2022 and they are going to google at the thought of what your life must be like. they will goggle at the thought of what it must be like to see something like this happening in your lifetime in realtime for the first time ever in american history, having no idea how it would how it would play out. nothing like this has ever happened before. and we don't know how it ends. tonight's news, that the fbi has raided the home of the immediate past-president of the united states, it feels both astonishing and sort of inevitable in equal measure. before republican president donald trump, we never before had a president impeached twice in a single term. we've never had so many members of a president's own party vote not only to impeach him but to convict him and remove him from office and bar him from ever serving in office again. we have never before had a president reject the results of the election that did remove him from office, we never before had a president summon his followers

into a violent insurrection at the u.s. capitol to try to stop the transfer of power to the successor and we never before had a president who was known to tear up official government documents and chief of staff is known to have burned documents in a white house fireplace, which would have been the, not for the fact that the former president him has repeatedly been accused of flushing government documents down nearby toilets. this is a former president who unlike any other former president in the united states is under active criminal investigation in multiple venues, under active criminal investigation in the state of georgia, his lawyers are reportedly negotiating already with the justice department, in washington, witnesses before the criminal grand jury have reportedly been asked about his actions, the reason the former president was not at his florida

home for today's fbi raid may in fact, have been because he was in new york city in preparation for what is expecting to be a sworn deposition from him very soon. in a new york attorney general probe investigating him an his family business on multiple allegations of serious fraud. that's a lot of firsts already. but today, the former president, donald trump, was the subject of an fbi raid on his home in south florida. and historically, sort of, you know, can't be overstated, and i do think it is worth pausing and reflecting on the fact today that we do not know where this leads, that we do not know where this ends, that this is a president who recently, in recent months has told some of his most rabid followers not only that he is still the rightful president of the united states, and has been forced out in some sort of unlawful push, but he's told them that if any prosecutor anywhere in the

country, it's an act of furtherance toward him for potentially prosecuting him for crimes, that he's promised his followers will take to the streets, in unprecedented number for the kinds of demonstrations the country has never seen before. we don't know where this will lead in legal terms. we don't know where this will lead in historic terms. we do not know where this will lead in terms of the behavior of the former president. and that is a moment that is worth appreciating. in terms of us being at an historical nexus. it is amazing what we have been through with this guy. we have no idea where it goes from here. but today, this nexus, where we are, in the most practical simple terms, what we know is this, we know that federal law enforcement authorities would have had to go to a judge, and bring to that judge a request for a search warrant, in order to get a search warrant from the judge, the authorities would have had to tell the judge where

they wanted to search and what they wanted to search for, and they would have had to demonstrate to the judge probable cause that at that location they wanted to search, they would find evidence that a crime was committed. a federal crime. a specific federal crime. which they would have to spell out in detail to the judge. the judge would have to be satisfied in the request in terms of the location and what they were looking for. and in the assertion that there is probable cause to believe that evidence of a crime would be found at that location. if the judge was so satisfied, the judge would then agree to sign and authorize the warrant which could then be executed by the fbi within 14 days. we know that just as a categorical matter in terms of what today's news implies about what's led to this point. kelly o'donnell reports for nbc news tonight that after the warrant was obtained but before it was served, the fbi notified the secret service today that they were going to come to mar-a-lago today, this morning, in order to execute this search

warrant. former president trump himself tonight confirmed in an online statement that the raid had taken place, and he noted in the statement that he felt aggrieved i guess you would call it by the search, more interestingly he noted the execution of the search warrant had included the fbi breaking into his safe. depending on the terms of the search warrant, one would expect that search warrant of this nature might include everything to be found at the property, everything related to a potential crime that the authorities had to serve probable cause about and therefore breaking into a safe wouldn't that be much more serious an act than the rest of the search itself, but he has volunteered, quote, they even broke into my safe. so at least if we believe his words, we know that was part of it. such is the nature of this very unique former president that it is literally hard to narrow down the potential federal crimes,

which potential federal grand jury investigation this raid might have pertained to. it's not like we hear about a raid on donald trump and you think oh, that investigation, you really have to narrow it down. and the former president is at least potentially implicated in an ongoing federal grand jury criminal investigation into sending forged sets of fake electors to the electoral college to keep him in power. there is a federal grand jury looking at that. he is potentially implicated in another federal grand jury investigation into efforts to use the justice department itself to overthrow the election results from 2020, and keep him in power. a second federal grand jury is reportedly looking at that. he's also potentially implicated in another federal grand jury investigation, this one first reported in may by "the new york times," is the alleged serious mishandling of classified information by the former president. now, the times was first to report the existence of the federal grand jury investigation into the matter but it was the "washington post" that was first to report six months ago, in february, that trump had taken

boxes and boxes and boxes of government materials with him to south florida to his club hotel called mar-a-lago. the post reported again back in february that many of the documents that he took with him to mar-a-lago were definitely and unequivocally classified. now that's important, because there are criminal penalties that attach to mishandling or allowing unauthorized access to classified government documents. people get in trouble for mishandling classified government documents all the time. the "washington post" reporting team was first to report on how highly classified some of these documents were, that trump took with him to mar-a-lago. i mean a classified document is a classified document. and criminal penalties sort of therein attach, just by the fact that something is classified.

but jackie and her colleagues at the post were first to report that some of these documents that he took were really, really, really classified. i mean we know that in part because the national archives desperately had to go retrieve them and make an inventory of what they found. some of these documents were so classified, they couldn't list them in an inventory, they couldn't describe what kind of documents they were. if the inventory itself was going to be an unclassified document. i mean here's the headline from jackie alemany and her colleague from february 25th this year. some records are so sensitive they may not be described in public. some of the presidential records recovered from former president donald trump's residence at mar-a-lago have so sensitive they may not be able to be described in forthcoming inventory reports in a classified way. and there are records at the very highest levels of

classification. including some that can be viewed by only a small number of government officials. there are records that only a very few have clearances to review. the documents are so sensitive, that officials may not be able to describe them in an unclassified way. according to the two people who spoke to the "washington post." so in other words, one of the federal grand juries looking into former president donald trump has been looking into this issue of potentially mishandling classified information. the existence of the federal grand jury looking into that as a potential criminal matter was first reported in may by "the new york times." but the "washington post" reported back in february that what he took to mar-a-lago, his boxes and boxes and boxes of documents, which the national archives tried for a long time to get back before they were finally able to get them from him, this is apparently such, some of this at least, stuff of such high classification, not only can you and i not know the

contents of these documents, can't know any of the words that are in the document, you can't know about the existence of the document. you can't have the type of document it is described to you unless you have a very high level government clearance. it's that classified. that's what he took to like the golf course, golf club thing, or whatever it is. the supper club. whatever it is. his gold thing in south florida. "the new york times" is reporting tonight that it is the classified documents investigation that led to today's fbi raid, that led to the execution of this search warrant at the former president's property. it was jackie alemany and her colleagues at the post who first reported the existence of this problem and the seriousness as we continue to follow this breaking news story tonight. it is a remarkable advance in this story that the fbi had taken public-facing steps in this investigation. we've known this investigation was under way for several months. them executing the search warrant today in south florida has all sorts of implications as

of the seriousness of this matter and broad historical terms, today will always be the day that you and i and always of us have learned that a former president of the united states had been raided by the fbi. joining us now is jackie alemany, investigations reporter for the "washington post." thank you for being with us tonight. this feels like maybe not full circle but quite a ways around the arc from your initial reporting. >> thanks so much for having me. >> i know that you and your colleagues have been continuing to report this story. you were the first to break the news of this scandal six months ago. what do you understand about the latest here about the scope of the fbi's action and what it says about the investigation as a whole. >> we're trying to get details right now, and what we have heard so far is that, which the former president confirmed himself is, that the fbi did raid the premises today.

this is an especially newsworthy development though, because obviously, six months ago, we reported that the national archives had sent people down to mar-a-lago to recover about 15 boxes worth of documents, classified information, and various mementos, things, records, that belonged to the american people, from former president trump. the fbi revisiting him today, indicates that there might have been documents that have yet to have been recovered. we have no reporting yet on what exactly might have been taken, what fibe eighths were locking for, but some -- fbi eighths were looking for, but some new reports that we do have is that some inventory that was turned over to the fbi of those 15 boxes was actually 100 pages long and that was only of the unclassified information, unclassified items that were improperly taken. although if you asked any archivist, they would say that that information is just as

important to our historic record as it would be classified information that was taken and we have a source telling us, that if you quantified the unclassified version of the classified inventory, which would be a separate inventory from the unclassified, it would be around three pages long but the source adding that one volume is one way to quantify the damage that might have been done, and that even just one page or one portion of a top secret or classified item that might have been improperly archived could do very grave damage to national security of the u.s. >> let me make sure that i understand this. so the national archives was able to retrieve about 15 boxes of material from mar-a-lago already. they then produced two different inventories of that material that they recovered and handed it to the fbi. a 100-page inventory of just the

unclassified material that was improperly taken and a three-page inventory of the classified material that was taken and that again, that is the national archives made that inventory and gave it to the fbi, is that right? >> that's right. we don't actually know how many inventories exist overall. but we do know of at least two unclassified inventories, one of it the unclassified items and then the unclassified version of the classified items, because even describing classified items can sometimes, needs to be classified. and these are rough estimates around 100 pages worth of items. we actually have some descriptors of some of the unclassified items, things like birthday dinner menu was schedules. calendars. speeches. agendas. talking points. we're still digging into this. again, every minute, sitting here getting text messages and

new intel just as we speak, but it's helping at least, you know, understand the full scope of what the fbi could be looking for here. >> i don't want keep you. i know this is a story you're actively working on right now and i promise i will not keep you too long so you can look at all those texts and advance your work with your colleagues. but i do want to make sure that i understand what we know about this in terms of the national archives and what they've done already. do the national archives have a fight with trump over some of these things that he did not believe were improperly taken, that he thought he had a right to? was it hard for them to get stuff back from him? is that perhaps the origin of any things that were held back? that sort of conflict, things that were held back by him that the fbi might have been looking to retrieve today. >> so that is a really good question and clearly you have been reading the reporting extremely closely, because six months ago, we first broke this story, the reason why it

actually became an issue because the national archives, as they do, for the public record is, they go through all of the documents from a presidency, put it all together, make sure it is very clearly organized, and during that process, which takes decades, there are still at times these archivists are going back to former presidencies, that, you know, in the '70s, in the '80s, when they find new historic records that need to be preserved correctly. but what they realized when they were going through the trump white house's records was that there were documents that were missing that were publicly known and fairly infamous, and gained notoriety throughout the course of the trump presidency, including for example that letter from kim jong-un, the north korean dictator that famously wrote former president trump a letter while he was in office, it was missing from the

records. and that prompted them to get in touch with trump's counsel that was representing him post-presidency, to say hey, guys, we're missing a bunch of records, do you have them. and there was then back and forth that was fairly extended. i'm not quite sure, i'm not quite remembering the time period, but this is a president that left the white house, in january, and these records were not retrieved until the beginning of this year. so there was some extensive back and forth. and the former president was very reticent about giving up some of these documents. and the volume of 15 boxes alone was quite an astonishing number at the time, and it was enough back and forth, an agreement that the former president would continue to hand over documents as they found them. >> jackie alemany investigations reporter for the "washington post," i know you are in the middle of ongoing reporting on this story which you and your

colleagues helped break in the first place, call us back over the course of this hour, as you learn more, obviously we're going to be covering this as closely as we possibly can. thank you. >> thank you. all right, i want to bring now into the conversation chuck rosenberg a former u.s. attorney, former senior fbi official and the person who i immediately get in touch with on my flight desk to make sure i've got the legal part of this at least under my belt and i can explain it in a way that is going to make sense to other nonlawyers such as myself. chuck, thank you for being with us tonight. >> thank you for having me, rachel. >> first, let me just get your top line reaction to this raid. let me, tell me if i've said anything thus far that doesn't strike you as correct in terms of the way the procedures work. tell me what you think of the seriousness of it. >> so your explanation at the opening of your show was spot on. i'm not sure why you need me. i will say this, it's astonishing. like step back for a moment, and recognize that the department of

justice went to a federal judge and got a search warrant for the home of a former president. putting aside what's in the affidavit, putting aside what crime they specified, putting all of that aside, this is not something, and this is an understatement, that happens lightly, at the united states department of justice. one thing i would add, you made this point, but i want to sort of amplify it, rachel, two branches of government are involved in a search warrant. the executive branch, the fbi, the department of justice, has asked permission, and the judicial branch which grants permission. so this is not some fbi agent off by herself seeking to search a former president's home. highly scrutinized. the most fly speck affidavit i suppose in the history of the department of justice, and then approval by a federal judge. >> chuck, i started making calls and texting people as soon as the news broke tonight and in addition to yourself, i spoke to

another former very high-ranking d.o.j. official who told me a couple of things that i wanted to run by you and this is a person not comfortable being identified publicly but was willing to let me characterize their remarks in terms of framing their understanding of what happened here. and the first comment i got from this person, jives a little bit with what you just said, that attorney general merrick garland himself would have had to approve this personally, and the official i spoke with also pointed out that attorney general garland approving this as a search, rather than as a subpoena, maybe significant, in that it may mean that the attorney general was convinced that these documents in question were at risk of being destroyed, or were potentially at risk of being disseminated to third parties, which would further aggravate the crime here in terms of mishandling classified information. what do you think of that aspect of this?

>> makes sense to me. first of all, a subpoena and a search warrant are not mutually exclusive. you could execute a search warrant and simultaneously hand the person a subpoena for the same records. meaning regardless of where they are, we want them back. and that we want them back piece is so important to my other point to the question you just asked. we want them back means we want them back regardless of how we get them. and if we have to get a search warrant to get them back, then so be it. if you don't trust the person with the subpoena, because the subpoena simply says hey, rachel, here's a subpoena for your stuff, when you get around to it, or at least by the date that the grand jury is meeting, give us the stuff. there's indicia of trust, right? maybe under investigation, but we're allowing to you give it to us on your timetable. that doesn't happen in the search warrant. we need this stuff, we want this stuff, the fact that the stuff is out there, can do grave damage to the national security of the united states, we're not just going to ask you for it,

we're going to take, it and so that's a very big deal. so subpoenas and search warrants are not mutually exclusive, but a search warrant is the most serious way that the department of justice and the fbi can get back something that it needs or wants. and again, has to be authorized by a federal judge. it's a very big deal. >> and chuck, if "the new york times" reporting is correct, that this is about the classified documents, the alleged classified, excuse me, alleged mishandling of classified documents reported by the "washington post," reported as a grand jury matter, by "the new york times," back in may, if that is the basis for this search warrant, number one, if the search warrant turns up evidence of other crimes, what happens to that information? is that also equally sort of in the possession and usable by the justice department? but also, is it unusual that for the specific crime of mishandling classified information, you would see a

tactic as aggressive as a search warrant, as opposed to just a subpoena, you would see a raid of this magnitude, you would see a former president not afforded, you know, informal deference for less intrusive means. mishandling classified information does get prosecuted but does it get prosecuted in ways like this? >> yes. and yes. so mishandling classified information, retaining classified information, at its worst, transmitting classified information with the intent to harm the national security of the united states, all of those are felonies, all of those are crimes, some more serious than other, but if you don't trust someone to give you the stuff and the way you get it back is through a search warrant, that's what is so astonishing here. the former president of the united states couldn't be trusted to return it. couldn't be trusted to return it simply with a subpoena. and so to your earlier point, merrick garland, who had to be

involved in this, it would just be remarkable if he were not, a h-to sign of on a search warrant, to go take the stuff. listen, i handled very classified information, highly classified matters, lots of stuff in the federal government that are overclassified but there are crown jewels fand those crown jewels get out and in the wrong hands they can do grave damage to the national security of the united states and so if you don't trust someone to return it, rachel, what do you do, you ask a federal judge for permission to go take it. >> chuck, i mentioned that in the case of this former president, and it almost feels hyperbolic to say but i mean it literally, when hearing about the raid by the fbi, on his home, you don't automatically know which federal grand jury investigation it might pertain to, because he does appear to be potentially implicated in multiple investigations of multiple potential crimes. at least three of which are

under separate federal grand jury investigations that have been reported in the press. given that, given the january 6th adjacent investigations, for example, if this search warrant was effectuated about the classified documents investigation, but it turned up material related to other matters for which the president is potentially under federal investigation as well, are those considered to be properly collected by the justice department? do those have to be handed back? is that sort of fair game if they come across things that are not, that is evidence for crimes for which, evidence of crimes that weren't the crime that they went to that federal judge to get this warrant for today? >> yes, it's a great question, and i apologize to you for making you ask me twice. i failed to answer it previously. so yes, if you are lawfully present in the home, and you are, because a judge authorized the search warrant, and you're

lawfully taking documents, because it's listed in the search warrant and being potential evidence of the crime that you're investigating, then sure, it's all fair game, there are a number of doctrines that apply once you're lawfully in a lome, plain view, if you wanted them. this is an outlandish example but if they saw a sawed off shotgun on the kitchen table and meth in distribution amounts, you can seize it because it is in plain view but more reasonably, and more rationally, if you find other documents that lead you to other investigations, or avenues, and they're lawfully seized by lawfully present agents yes, rachel, fair game. >> chuck rosenberg, former senior fbi official and justice department official, thank you very much for your time. invaluable as always but particularly tonight in this historic night. thank you. >> my pleasure. when this news broke tonight, one of the other people i immediately wanted to speak with is a colleague who is on vacation. i however am a cruel and unusual

colleague to pursue her even though she is not supposed to be working tonight because simply i must hear her reaction from the news, nicolle wallace, my friend and a person who is being very kind to me by taking this call even though you're not supposed to be working tonight. thank you. >> well, it is an act of god that you are on tonight and i think i speak for all of you, i am very glad that you are. you know, building on what chuck rosenberg said, i mean the crown jewel of our democracy is the transfer of power and the electoral counteract is a law, too. so is obstructing an official proceeding. and i think the tsunami of questions far outweigh the revelations on a night like this, but i think what we know now is that the preciousness with which we sought merrick garland and viewed the next president, may be a mirage, may not be real, they view the potential for a criminal, you know, act, or a crime, that had

been committed by the possession of classified materials, at mar-a-lago, to be blind to the fact that the home at which the classified documents may be put away in a safe, is an ex-president's home. we may just be learning the very first things that we will know from now forward, as your first words tonight made clear, we've never done this before, but we may be learning the very first things there are to know about how merrick garland and lisa monaco view potential crimes committed by an ex-american president. >> what do you think will happen on the right in response to this news? we've seen the statement from former president trump today, helpfully confirming that the fbi raid had occurred which made life easier for a lot of news organizations trying to confirm the initial reporting at that time and lashing out and using all of his specific and typical

and repetitive words about how aggrieved she is by his, by these efforts to hold him accountable and investigate him for various things. he has threatened in the past that if any prosecutor anywhere took any sort of act toward him, meaning toward indicting him, that his supporters, we expect his supporters in the street, for protests and demonstrations of the size that the country had never seen before. what do you think the reaction will be here, and how important is tonight versus what happens next? >> i was thinking about stephen ayers an insurrectionist turned january 6th select committee public witness, and i think it is an important window into how brazenly trump and his media allies, people like tucker carlson, feed the lies to the base. but i would lope that some of the people who may be on the fence in that endeavor would

look at the bill barr guffawing and making a mockery of trump's lies and calling them b.s, over and over again and while he had taped depositions. everyone close to trump knows he is a liar. they're acutely aware of his pension for mishandling of classified information. and trump has been mishandling classified information, and you probably did this extensively at the time since lavrov wormed his way back into the oval office back in 2017, believe. so the mishandling of classified information is something that has been going on for so long, i believe multiple national security advisers were either witness to it or tried to stop it or stem it, but if that is the crime for which there was probable cause to seek a search warrant, then we have our first window into how potential crimes by the ex-president are viewed by this justice department. >> nicolle wallace, the host of

"deadline white house" but right now because she is on vacation, i pried her out of it. msnbc 4:00 p.m. eastern, thank you for joining me on such short notice. back on vacation. i apologize. >> thank you, my friend. a quick break and much more on this story as it develops over the course of this hour. and i need to tell you as we come back from this quick break we will speak with senate majority leader chuck schumer, we want to get his reaction to all of this and talk to him about a lot of the things he has been working on, the world-changing stuff he has been doing in the last few days. it's a big night. twus. lots to come. night twus lots to come

every search you make, every click you take, every move you make, every step you take, i'll be watching you. the internet doesn't have to be duckduckgo is a free all in one privacy app with a built in search engine, web browser, one click data clearing and more stop companies like google from watching you, by downloading the app today. duckduckgo: privacy, simplified. as we continue to follow the breaking news out of south florida tonight with the home of former president trump just been raided by the fbi, we have the leader of the united states senate standing by to speak us with, senator chuck schumer of new york is the leader of the senate democrat, the senate majority leader, about to join us tonight fresh off of a marathon overnight session of the senate, in which he and his democratic colleagues passed

what is being described as the most important most far-reaching legislation since the affordable care act. since obama care 12 years ago. it was a year ago this week that senator schumer led passage of the big biden infrastructure bill. but the bill schumer and the democrats just passioned this weekend dwarfs even that. but they just passed the biggest climate legislation ever. also for the first time in 30 years of trying the democrats finally passed a bill to led medicare negotiate lower drug prices. they also got a new spending cap. to nobody on medicare will pay more than $2,000 a year on prescription drugs and also caps insulin prices for people on medicare too. it would have capped insulin prices for everybody but republicans blocked that which is astonishing. the huge new bill called the inflation reduction act, it is the latest in a string of wins for senator schumer and the democrats and the biden administration, on top of the really good jobs news in recent days, on top of steady now sustained drop in gas prices, on

top of the huge u.s. counter-terrorism strike killing the head of al qaeda, just in the last six weeks, in congress, this congress passed the first bipartisan gun reform in decades. also a huge bill on our competitiveness with china. and big veterans health bill that republicans initially tried to block, the one about burn pits exposure. plus they got through approving finland and sweden to join nato with only minor republican slow -- shenanigans. it is called the extraordinarily productive run by congress. the chips bill will be signed tomorrow. and the burn pits bill on wednesday. and the huge climate and health bill the senate passed will pass the house on friday and president biden will sign that one too right afterwards. it is a remarkable flurry of productivity and action on long-held priorities. and it all is hitting alongside this just jaw-dropping

unprecedented news tonight that the home of the immediate former president, former republican president donald trump, his home has just been raided by the fbi. everything happens all at once. senator chuck schumer of new york joins us live to talk about all of it. sir, thank you so much for being with us tonight. i appreciate you making the time. >> hi, rachel. it's goods to be back. it has been a while. >> it has been. >> and you are back under circumstances i could not have previously imagined. i need to get your reaction from the news from south florida that the fbi has searched the home of the former president. >> i know nothing about it other than what i read like everybody else so i think it is wise for me to withhold comment until we learn more. >> i appreciate. that i do have to tell you that one of your not colleagues but another congressional leader, the house republican leader kevin mccarthy just made a statement online, about the fbi

executing the search warrant at the former president's home, he said when republicans take back the house, they will conduct immediate oversight of this department, and then he says this, quote, attorney general gerland preserve your documents and clear your calendar. effectively threatening attorney general garland in response to the fbi having executed the search warrant tonight. i know that you don't want to talk about the substance of the matter at mar-a-lago but i do want to ask your reaction to what mr. mccarthy has said. >> none of us know the facts and any comments are premature. >> okay. i appreciate it. and i will not press you further ton because i understand you're disciplined enough that it would be futile. >> yes, it would. >> let me just ask you about what i laid out very quickly about this string of accomplishments that you have managed to pull off in the united states senate. this bill, the inflation reduction act that you and your colleagues were able to pass in the marathon session over the weekend, it is being called the largest most important, most significant legislation since

the affordable care act. do you think it is that big of a deal? do you see it in those terms? >> i do. some have even compared it to things earlier in the '60s but it is huge. and for years, decades, congress said we are going to do something about climate change. nothing happened. we were going to go after the pharmaceutical industry and lower the cost of prescription drugs. nothing happened. we were going to go after wealthy corporations. and individuals who didn't pay fair share of taxes. nothing happened. and now all of these things, plus nine million jobs, plus real deficit reduction, $300 billion is happening at once. it's an amazing accomplishment. and particularly in light of the fact, rachel, we have a 50-50 senate, running from bernie sanders to joe manchin, no help from the republicans on these issues, they're intransigent, so it is really something my colleagues stuck together, every one of us, because we knew we had to get something done. it doesn't have everything we want. it doesn't have everything i want. but if you ask the american people, do you, are you

anguishing, and just concerned ha we can't get, that congress is gridlocked and can't get anything done, these six weeks have brushed that away. and i'll make one more comment, rachel about how it might affect things. you know, people are now realizing that the republican party is becoming a maga trump republican party. the dobbs decision on choice. and the other supreme court decisions on guns. and on environment. the january 6th hearings. the right wing rhetoric that comes out of almost so many main stream or formally mainstream republican politicians. they don't like them but they were wondering well, if we give the democrats power after november, you know, keep the house, democratic, increase the number of seats in the senate, will the democrats be able to get anything done, i think the last six weeks with all of the bills you mentioned and particularly this recent bill, answer with a resounding yes, democrats can get things done, in a bipartisan way, when republicans will work us with, or are pressured to work us

with, but on our own if we have to. >> did you learn something through this process, and particularly on this bill that you just were able to pass this weekend about unlocking the, unlocking the lock that has been senator manchin of west virginia, senator kyrsten sinema of arizona, those two senators in particular have taken on outsized roles both in the public sphere, in terms of public attention, but also in terms of the ability to decide which legislation moves forward and which doesn't because of their willingness to stand with republicans on some things or at not always stand with their democratic colleagues, do you feel like you've learned more about how to work with them in ways that keep them on the side of you? >> well, you know, the bottom line is that, in a 50-50 senate, any one senator can block things. but if you, you have to keep going at it, and finding ways to come together in a way that it affects the american people. joe manchin and i disagree on climate, but this bill will reduce, this proposal when it

becomes law is the most massive change in fighting global warming that we have. it will reduce the amount of cash than goes into the atmosphere by 30%. and originally 35%. and my dad caught me. a lesson my dad taught me. my dad passed a you way in november but he is still with me. he worked his whole life in a junky little exterminating business, hated it. never complained, and never resented people who got better breaks than him. but he taught me one thing. that if you work hard at some point and doing the right thing and if you work hard and you persist the way he put it, god will reward you, you will succeed. we had had a lot of dead ends in this process but we kept persisting and persisting and persisting and look what we achieved something really fine. so my message, persist, don't give up, try to find the common ground, keep your principles, but make sure that you never give up.

>> given the breaking news tonight, sir, i feel like i need to ask you about something that i feel like we can sort of see looming on the horizon, and we are starting to see very far right, trump supporting members of the party of the republican party, talk about things like going after the justice department, going after the fbi, defunding or getting rid of the justice department, getting rid of the fbi, we're seeing high profile ambitious republican governor goes after individual prosecutors for not wanting to prosecute things the way that governors want them prosecuted in their states. with the fbi raiding the president's house today at mar-a-lago and i know you don't want to talk about that in substance, it seems clear, i think it seems obvious to both of us that we are about to enter into a new and more intense air afterthe republicans and the trump-supporting republicans, really waging law on law enforcement and especially on the idea of federal law

enforcement and i wonder if you've been thinking strategically about that, about depending those institutions, depending that part of the executive branch that forces federal law, enforces federal law against the sort of politicized attacks that are coming your way. >> what has happened, and you put it well, rachel, is a large chunk of the republicans, not all of them, but a large chunk, have become what i call maga republicans, trump republicans, with little respect for rule of law, with little respect for the balance of power of institutions, frankly with little respect for truth itself. i mean when a third of all people and a majority of republicans now believe that the election was stolen, when there is no evidence to that effect, that's proof of that. the good news on that front is it's hurting them. in just speaking in terms of preventing them from getting power, in the house and increasing, or in the senate, and in the house, the numbers in all of our elections is looking very, very good in both our incumbents and our challenges.

and that is i think because the american people are smelling that this republican party, the maga republican party is not the old republican party which may have been conservative, may have been pro business, may not have been very good on climate issues but at least had some respect for democracy and rule of law, i think they're going to pay a price for this in the election. i think democrats should use it as an issue, that the rule of law, the protection of democracy, is a key issue here, and we better watch out if we give republicans power in either the house or the senate. and i think that's going to be successful, along with the issues we're talking about, the accomplishments that we were talking about, on climate, and on drugs, and on closing loopholes and on job creation. we're going to go back, and this is one smaller thing, it is not exactly on your topic, they blocked a 35 dollars price for insulin for nonmedicare people. we're going to come back and make them vote on that again. when they get taken over by the extremes whether on issues of democracy or issues of making

people's lives better and reducing their costs, they're going to lose out. i still have faith that if we have vigilant, if we persist and don't give up or throw up our hands it is going to backfire on them, and i believe it will. >> senate majority leader chuck schumer fresh off a remarkable string of wins in the senate on gun reform, on veterans health care, on china and competitiveness, on health care, on climate, i know it's been a heck of a run, thanks for being with us. >> thank you, rachel. i very much enjoyed being on your show as always. >> thank you. all right, we are going to take one more quick break tonight, and when we come back, we will get reaction live from a member of january 6th investigation. to this breaking news we're continuing to cover tonight, the fbi's search of donald trump's home in south florida. mar-a-lago estate. we'll be right back. stay with us. r-a-lago estate. we'll be right back. stay with us

when hurting feet make you want to stop, it's dr. scholl's time. our custom fit orthotics use foot mapping technology to give you personalized support, for all-day pain relief. find your relief in store or online.

we're continue to following breaking news from former president donald trump's home in south florida where the fbi today executed a search warrant. a source familiar with the matter tells nbc news this evening it is the trump team's understanding that the investigation is related to the transfer of documents from the white house to mar-a-lago after the trump presidency was over. that same source also confirming to nbc news tonight that boxes of documents were seized by fbi agents as part of today's search. one senior u.s. official is also

now confirming to nbc news that the president was present at mar-a-lago quote for the majority of the day and also further companying that the matter does indeed involve government records and the national archives. at the start of this hour, i mentioned i did this sort of narrow down which federal grand jury investigation might have led to the fbi raiding the former president's home, we have multiple sources from multiple directions confirming what "the new york times" was first to report that the investigation in question that led to the execution of the search warrant today does relate to the alleged mishandling of classified documents by the former president, something first reported in detail by the "washington post," which started six months ago, reported that not only did the national archive recover boxes and boxes and boxes of material that trump him properly taken from the white house but some of that material was not only highly classified it was so highly classified that even its existence could not be described

in an unclassified setting. joining us now is virginia democratic congressman elaine luria, a member of the january 6th investigation in the house of representatives. congresswoman, thanks for making time tonight. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> let me first start by asking your reaction to this news about the search of the former president's home and let me ask if you you know anything more about this than we've been able to report yet this evening? >> well, rachel, i'll start out by saying as a member of the committee, i'm not directly involved in the d.o.j. process of ongoing investigation, i'm learning as has been continued to be reported throughout the last hour. my immediate reaction is in a statement, president trump said, you know, nothing like this has ever happened before. it is truly unprecedented but unprecedented because this is a reaction to an unprecedented presidency. we have never before seen a president who sought 0 overturn elections, fake electors, put pressure on the vice president, summoned a mob to dc, we don't need to summarize, i'm sure your

viewers are all aware of all of those facts but even today, more things, we see, you know, torn-up pieces of paper in a toilet, and another reporting of one of his aides saying he had eaten a document. and chairman of the joint chiefs milli's comments, about the things that happened during the last administration. so an unpresidented response is required to these unprecedented actions that you know where we need to have accountability. >> i hear you and i understand when you say that the january 6th investigation that you are a part of in the house and the justice department's actions are separate, and you've got no special insight into their actions, certainly no forknowledge of any of their actions but i wonder if i could ask you if there is a working relationship, a functional working relationship between the justice department, as they pursue what appear to be multiple federal grand jury investigations involving the president, some of which pertain to his efforts to stay in power after he lost the election and

your own investigation. i know there has been some tension or at least some statements by the justice department, expressing frustration that they have needs that you might be able to meet if you were able to give them more of your materials, is that relationship constructive enough now that fe this turned up material in their search warrant, in executing the search warrant today, that is relevant to your investigation, that you will eventually get it? >> well, rachel, again, they're separate investigations, we do not have insight into what one or multiple grand juries are doing, whether investigations are happening, for example, in georgia, there are a lot of investigations going on, you broke that out earlier on and we're negotiating with the department of justice in order to potentially facilitate some of the investigations that they havian going. but that is really also still a work in progress and i think the two dynamic fast-moving investigations happening in parallel is a complicated think to synchronize those but we want people to be held accountable and we want justice to be served and we're working as well toward

the role of our committee as a congressional committee at the same time. >> congresswoman elaine luria, in the january 6th committee, appreciate you joining us on short notice. joining us is a pulitzer prize winning reporter, executive director of the new yorker.com, and thanks for making time to be with us tonight and i was glad whi when i heard you might be able to join us. >> thank you for having me. >> so you had great sources inside the justice department over the last few years and i just wanted to to ask if any of your reporting in recent months, in recent weeks on this classified documents investigation suggested that it was leading towards some dramatic action like this fbi raid today. is it your sense from your reporting that this investigation is very serious, that this action today is some indication about where the investigation might be going? >> so the raid is a surprise to me, but a government

investigators told me that they felt that the clearest case against donald trump was this mishandling of documents, that it was 16 boxes as jackie alemany explained earlier, that trump was warned to not take documents. if you remember, and this is the same type of investigation that hillary clinton faced, was she intentionally mishandling classified information. and you know, the sense i have is that the case against trump for intentionally mishandling classified information is even stronger than the case against hillary clinton, because he was told to not take these records, but he took them to florida. so i think that is a focus of the search and that is the most likely, if there is going to be a criminal charge, that appears to be the clearest one. >> and david, just as a follow-up to that, is it your sense that then pursuing this information with the search warrant, rather than just sending a subpoena, telling trump that he needs to collect these documents and send them

in, indicates a certain level of urgency, or aggressiveness, in terms of how fast they're moving and how they're approaching this. >> it's very aggressive. there's a sense of urgency. there's evidence every day, destroying documents, documents in toilets that came out this morning, this is an incredibly serious step. i believe that merrick garland approved this himself. he will be investigated by kevin mccarthy, as you said earlier, so we are learning new and very, we are entering a you in and very dangerous stage but all of the justice department people i've been speaking to for a work i've been working on saying they are incredibly careful and only act if there is crystal clear evidence and they don't want to be political, this will be perceived as political by half the country so it is a monumental development and we'll see if their evidence holds up in court but it is just a shocking series of events tonight. >> given what is going on at the u.s. justice department right now we are blessed that david

road, executive editor of the new yorker is working on a book on what is happening at the justice department. david, thanks for making time to join us tonight. >> thank you. >> that is going to do it for me tomorrow. ali velshi will be here tomorrow. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is up next. the fbi searches the florida home of former president trump. looking for documents from his time in the white house. and this morning, we're learning more about what agents found at mar-a-lago. the search has republicans rallying around the former president. house minority leader kevin mccarthy is even threatening an investigation of the department of justice. and online, some of trump's most devoted followers are furious and posting concerning calls for action.