually do have. i mean, it's truly bonfire of

the vanities at this point. >> yeah, the part of it that i don't understand, michael steele, is why we don't start at, it looks like a cover-up. prove that it wasn't. why don't we place these agencies in such a -- i mean, these are not nothing agencies. they're really important. the secret service is operating on the up and up today is a national security question. why don't we demand accountability and that everything stops until we can prove that this is not something nefarious? >> you ask the perfect question, and i'm going to try to give you as close as i can to the perfect answer. and that is because everyone in this town, nicole, is so afraid of what will happen if we bust this thing wide open. if we expose -- i'll use the term, rot, i like cover-up -- but the reality is, if we expose it, in other words, damn it, something happened here, something illegal, corrupting happened here, and why these

folks, whether it's the biden administration, prior, you know, administration officials, members on capitol hill, don't take seriously the responsibility they have to the american people to expose the corruption, and expose what led to january 6th. everyone is walking around pins and needles, what does this mean? we've never gone after a president. we've never done this before. because we've never had a president do what donald trump has done. we've never had administration officials actually, as we've just pointed out, use signal to communicate when they know it's a violation of law. >> right. >> so, if people stop pussyfooting around and stop acting like children scared of their own shadows and what this may mean for the future of democracy, well, let me tell you what the future of democracy looks like if you don't do something. if you don't investigate, if you don't expose, and if you don't bring to account the josh

hawleys on the hill and the chiefs of staff in the administration and the president himself, if you've got the evidence that shows that they did something illegal, damn it, prove it. and the only way you can prove it is to investigate it. >> yeah, i mean, neal, right now, i don't have any innate sense that everything was corrupted, but i must be shown the evidence that it was not, because trump tried to. and you go back to -- there's such a body of evidence of him sitting with, you name the agency, actually, i think it was dhs, i'll pardon you, just do it. wanting, you know, people trying to come to this country shot. oh, i'll pardon you. wanting, you know -- he sought to corrupt everything. so, why don't we turn everything upside down, shake everything out, and say, that one's okay, yeah, these really were an incompetent reason that these were -- because if you investigate it and you come out and you can prove that it was

incompetence, fine, then we can move on. but until we know it was incompetence is not corruption and criminality, how do we function with these glare questions about the united states secret service in charge, today, with keeping kamala harris and joe biden alive? >> 100%, nicole, and we refer to that in the law as a negative inference, the idea that, you know, that we infer something bad happened unless you can prove otherwise and that's always a rare thing to do, but it makes sense here when viewed against the tapestry of all of the things that we know that trump did, things that you mentioned like corrupting the pardon process, dangling pardons out, also trying to staff even at the last month of the administration, trying to jam people in, in december of 2020 and january of '21 into the d.o.d. and other places, all those personnel changes. that's, like, never done from one administration to the next. you know, you leave that open. but there must have been a reason and i suspect it's nefarious, and then when it

comes to the destruction of all of these different documents, having no call records, and the like, i think a negative inference is appropriate, not just because of trump and what we know he did otherwise, but also, nicole, something you said at the beginning, which is, this is not the way the white house operates. it's not the way the government operates normally. like, when i was at the justice department, we'd go in on the weekends and print out our emails just to make sure there was a paper record and not just an electronic record of everything that we sent and did. these people, like, you know, if they had printed it out, it was only to burn it, and then to hit delete over and over again. and you know, i understand the government sometimes makes, you know, not always competent, and you know, particularly in technology, but this, over and over and over and over again, and from the top, as michael says, you know, it's the white house chief of staff using signal? you know, that's a negative inference to me. that is absolutely appropriate,

and -- for investigators. so if he can't prove otherwise, that these communications were innocent, i think we should assume that they were nefarious. >> i also want to come back just at the risk of sounding glib myself, to how deadly serious this was. if this was a super bowl and this was the radio traffic about the threats, there would have been congressional hearings immediately, bipartisan ones, i believe. this is some of the police radio transmissions from the 6th about the kind of security threats that existed. >> the individuals entering, white male, about 6' tall, thin build, brown cowboy boots, blue jeans and a blue jean jacket and underneath the blue jean jacket, stack of an ar-15, with eight five to eight other individuals. two of the individuals in that group at the base of the tree

near the port-a-potties were wearing green fatigues, about 5'8", 5'9", skinny white males, brown cowboy boots, then a glock-style pistols in their waistband. >> 8736, subject, weapon on his right hip. after that, he's in the tree. >> so, in the tree were trump supporters, michael steele, with ar-15s, and then at the bottom of the tree near the port-a-potties dressed in green fatigues and olive-colored fatigues were trump supporters with glock-style weapons. all weapons are illegal in d.c. but this was an event that was under the purview of the department of homeland security. it's really important to know what they knew about what was happening in washington, d.c., that day. >> it absolutely is. there's no doubt about it. all up and down the chain,

nicole, that is the truth here. that's where the truth is. all up and down that chain, what people knew, when they knew it. because you've got to go back in time a little bit, not the day of january 6th. you got to go back to the week before. these -- events like this just don't happen in washington. i grew up here in this town. i know exactly. you just don't show up on the hill, you know, 100,000 people and nobody knows about it. right? so, the reality of it is, there was some planning. there had to have been some level of planning. what was the cross talk between the agencies? what was not told to d.c. police? what was not told to the capitol hill police? what was told to them? and i think you will begin to see exactly how this nefarious event materialized in the way that it did so that you had that kind of chatter among the officers who probably were

themselves, i can't believe there's somebody up in the tree with a glock. how does that even happen? how does that happen? >> the guy in the -- >> on capitol hill. >> the guy in the tree with the ar. there's that. yeah. the glocks were by the port-a-pots. i just want to be accurate in my armed trump supporter descriptions. >> yes, absolutely. >> because we didn't get there yet, i just want to put this out there. i don't know that the committee has sought any communications or texts from mr. ratcliffe, but here's what cassidy hutchinson told us his concerns were heading into january 6th. >> my understanding was mr. rat -- director ratcliffe didn't want much to do with the post-election period. director ratcliffe felt that it wasn't something that the white house should be pursuing. he was concerned that it could spiral out of control and

potentially be dangerous, either for our democracy or the way that things were going for the 6th. pretty much the way that the white house was handling the post-election period, he felt that there could be dangerous repercussions. in terms of precedent set for elections, for our democracy, for the 6th. hoping that we would concede. >> so, for me, neal, the most interesting thing she says there is that mr. ratcliffe didn't want anything to do with the post-election period. for me, that pushes the national security concerns about donald trump's conduct back to november. do you want to know what he was saying and writing and texting? >> heck yes. and so i think you got -- i think the committee's got to subpoena director ratcliffe and figure out what cassidy hutchinson's talking about here. and you know, more generally, i think, i love michael's point

about going back from january 6th and looking at the record before and the director ratcliffe stuff is part of it, but also, as we think about all the destruction of the evidence, it's worth going forward a week or two after january 6th because the week after it, of course, we had the impeachment proceedings. where was director ratcliffe in that? nowhere. where was mark meadows? nowhere. where was pat cipollone? nowhere. and the list goes on. we could go down 20 more individual,none of whom showed up, and when we ask ourselves about the missing evidence, the missing call logs, all these texts that are gone, it's important to remember these folks all knew within days of this investigation of an impeachment and if they didn't want to come forward then, well, gosh darn it, you got to preserve your evidence and records for at some point when that evidence is going to be needed. the idea that they were silent then and then all of a sudden, all this evidence got destroyed, so now the committee is the congress and the american people can't find out about it?

all that stinks to high heaven. and so, to me, this is looking really like a deliberate attempt not just incompetence, but a deliberate attempt to hide the truth from the american people. >> neal, let me just ask you a technical question. i mean, this is a national security event, right? like the super bowl or like any other national security event, for which -- and we know the result. there were guys with, according to the police traffic, ar-15s in the tree and glocks in their belts by the port-a-pots. if this were anything else, wouldn't we have had a full vetting, a full after action, a full turning over of every piece of evidence of who knew that was going to happen and what they did when they found out about the threats? >> 100%. i mean, absolutely. and i can't say it better than my friend, michael, earlier. i mean, there is a deliberate attempt on the part of one party right now to cover this up, not just in terms of destroying the evidence, but today, to not get to the bottom of the truth.

and to go and attack this committee, you know, i'd have some sympathy if these people said, you know, the 1/6 committee is partisan or whatever. we know that's not true. but if they also said, but we really want to get to the bottom of what happened, but they don't. it's just an attack on the committee, and a bunch of bogus allegations not coupled with any attempt to get at the truth, and you're right, if this were the super bowl, which, no offense to the super bowl, is not quite the national security or government event that the transfer of power on january 6th and the certification of the votes is, you know, we'd be -- we'd know all of this. and so, you know, the idea that right now, one of our two major political parties is standing between the american people and the truth, i just -- that's baffling to me. >> and i think the other variable is that the people were all trump supporters. go ahead, michael. you get the last word. >> i was just going to say, on that point that neal just made. can you imagine if the president -- i like the super bowl analogy. put the president of the united

states attending the super bowl. do you really think that the secret service and everybody in government would allow seven, you know, 70 or 80,000 people to come into the super bowl with weapons? no. >> right, or take down the -- or if the super bowl -- i mean, the super bowl is good, because take out the mags. we've got guys with ar-15s in the top stands,take down the mags, they're not here to hurt me. part of what paralyzes all these conversations is where it happened. but i remember after 9/11, there were designated national security events, and the super bowl is just the first one i thought of. i don't mean to pick on football. but if there were one -- if the president's supporters had ar-15s in the stands and he said, take down the stands, they're not here to hurt me, we would have had congressional hearings the next day, and the notion that one of the two parties won't participate and the three agencies have lost all their records is fishy at best. neal katyal, michael steele, to be continued. thank you both so much for starting us off this hour. when we come back, there's some big developments on a story

we first told you about two weeks ago. it involves the republican nominee for governor in pennsylvania and his ties to a white supremacist social media platform. that update is next. plus, progress on the biden administration's proposal to free detained americans brittney griner and paul whelan and possibly more. secretary of state tony blinken spoke today with his russian counterpart. we'll have a chance to ask white house national security council spokesperson john kirby where those negotiations stand. plus, over the past few months, we have turned to colonel alexander vindman and ambassador michael mcfaul for their blunt assessment of what is happening on the ground in ukraine. they'll join us later in the hour as ukrainian forces may be starting to turn the tide against the russian invasion. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. "deadle inwhite house" continues after a quick break. m and our hero needs solutions. so she starts a miro to brainstorm. “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?”

and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro. 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. ♪ if you're turning 65 soon or over 65 and planning to retire... now's the time to learn more about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare and get help protecting yourself from the out-of-pocket costs medicare doesn't pay.

because the time to prepare is before you go on medicare. don't wait. get started today. call unitedhealthcare for your free decision guide. 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.

these are the words of doug mastriano supporters on his own gab post. "jews are a cancer on society." that's what one of his supporters wrote. another wrote, "good people must fight evil jew filth." that's what one of his supporters wrote in response to doug mastriano and they also wrote, it's time for jews to face the great replacement, obviously referencing this white nationalist conspiracy theory. those are just three of hundreds of posts. he is dangerous. he is extreme. and he must be defeated. >> since that rather illuminating and terrifying conversation with pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate josh

shapiro two weeks ago, his opponent, doug mastriano has been playing defense. gab is called a cesspool for anti-semitism and racists on which the pittsburgh synagogue shooter posted his anti-semitic rants, got $5,000 from mastriano for consulting. last night, finally, mastriano responded, tweeting this, "gab's founder, andrew, does not speak for mastriano or his campaign," adding, "i reject anti-semitism in any form." he also deleted his account on gab. so this is how josh shapiro responded, with a quote from mastriano himself, speaking the to aforementioned andrew in may. "thank god for what you've done." joining us now, the reverend al sharpton, host of "politics nation" and the president of the national action network. donny deutsch is here, host of

the "on how mistaken we were in every looking for the bottom, in ever looking for shame or political prices to catch up with these folks, because it's clear that on the right, there's space for anti-semitism and racism. this seems to have at least caught mastriano's attention but it's not clear that there's a price to be paid, and that is the sickness that sometimes we don't get at in these conversations. >> yeah, these are evil, dark, anti-semitic, racist people running for major offices. i go back to your previous segment or a couple segments ago where the lincoln project ad referencing jd vance, talking about that women abused in violence should stay in marriage. this is crazy, off the rails stuff. what's interesting is josh is ahead by only ten points, yes, he's ahead by ten points, but i say only ten points against a

christian white nationalist, a man that preaches hate, that preaches anti-semitism, that preaches racism and yet still 40% of the voting populace in pennsylvania think that's okay. the silver lining in all of this, and i have said this before, is that democrats have to use this. they have to tar every republican with it. ask governor desantis, what does he think of this? ask jd vance what does he think of this? ask herschel walker what does he think of this? stamp the entire republican party as fans of this white christian nationalism, because that's what they are. make them condemn it. it took mastriano three weeks to come out and say, oh, i don't believe in anti-semitism, which we know how thin that is. i've said this on the show before. brand the entire republican party with this level of heinousness, hate, and craziness. >> let me show you, rev, jonathan greenblatt of the adl's response to this on with my colleague, andrea mitchell. >> it is a frightening moment

when we are seeing this kind of outright christian nationalism, and undisguised hostility toward jews and muslims and other minorities. as you pointed out, and as rachel talked about on her show last night, elected officials who engage in this kind of rhetoric aren't just flirting with fascism. they are bringing it to the forefront of their political argument, and that's, i think, a terrifying thing for all americans. >> rev, we've been having a version of these conversations for five years now, and i wonder what your views are about whether the right is getting more brazen or whether the rest of us are quicker to hold them to account. where do you think this stands? >> they're getting more brazen, because we've been having this conversation for five years, and they've not really suffered a penalty. let's remember, mastriano was

also a part of the january 6th insurrection, and 40% are looking at him for support. but let's remember they were there, january 6th, to say that donald trump should be -- should remain president. donald trump, in the middle of what was going on in virginia, charlottesville, said that there were fine people on both sides while they were marching, saying, "you will not replace us." the replacement theory, the replacement theory in action. so, why should we be surprised if people did not denounce donald trump on that side, none of the republican leadership, i think donny's point is right. but i'll take it a step further. none of the senators in the republican side of the senate or the house denounced trump for saying that those were fine people. so, why wouldn't we get a mastriano and others that are going to feel that this is fine to bring into mainstream,

legitimate politics, and if you get banged up a lot, add three weeks but keep going because that's who we are, and we're not going to pay a penalty for it. >> rev, for his part, the gab guy said this. his name is andrew torba, and he doubled down, unsurprisingly. "we're not bending the knee to the 2% anymore," mr. torba said in a video this week, an apparent reference to the rough percentage of the country that is jewish. "we're taking back our country. we're taking back our government, so deal with it." that's according to andrew torba, his response as reported by "the new york times." >> well, this is what is frightening. when you have people that have mainstreamed this kind of behavior like donald trump has, then you have people like this guy that is firing up the troops. but let's not forget we have had synagogues where there's been

shootings. we have had one of these guys that was on that site that was a shooter in terms of anti-semitism. just a few months ago, jonathan greenblatt, who you played from adl, joined rob and i and muslims in calling for a hate summit at the white house that we've been conversations with the white house. we are not on our way there. we are there, where we have allowed haters and those that have built a following on hate to be mainstream, hold political office, and be acceptable in political company, and i think we've got to deal with it in an aggressive way. i do not think he's the cause. i think he's the result of what we've allowed to manifest over the last several years in terms of mastriano. >> donny, the problem for the whole of us, though, is that the violence and the threats and the hatred endanger all of us. there's a direct line between

the ideology and the current homeland security issued warning of an uptick in threats of domestic violent extremism. it's around the grievances over the election, and i think in pennsylvania, you've seen some of the extremist groups marching openly in broad daylight on the streets. i don't know that anybody, except the militia groups themselves, wants to live in that country. how do you, in your view, sort of take this message mainstream and make people understand that's the choice? >> i think it's exactly what you just said. let me also point out one thing about our friend, mastriano. he, obviously, was part of january 6th. and he likened it, his words, to hitler's reichtag and drew those parallels himself. i think you have to scare the hell out of people. i think those 40% have to understand that are still voting for mastriano, he has come out

and said, look, with one stroke of my pen, i will be in control of the elections in this state. i will be putting in the head of elections, and i will take -- i will overtake all of the voting machines with one stroke of my pen. this is what he's saying. autocrats and fascists tell you what they're going to do. the thing about donald trump that we figured out years later, he told us what he was going to do, that he wasn't leaving office peacefully. all we have to do is listen and continue to amplify. the democrats have got to put all this in one bucket, and that's why i mentioned the jd vance thing which is off point from here, but this level of crazy insanity, and i'm going to say it again, i know james carville said, it's the economy, stupid, but in this election coming up in the midterms of '24, it's crazy, stupid. make it about crazy. in generic ballot polls, the democrats are winning by 5% and 6% across most polls and this is against 50-year inflation, a 50-year stock market low, a very, very humbled economy, so

what the democrats have to do, and the lincoln project does it, but the mainstream democrats have to do it, is show and scare the hell out of people, say, we cannot have these crazy fascists in power. >> donny deutsch, who knows a little something about brands. thank you. the reverend al sharpton, thank you so much for spending time with us today. when we come back, big developments to tell you about in the biden administration's efforts to free wnba superstar brittney griner and other americans. john kirby, the national security council coordinator for strategic communications will be our guest after a quick break. ce our guest teafr a quick break. [whistling] when you have technology that's easier to control... that can 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'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. the unknown is not empty. it's a storm that crashes, and consumes, replacing thought with worry. but one thing can calm uncertainty. an answer. uncovered through exploration, teamwork, and innovation.

an answer that leads to even more answers. mayo clinic. you know where to go. 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. i want to reiterate that president biden has been clear about the need to bring home every american who is held hostage or wrongfully detained abroad, and that includes, of course, brittney griner and paul whelan. this has been at the top of the mind for the president and for his whole national security team. he receives regular updates about the status of our negotiations to secure brittney and paul's release as well as other u.s. nationals who are held hostage in russia and i might add around the world as well. >> that was national security council coordinator john kirby yesterday. if he looks to you like the john kirby who did that from the pentagon, you're not wrong. the argument was reaffirming

president joe biden's support to bring home americans being detained in russia. they include wnba superstar brittney griner and paul whelan, who have been approved for a swap of russian arms dealer viktor bout. today, secretary of state tony blinken confirmed that he spoke with his russian counterpart, russian foreign minister sergey lavrov, and pressed lavrov to accept this substantial proposal that's been put forward. joining us now is john kirby, the national security council coordinator for strategic communications at the white house. we haven't seen you since your new role, so congratulations on that. is there anything you can tell us about securing the release of brittney griner or paul whelan or others who are detained in russia? >> i don't have any immediate updates to provide today, nicole, but i would reiterate what i said the other day. we did put forth a serious proposal to the russians, and we urged the russians to accept this proposal. it was done in good faith.

we'd like them to reciprocate in good faith and let's bring brittney and paul home where they belong. we don't want to get into the details of the proposal, we don't think it's helpful to negotiate in detail in public, but it is serious. it's a meaningful offer, and it could provide a path here to get paul and brittney home as soon as possible and that's what we're focused on. >> john, you and i are both blessed by our platforms, and i want to use mine to tell our viewers about mark fogle. this is from the "washington post." "for the last 11 months, mark fogle languished in russian detention centers for trying to enter the country with about half an ounce of medical marijuana that he had been prescribed in the united states for chronic pain after numerous injuries and surgeries. first, he endlessly awaited trial, often in crowded, smoke-choked cells. more recently, he's been serving the first weeks of an

incomprehensible 14-year sentence handed down by a russian judge in june." is securing mark fogle's release as important and part of this deal as important as brittney griner and others? >> the offer that we are in negotiations with, with the russians, revolve around paul and brittney. we're aware of mr. -- we're aware of this case. there's a lot -- not a lot we can talk about as we continue to try to evaluate it and learn a little bit more. look, when somebody has been wrongly -- wrongfully detained or held hostage, that's a commitment that we take very, very seriously, and the president will continue to do everything he can to try to secure their release. in this particular case, we're aware of it. we're trying to get some more information, but i really can't go into much more detail than that right now. >> i know as excruciating as these questions and your -- i know you're doing your best to

answer them -- are for us, they're gutting for the families, and i wonder what you would say to the families of someone who isn't part of this package, part of this proposal. >> i would say a couple of things. one, we understand. the fear and the uncertainty, the worry that you have. and this president and his team, we're focused on bringing these people that are wrongfully detained and held hostage home to you as fast as we can. the second thing i would say is, each case is individual, and each case revolves around a set of unique circumstances, and we have to look at each one differently. now, in this case, we are trying to make an offer for two americans. that's true. but we do try to look at each case individually, which requires, then, a unique set of factors to be considered and probably a unique set of proposals that can be offered to try to get them home. it's a balance between our own national security interests as well as our serious responsibility to americans that

are wrongfully detained to get hem them to and the president takes that seriously. so, i would say that. the third thing i would say to those families is that, you may not see a lot. you may not hear everything in public, but rest assured that we're focused. we're working on it. and to the degree that we can, we're going to communicate with you as much detail as possible to the degree that we can. and we're going to work on this, but not everything is going to be made public. not everything is going to be out there for everybody to see. >> let me ask you a question that would require you to give a hypothetical response, which i know you do not like to do, but if an agreement can be reached to secure paul and brittney from russia in some sort of swap, how quickly could they be home with their families? >> a lot of that's going to depend on the russian side of this equation, and their acceptance of this offer and then working through the modalities of it.

so, it's difficult for me to say -- i couldn't say two days, three days, two weeks, i just don't know, because it's going to depend on what the russians now come back with, if they do come back with, you know, an answer to this very serious offer. what i will say, because i can't give you a date certain or a number of days, i will say that we have been -- this offer has been on the table now for several weeks, and we believe that it should be accepted. this isn't something that's brand-new. and we believe that if accepted, that their return could be very, very quick, could be very soon. >> john kirby, again, congratulations on your new post. it's clear that you have plenty of work to do in this posting as well. thank you for spending some time with us to talk about this. >> you bet. any time. reaction to what we just heard from john kirby plus a realtime assessment of the war in ukraine from two of our most trusted and favorite analysts,

lieutenant colonel alexander vindman and ambassador michael mcfaul. they'll be our guests after a quick break. faul they'll be our guests after a quick break. ning and the grass is green ♪ ♪ i'm way ahead of schedule with my trusty team ♪ ♪ there's heather on the hedges ♪ ♪ and kenny on the koi ♪ ♪ and your truck's been demolished by the peterson boy ♪ ♪ yes -- ♪ wait, what was that? timber... [ sighs heavily ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you've built with affordable coverage.

we got the house! progressive helps protect what you've built you did! pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team. for too long, big pharma has been squeezing americans for every penny, and inflation has only added to the pain. but congress has a historic opportunity to deliver relief, by passing a bill to let medicare negotiate lower drug prices and put money back in the pockets of seniors. 87% of americans support the plan, and applaud the senators who are standing up to big pharma.

let's make history. vote yes to let medicare negotiate lower drug prices. ♪ so i climbed into the cab, and then i settled down inside ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man ♪ ♪ i've been everywhere, man ♪ ♪ of travel i've had my share, man ♪

♪ i've been everywhere ♪ ♪♪ amid continuing russian attacks, including therussian attacks, including the first missiles to hit kyiv in weeks, ukrainian forces, with the help of newly delivered western weapons, have been making up significant ground, giving a glimmer of hope they may be able to turn the tide of the war back in their favor. again, russian advances in ukraine have drastically slowed down. no significant days being made on the battlefield since made ukraine retreated july 22nd. let's continue our conversation. retired u.s. army lieutenants, former director for european affairs for the national states

secretary counsel. your titles are growing longer and more impressive to me every time i read them. i know you are both-- have a lot of ground, truth, communications and understanding of what is happening on the ground and i would like to ask both of you what your understanding is of ukraine's ability to push back with their tenacity and skill, also with these new weapons. >> i think the story here is that the trajectory of this war is going to end up in favor of ukraine, as long as russia does not collect a general mobilization, calling tens of thousands of reserves and trying to train them up over long-haul. russia does not have the sufficient combat power to make that much progress. every inch it takes, it does an extremely great cost and every inch it takes complicated geometry that much further. asked to fight along a larger military frontage. the tide is going to turn in

ukraine's favor as russia runs out of steam with these new added weapons coming in from the west with significant effects over the past four to six weeks. that is very much aiding ukraine's ability to start to liberate its territory. frankly, there is not enough of this coming in. there is still some significant gaps in terms of these long- range fires. this conversation about airfryer is beyond painful watching this administration to liberate over the advance of drones. these types of things could really help shift the war more decisively in ukraine's favor. this trajectory of the war, barring significant developments on russia's side. >> ambassador, the battlefield a story is difficult to see with our own eyes. what we can see is the terrorism campaign that russia is waging against ukrainian civilians. if you look at that as a sign

of weakness, terrorism in recent history is waged by a nationstate, certainly not we are used to covering in a post- 9/11 world. what is the reliance and dependence of terrorism say to you about what is happening on the battlefield? >> great question, nicole. by the way, before i get to that, thank you for mentioning mark fogel in your from previous segments. i know mark. he was my son's high school teacher, the best teacher he ever had. i thank you for raising awareness to his case. two things, if you are using terrorism, that means you can't win on the battlefield. the ukrainians use the weapons we give them to attack military targets. putin uses his weapons to attack civilians. the second thing i would say to add to what lieutenant colonel denman just said about the

battlefield, i think there are two different pieces going on right now, the battle for the don mosca, we talked about that many times. you see russians making incremental gains and in my view, will not stop until they are stopped on the battlefield. when i hear people say, if we could just talk to zelinski and putin, and tell them to stop the war, put in will only stop on the battlefield. secondly, the ukrainians are now launching a counter offense in the south for the city of her song and i think that is the battle to watch. >> what is your sort of informed opinion about how that is going to go and what the ramifications are? >> i'm not a military expert. i talked to them all the time, including in ukraine. we have one witness right now, let's turn to him in a minute. but, i am cautiously optimistic that you will see progress, especially on the side of the river where the russians are exposed on the west. that is the targets for the ukrainians. they feel very

confident they can push them out of there and that would be a major victory, a counter offense. remember, the fit was one of the first taken in the beginning of the war. they want to take it back and they think they have the means to do so. met alex, sometimes it feels like we are watching putin sort of thing out all of his grudges against ukraine and the west. tragically, the consequences are so much suffering and loss of life among ukrainian civilians and the battlefield. give us your assessment of this battle that the ambassador tells us to keep our eyes out for. >> i would just say it is not just putin. i would hope the coterie of elites, and large security apparatus that are more than happy to engage in barbarism. some of the reports coming out, even over the past couple of days, are probably not appropriate for television. >> i have seen them. >> castration of ukrainian soldiers. it is the kind of tourism that we don't understand.

in our military, if anything like that happened, those soldiers would be prosecuted. in russia's military, they are elevated and harold. in the battle of ukraine, the 64 brigade from the east that committed those atrocities was given the honorary title of guards. that is what happens in a place like russia. an authoritarian, moving toward a totalitarian state. in terms of these developments, the fact that mcfall's is absolutely right, this will be decided on the battlefield. this battle is one that we should be watching. it is something that any military analyst looking at ukraine, or watching ukraine for weeks back would have told you that this would be a huge vulnerability. this is by far the most important city, more important than variable. this is really significant.

it will and their aspirations for a southern campaign and really set back there military operations in general. >> i would love to both of you on the spot. we try to cover the developments regularly, but your contacts are sort of telling us what we are seeing and what to look out for is so important and valuable. we will continue to bother both of you through the summer. thank you both so much for spending time with us today. really important conversation. things to all of you on this friday for letting us in your homes during these truly extraordinary times. we are so grateful. here is a very special edition of "the beat." it starts right after a quick break. do not go anywhere. anywhere.

[whistling] when you have technology that's easier to control... that can 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] kids, one year they want all dinosaurs stuff the next, camels. - llamas. - llamas. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. you sure that's not a camel? yeah. whatever you say.