negative in theory. >> as governor, palin drove oil investment out of alaska and quit and left alaska to be a celebrity who didn't want to be stuck in wasilla. >> reporter: but some good will toward rivals. even for the most partisan of fire brands. >> i'm very, very thankful that we have great candidates up here. you have good choices. kind of can't go wrong. >> reporter: now, look, mika in, terms of what we expect for the results on this and this isn't new to alaska which is a state that is largeeot a lot of mail- voting here. but that combined with the fact that the rank choice voting system takes time to pars out results. we don't expect to see results here for at least a week. and i also should add that in systems like this experts had told us there are systems that women candidates tend to do well in. i don't highlight that because

of my book coming out about women in politics, but you look at the field of women candidates, it is a system that tends to reward candidates that could build consensus. those are traits that are associated with female candidates. so it is interesting to see how and if that shakes out in alaska with the heavily female primary fields. >> thank you. an your new book out is next weaken titled "electable" why america hasn't put a woman in the white house yet. and i just got my copy. congratulations and we look forward to talking you to more about your book. thank you. it is now 1 minute past the top of the fourth hour, 9:00 a.m. in the east and 6:00 a.m. out west. and jonathan lemire is here with us. and boy do we have a lot to get to this hour. >> following up on ali's report and talked about this rank voting that alaska avoting for,

it makes people connect a little bit better, try to be a little bit less harsh and add a little bit of civility. you heard sarah palin saying we have good people on both sides. whatever -- whatever can get people back to that position, perhaps it ranked voting, i just think that is good for america. that we can -- we can have a political system where everything is not just if we win america wins, if we lose america loses. so, yeah, i think that is critical. >> we'll be watching how that plays out and the primary this is week. the latest on the justice department's reasoning for the search of mar-a-lago is a big story this hour. while donald trump's team tries out another line of defense after several including working from home, and packing quickly, we'll bring you the very latest on that. and also ahead, joe biden tries

to capitalize on his latest string of wins. how they plan to tout their accomplishments, we'll get a live report from the white house. plus afghanistan one year after america's departure. we'll have a look at a country that remains in turmoil. >> things just keep getting worse and it shows you the power of america and the power of 2500 u.s. troops being in a place stopping it from the sort of tyranny that we've seen unleashed with the taliban over the past year and of course al qaeda and taliban will never learn. i never expected them to. but there you have al qaeda once again protected al zawahiri once again, and protected by the taliban. some people just don't learn their lessons. speaking of which, donald trump is one of them. donald trump supporters, they're saying -- and we've been talking about this, this morning and we've been talking about all of

the different excuses trump and his supporters have been throwing up against the wall on the weekend and even the sunday show yesterday and it is one lie after another and they con flick with each other. so if you're asking me, joe, how do you know they're lies, because donald trump's second lie usually counteracts his first and there has been a tweet by a skipper shane who really summarized it very well. with trump saying, i didn't take the documents, but if i did, they weren't classified. and if they were, then they were planted on me by the fbi. and if they weren't planted on me by the fbi, then i declassified them. and if i didn't declassify them, then, well, it is a hoax. >> my gosh. >> and if it is not a hoax, obama did it. and of course all of those lies. all of them lies. in "the new york times" reporting first he said he was working and cooperating with the

government agencies claiming he inappropriately entered his home. and then when the government revealed that fbi had recovered dozens of sets of documents clearly marked classified he suggested the agents planted the evidence and then he had a standing order to declassify documents. all of that proven to be a lie or irrelevant. to the charges that -- the crimes that he could be charged with. on sunday, his staffers went on tv. yesterday and they said oh, donald trump was in a rush. he just threw everything back in the backseat of the station wagon or whatever. he packed quickly. which is of course is laughable. >> that is crazy. >> and then you had another trumper blaming on tv the gsa, the gsa quickly responded and said the responsibility about what materials are moved rests

entirely with the outgoing president and his supporting staff. any questions about the contents of any items that were delivered, eg documents, are the responsibility of the former president and his supporting staff and should be directed to their office. so mika, one lie after another. it is almost as if they're running around in circle and have absolutely no alibis to these potential crimes. >> we'll see what happens and we'll follow the information as it is released and the details come out, but it does appear that these explanations, these multiple and conflicting explanations would make things worse for the former president if he indeed took classified documents that he was not supposed to have. >> and john bolton was quoted, here when somebody begins to concoct lies like these, it shows a real level of desperation. that is his former national

security adviser who said this whole idea of he somehow has a new system for declassifying documents, not true. as national security adviser, he said it is something that i never heard about and if it had happened i would have heard about it. >> so, here are several new details about the fbi search warrant used on former president trump's mar-a-lago home. it reveals trump is being investigated for possible violations of the espionage act, that is pretty bad. tied to the mishandling of national defense information or classified material. we're also learning more about the contents of the fbi's search. they include 11 sets of classified records that were seized from trump's florida residents. some of those records were marked as top secret, meaning they were only supposed to be available inside of special government facilities. you don't leave with them. the fbi cited two other laws as reasons for the warrants. they pertain to removing, destroying or concealing records

and obstruction of justice. the search warrant also reveals that fbi agents were allowed to search trump's office along with all storage rooms and all other rooms available to trump, his staff, or anywhere documents could be stored. as we mentioned, former president trump is offering a new line of defense for taking top secret government documents to his mar-a-lago home in florida. a statement released by trump's office on friday night contends, everyone takes work home some times. >> nope. no, they actually don't. >> it is also admitting he took them. so that helps. >> yeah. >> president trump, here is the statement, president trump in order to prepare for work the next day, often took documents including classified documents -- >> i don't understand. he didn't work during the day. he watched cable news all day. >> maybe that is why he needs to

bring work home. but you can't take classified documents it you could only read in a skiff to mar-a-lago. this is not a stretch. this is not an assumption. you can't do that. >> no. >> taking documents from the oval office to the residence, that is what this statement said. and the statement said this is ludicrous, this is a standing order that documents removed from the oval office and taking into the residence were declassified the moment he removed them. so, we're going to hear from john bolton in just a second. but let's point out that this statement appears to admit that the documents were taken. right? what am i misunderstanding. >> well, again, here is bolton, that we just want to -- we just wanted to tease john bolton because a lot of you are like, i know you're sticking around to see former national security adviser, see how that mustache is looking right now. so you'll see that in just a second. but the first lie was i didn't

take any documents. >> right. >> and so the statement undercuts that. his next lie was if i took the documents, they weren't classified. that was also undercut by this. the next one was, i didn't take classified documents, they were planted on me. remember that? that is what trumpers were saying. they planted the documents. >> now he's not saying that. >> i was just standing there, man and they planted it on me dude. set up and knocked down like a bowling pin. that, again, that lie also undercut. and then the whole lie about well if i did actually have classified documents, i declassified them. this is where john bolton undercuts that lie. >> when i became national security adviser, nobody briefed me or informed me this this policy or order was in effect. i was never aware of anything

even remotely approximating that policy and i haven't heard anything of it since i left. if he in fact said something like that, when was it memorialized, when did the white house counsel write it down and to whom it was distributed. but if he did take materials out of a safe space to the residence, it would have to be documented what they were, each document so that people with know what have been declassified and i know of no logistical train, no paper train at all that said what is declassified and what is not. when a document is declassified, it is not just declassified as to donald trump, it is declassified for the whole world. so, in theory, if that order existed which, i don't think it did, the news media to file a freedom of information act for every document he declassified for over a four-year period could be a high stack. i think this is made up and i think a key point is when somebody is making up stories

like that, i think it indicates a level of desperation. >> it is also being reported that at least one lawyer to the former president signed a written statement back in june that said all material marked classified and held in boxes at a storage area in mar-a-lago had been returned. >> they had not. and by the way, guess what, they have cameras from mar-a-lago that shows what exactly happened to the boxes and reportedly that when the dodge -- when the doj called later, they moved the boxes out of the area. i'm sure that is one of the reasons why the fbi is now seeking that footage. >> according to "the new york times," the justice department subpoenaed surveillance footage from mar-a-lago recorded over a 60-day period including views from outside of the storage room. >> that is going to leave a mark. >> according to a person briefed on the matter, the footage

showed that, after one instance in which the justice department officials were in contact with mr. trump's team, boxes were moved in and out of the room. joining us now, pulitzer prize winning journalist for "the new york times" charlie savage. chief investigate correspondent michael isikoff and carol lee joins us. >> it is great to have you all here. carol lee, why don't you clear this all up for us. what is the latest. >> coy do my best, joe. our reporting about the way that the president approached things in the white house and this is been talked about for some time, is that he saw everything as his own. so that is kind of the context and the back drop to all of this. whether it was staff, whether it was his cabinet members, they worked for him, right. and so the same was true with documents. and people that we talked to, you heard from normer national

security adviser john bolton right there said that there was this constant effort to try to take documents and constantly grabbing at intelligence, he thought he just owned it. there were efforts to try to sneak things away from him once he had them, sometimes they would give him photocopies of documents that were sensitive that he wanted and he said he didn't want photocopies, he wants the originals. so the sloppy approach toward documents an the approach that they were his, that he was the president and he set the rules and didn't have to follow any of the rules, that is is the sort of attitude behind the way that trump conducted himself while in the office including when it came to classified information. i think the question that is hanging all over this is sh you know, there was sloppy efforts as he was leaving the white house, things thrown into boxes happen -- haphazardly and what

did he pack beforehand and what did he have beforehand or think that he was ep titled too. and they said there was just this general sense of entitlement that these were his and he could take them if he wanted to. he ultimately decided and he did. so now the question going forward and what we don't know from this investigation is whether there was some sort of intent there that obviously he had these documents but what did he intend to do with them? what was the purpose. why did he want them. that is something that he went don't know. >> charlie, it is jonathan, we know and we'll stipulate up front that he shouldn't have had the documents whether they were classified or not. having said that, the word "classified" garners extra attention that there might be some nuclear seeks that were part of the what -- the former president had at mar-a-lago.

and there is a sense that he has broad powers to declassify and you wrote an article titled presidential power too declassify information explained. so explain what he can or cannot do. >> sure. well so the important caveat here going into this question is whether it matters and is it doesn't matter for legal purposes because all three of the criminal laws that the justice department is basing this investigation on, according to the search warrant, do not depend on whether mishandled government documents are technically deemed to be classified. two of them don't even have anything to do with national security. so the whole question of whether these were classified or technically secretly declassified by some standing order that no one knew about is a gigantic diversion into terms of the legal troubles that trump may be in here. that said, the president does -- interesting why this question of

could you have such a standing order. what if the president in his head said this document is declassified but never tells anybody. that is what john bolton was getting at. it raises interesting almost metaphysical questions. the president does ultimately control the classification system, it is a product of executive order that systems from the president's power as commander-in-chief. and it exists in parallel and separate from the most part legal controls on disclosure of national security secrets, so the espionage act predated the classification system and makes no reference to and if you violated it, saying i technically declassified it is not going to help you. the president could declassify anything he wants. there is an unanswered question by the supreme court ruling about whether the president could disobey the normal procedures that are -- that the rest of the executive branch has to follow and in declassifying

information. and the nuclear secrets that you bring up are a special case because that information is protected by statute. congress has set up a system for nuclear information. it is not called classified. it is called restricted data and under congress's statute, if it is nuclear stuff, the energy department and the defense department have to be involved in decisions about whether to lift restrictions on that data. although the president is the ultimate decider if they disagree. we don't -- our reporting has not yet matched "the washington post" that there was nuclear information in these documents but if there were, that adds another wrinkle to the mess. >> that is a big if. we don't know right now. so michael, you've been looking into the national security implications of all of this, talking to people who have obviously spent their life concerned about the national security implications of this. what could you tell us?

>> well, on the one level, you know, they've got trump now. they could bring charges against donald trump this week if they choose to. on the obstruction count and probably one or more of the others. he was -- he takes documents that didn't belong to him. he gets subpoenaed to return those documents, he returned 15 boxes or 15 boxes are returned and then the fbi finds that he didn't return everything and he returned finally they do the search and they get 11. on that, they've got him. they could bring charges on obstruction. he didn't -- he didn't adhere to the subpoena he got. that is not the end of the analysis. there is a lot more that goes into this. there were questions, there was an interview with mary mccord who pointed out that often intelligence agencies are reluctant to let the justice department bring criminal

charges that would require them to declassify some of this material in order to present it in court. there is that. but i think the more important one is the question that carol was raising, does the fbi have evidence for what trump's motive was in retaining those 11 boxes of documents as opposed to the 15 he did return. was there something he was planning to do with them? was he going to share them with anybody. that goes to the level of criminal intent here. and right now, we don't have the answer to those questions. and it may not be anything other than the kind of reckless contempt that trump has for the norms that was -- that explains all of this. and if they don't have that criminal motivation to do something with the documents, i think the more likely route here is -- the justice department isn't going to drop it, there is a misdemeanor charge that could be brought. that is what they did with david

petraeus, when he shared highly classified documents with his biographer. that is what they did with sandy burger when he took documents from the national archives and john deutsche after he was cia director. so there is a precedent for going the misdemeanor route. but that would require trump to consent to, to plead to a misdemeanor and i think that is where this gets really dicey as to whether or not trump would ever -- would ever do that. and basically dare the justice department to try to go to the felony route. >> yeah, i don't think that is a dare he's going to want to make. merrick garland appears determined to see this to its legal conclusion. mika, the deep irony here of course on michael just brought up, of course david pet rayous

and sandy burger. one of the reasons that donald trump did not select david petraeus, secretary of state, was he mentioned this, he mentioned the fact that he had mishandled classified information and there was just no way that either he nor the generals who were going to work for him could be -- have any part of that. >> the question of intent, obviously, we'll let the investigation speak for itself. but that is a big one and it makes it far more serious if they find intent. but still if the documents were in his possession, illegally, not matter what, it is bad. you can't walk out with these documents. you didn't by mistake stuff them in your pocket. carol lee, the justice department, the fbi, they're not thinking about the politics of this but it is hard not to look at what might happen or the impact of this politically, your taking a look at the impact this

could even have on president biden, positively and negatively? >> that is right. mika, my colleagues and i reported out how some democrats are looking at this and so you have the white house's perspective here which is the president is not going to touch this or talk about it or campaign on it. he wants to keep a distance there. but, democrats say, that doesn't preclude democrats to use this to try to undermine former donald trump politically and to galvanize the base. and in ways that democrats could benefit president biden politically is that his ole premise for running for re-election is based on his notion, his idea that donald trump is a threat to the country and so this is in democrat's view feeds into that and some argue that the more that president trump is in the news, particularly in this context, that could help president biden.

now there is also the flip side of that where the white house that had a very good week, the president got a number of wins, whether or not a lot of people are paying attention to them in the middle of august, they could be debated. but they wanted to focus on that and this overshadowed and we know that was a concern that president biden had, was that every day would be about trump and overshadow his presidency at the same time he has to contend with the reason he's telling everyone he's the best candidate to run for re-election in 2024 is because he's, in his view, the only one that could beat president trump. so we don't know where this is going and what the political dynamics will be but democrats are very much thinking about that right now. >> washington correspondent charlie savage and michael isikoff and carol lee, thank you all so much. we really do appreciate it. and jonathan lemire, just following up on what carol was saying there, republicans who

are not playing checkers right now, looking at what is right in front of them going oh, this is going to upset the base and this is good for us those are looking a little further down the road. not even playing three dimensional chess, just a basic game of chess and they could see two or three move as head understand this is the republican party's nightmare because if it does strengthen donald trump among the base or does strengthen donald trump in the republican party, it is what democrats would love to see. they love running against dr. oz. they love running against butters in ohio. they love running against herschel walker in georgia. they love running against crazy people in arizona. all of these people that are there only because of donald trump's influence with the republican party. if donald trump, if his numbers keep going up in the republican

party, well, mitch mcconnell knows he's never going to win the suburbs of atlanta back in a presidential election. he's never going to win the suburbs of philly back if a presidential election. he's never going to win swing voters back in arizona in a presidential election year. it is just not going to happen. so this is just bad news stacked on top of bad news, isn't it? >> yeah, the more this election or the 2024 election is about donald trump, the better it is for democrats. that is what they feel. they think right now that even before the search at mar-a-lago, let's recall flash back a few weeks ago when in the wake of the january 6 hearings there was rumors that donald trump was going to announce his candidacy for president then and most democrats are like, please do it now because they feel that would be a distraction for republicans. that he would take up all of the oxygen in the room and allow them to better highlight the contrasts between the trump term and what president biden is doing. the contrast between the

trump-picked candidates, the herschel walkers an the jd vances and the slate of arizona and versus what the democrats are putting out there believing the candidates are too extreme for the nation and those independent voters, those swing voters who broke from trump in many of them in 2016, that went for biden in 2020, and are sick of trump are going to be reminded of that disgust, reminded of that exhaustion that came from the donald trump experience and aren't going to want that again. so it is to carol's point been a source of frustration for this white house to have to deal with trump every day. and especially now they have all of these legislative wins but at least in terms of the election, they don't mind if trump becomes the topic again. they think it is good for democrats and good for biden in '24. >> and so many democratic professionals i talk to in d.c., mika, almost to a person say that ron desantis could beat joe

biden. glenn youngkin could beat joe biden and they go down the list that they believe could beat joe biden right now. but donald trump, they know, could not beat joe biden. so that is what they're hoping for. >> up next, the legal issues of former president trump may have over shadowed president biden's major legislative victory. we're going to break down how the white house is planning to change that. and the must-read opinion pages including one entitled trump's angry wailing is loud. biden's government is louder. we'll be right back. be right ba. a "ponzi scheme." the women and men i served with in combat, we earned our benefits. just like people earned their social security and medicare benefits. but republicans in congress have a plan to end so-called "entitlements" in just five years. social security, medicare, even veterans benefits. go online and read the republican plan for yourself. joe biden is fighting to protect social security, medicare and veterans benefits.

call joe biden and tell him to keep fighting for our benefits. for copd, ask your doctor about breztri. breztri gives you better breathing, symptom improvement, and helps prevent flare-ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition... ...or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,... ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur.

if you have copd, ask your doctor about breztri. vo: as families struggle with inflation- ...problems urinating, vision congress and president biden are doing something about it. congress just passed the inflation reduction act, reducing costs for millions of families. it lowers the cost of drugs and ramps up production of american-made clean energy. that means lower energy bills for families jobs for our communities and the boldest plan to take on climate change we've ever seen. the inflation reduction act will “bring relief to millions of people” congress just got it done. millions have made the switch from the big three to xfinity mobile. that means millions are saving hundreds a year on their wireless bill. and all of those millions are on the nation's most reliable 5g network and most recommended wireless carrier. that's a whole lot of happy campers out there. and it's never too late to join them. get $450 off any new purchase of an eligible samsung device with xfinity mobile. or add a line to your plan today at xfinitymobile.com

32 past the hour, the race for congress appears to have tightened as a new poll shows a remarkable shift in a few key demographics. >> this one is fascinating here. we need -- we need to talk about this one. >> the lastest fox news poll found a four point swing among men since may when asked which

party they would vote for in the district if the election were held today. the swing among dads is 28 points. >> hold on. so get this. a 28 point swing among dads since may, since the abortion ruling was leaked. so what do you think about that 28 point difference there, mika? >> i think it is very in line with how a lot of people have evolved on the issue of abortion and a lot of dads have daughters and sons. >> let's keep that up. >> and there are rights that they thought their daughters would have until the end of time that have been taken away. >> it is rights of the daughters, jonathan lemire, as we look at this, it is also

rights of parents to have a say in what happens to their 10-year-old girl who gets raped, or what happens in -- as the republican nominee for governor said in michigan, if a 14-year-old is raped by an uncle, she thinks that is a perfect example of why there should be a forced birth of the rapist's child. and i'm looking at this poll and perhaps, i don't know, perhaps something else is in there. but i just think dads may not be saying, oh, i want my daughter to have an abortion. maybe dads are just saying, i don't want the government to force my daughter to do something until the family, our family, mom and dad, daughter, doctor, preacher, health care provider, mental health care

provider can't sit down if a child is that blessed to have some sort of support, could also sit down and make a decision together. but that is, as they would say in your home town, a wicked swing. >> that is indeed, no points there for the accent, though, joe. but it is about potentially making decisions of family, if a daughter or loved one or wife or partner is raped, but also if they face life-threatening complicated due to a pregnancy. there is that as well here. and it does seem that we only know the top lines but it seems like there is something to this and this is clearly linked to the supreme court decision and it is about feelings of government imposing their will on what should be the most private family decision. and that is a big swing. >> and mika, there is also, it is in line with another poll that surprised me that we learned about from last week

about among hispanic voters who have always suggested for 25 -- for 25 years i've been trying to tell democrats that hispanic voters, a lot of hispanic voters are more conservative than liberal progressive leaders in washington, d.c. think they are and in part because of their faith. strong catholic faith among many hispanic voters. and then we had the poll on friday that shows that 75% of hispanics who were catholics disagree with the roe poll -- or with the overturning of roe and that it is going to have an impact on think voting. >> this could be very interesting in the lead up to the midterms. after months of negotiation, congress on friday gave final approval to democrats' $750 billion climate and health care and tax bill with a party

line vote of 220-207, they agreed to pass the inflation reduction act marking a significant victory for president biden and his party. it now heads to biden's desk wherer expected to sign it into law later this week. it provided more than $300 billion to tackle climate reform, marking a largest climate investment in u.s. history. it also makes major changes to health policy and allows medicare to negotiate drug prices for the first time. in addition, the bill adds a new 15% minimum tax on large corporations. let's bring in white house reporter for politico and morning show senior correspondent eugene daniels. a lot to celebrate for this white house. this legislation is landmark, eugene? >> absolutely. and president biden expected to sign it this week. and more importantly, this white house is getting ready to go on the road and sell this to the

american people. we got our hands on the playbook, our hands on a memo sent to chief of staff ron klain where really it was about we told you so, the message that this white house is going to go out and to america with is we kept our heads down and we focused on getting things done for the american people, we didn't focus on the shiny fights, we got the politics right and we got the policy right. and they have been looking for a really good story to tell the american people as they head into midterms an senior white house advisers have told us for months that it was up to them to figure out what that story is. and this is what the story is. in almost $3.5 trillion addendum in about 15 months you have $1.9 trillion for the american recovery act. you have the infrastructure bill that was $550 billion, chips and science act, $280 billion and inflation, this reconciliation bill $700 billion.

that is doesn't include the gun reform. and so we have all of these different things they have worked on tackling and now you have president biden, he's going to ohio at the ground-breaking for the intel plant that is only happening because he was able to sign their chips bill, that semiconductor bill and the cabinet is going on from now until the end month, get this, mika, 35 trips to 23 states. and that is going around and telling people what they've done over the last 18 months. especially over the last couple of weeks. because, after a slog of months of kind of bad news of looking for something to say that they have this story that they're going to take to the american people. >> politico eugene daniels live from the white house. thank you very much. which brings us to one of the morning's must read had been pages. in the latest column for "the

washington post" entitled trump's angry wailing is loud, biden's governing is louder a. mong the many criticisms that president biden has had to grapple with, this play be the most frustrating. he's been president fror nearly two years and donald trump is the dominant figure in our public life. biden is a fundamentally decent man who has spent his life thinking about what legislation he could pass and what problems he might start probleming and how he could tilt the economic playing field toward the people he grew up with in scranton and delaware. only history and future elections could decide the matter. but biden may go down as a achieving something like ronald reagan did but in reverse. his time in office is altering the nation's assumptions about government and its role in our economic life. joe biden will never seize the public stage the way trump does. he will never galvanize mobs and

inspire frenzied loyalty or encourage his supporters to embrace and defend lies. that happens to be why biden was elected. and joe, i do think that a lot of folks will say easy for her to say, blah blah blah, but he has been underestimated every step of the way in his career. and here we go again many times. >> always underestimated the butt of jokes throughout his entire political career. always. and even when he was vice president of the united states, everybody mocked and ridiculed him after iowa and new hampshire. again, just like ronald reagan, one of reagan's most powerful -- one of the most powerful weapons was being underestimated by opponents from the beginning to the end. but look at this. joe biden, big wins.

the inflation reduction act, there is a debate whether it reduces inflation or not. it does a lot of things but some people taking exception to the actual title. but it does lower the cost of drugs, it does lower the price of insulin for people on medicare and it does many other things. also the chips act, to make us more competitive with china. that is good thing even though republicans whipped against it and tried to defeat it. you also have first bipartisan gun legislation in 20, 30 years. you have the killing of the lk -- of the al qaeda leader who was the driving force from bin laden forward and then you get prices are plummeting but i'm skeptical of placing too much credit right in the president's hands. we have a massive economy. but if republicans are talking about how horrible things are,

and the economy is blaming joe biden, democrats could talk about plummeting gas prices and massive job numbers, more than before covid, low unemployment, 3.5% and then also you look at what has been happening with the v.a. health care bill. you could come to us, thank you for the billboard here. >> it is a list. >> it is a massive list. but a lot of bipartisanship too which people presumed would never happen. people were mocking joe biden. i would say progressive democrats would tell biden, stop trying to do deals, and they said biden don't be stupid, stop trying to do deals with republicans. you could never do that. and yet you look at the china bill, you look at the v.a. bill, the largest expansion of v.a. health benefits in well over a decade. you look at the bipartisan gun control, gun safety, a public safety bill, the most

significant gun safety legislation in 20 years perhaps. you look at the bipartisan infrastructure bill. the most significant infrastructure package in quite some time. yes, he got a lot of huge wins with the reconciliation bill when he got all 50 democrats lined up, but more for this president than any president since maybe bill clinton. >> it is hard to argue that biden's bet on bipartisanship didn't pay off. some in the white house thought he was giving republicans too much credit and trying to reach across the aisle too often and from the gop and that still remained on some things but he did score some absolute bipartisan wins here. and even if that is the extend of it, even if there are no republican cooperation going forward, that is an impressive scorecard and now to have this democratic only recommendation bill to head into the midterms, he and his party feeling good

about where they stand. >> so joe biden is doing historic things with ukraine, doing historic things with nato. but make no mistake of it. republicans for the most part have been there every step of the way. been willing partners every step of the way. and mika, you we don't really talk a whole bought about what your brother does as ambassador, u.s. ambassador to poland. but i think it could be comfortable with us saying this. that the legislation -- i mean the legislators that come over there, the coddel members that come out there, it doesn't matter how harsh they may sound on cable tv shows, either on the right or left, so they all come over there and they're of one mind. how do we help. how do we help the ukrainians? how do we push back on the russians? how do we expand freedom across europe and the world? that is encouraging. >> yeah, and that is visiting a

country where my brother is, that is is really showing the world how to open its arms to those who are struggling for democracy and for freedom. they are an example to america. it would never happen in america, quite frankly, what poland is doing. still ahead this hour, quote -- >> i disagree with you on that. >> well we could talk about it another day and we should do a segment on that. >> this country has fed and freed more people than any other country. >> i think it would be if you have for this to happen. i agree with you. i'm proud of this country and i love this country. >> if you talk to zelenskyy, he'll say they're still fighting this war and still surviving because of america's support. >> absolutely. poland brought in 4 million refugees in five months. i'm just saying that is an incredible example of across the board agreement that something needed to be done to help these people and it wasn't the government imposing this on the

polish people, the polish people opened their arms and their homes and their lives to ukrainians. it is a sight to see in history. still ahead this hour, quote, this country is tracking toward a scale of political violence not seen since the civil war. our next guest weighs in on why america might be a powder keg with the fuse about to be lit. the atlantic tim alberta joins us next to explain. electric shocks or sharp, stabbing pains. ♪♪ this painful, blistering rash can disrupt your life for weeks. a pain so intense, you could miss out on family time. the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older, ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles.

i just always thought, “dog food is dog food” i didn't really piece together that dogs eat food. as soon as we brought the farmer's dog in, her skin was better, she was more active. if i can invest in her health and be proactive, i think it's worth it. visit betterforthem.com

♪ ♪ i t elon musk says it. tesla's full self-driving software is “amazing”, it will “blow your mind.” but does it work? this happens over and over again. 100,000 tesla drivers are already using full self-driving on public roads. i'm dan o'dowd. i'm a safety engineer and tesla full self-driving is the worst commercial software i've ever seen. tell congress to shut it down. paid for by the dawn project.

non-gaming tribes have been left in the dust. wealthy tribes with big casinos make billions, while small tribes struggle in poverty. prop 27 is a game changer. 27 taxes and regulates online sports betting to fund permanent solution to homelessness. while helping every tribe in california. so who's attacking prop 27? wealthy casino tribes who want all the money for themselves support small tribes, address homelessness. vote yes on 27. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein. i would say that to me an important aspect is too...

meta portal with smart sound. helps reduce your background noise. bring that sense of calm, really... so you come through, loud and clear. meta portal. the smart video calling device that makes work from home work for you. today marks one year since the u.s. fully pulled out of afghanistan, and while taliban fighters hosted small victory parades in the streets today, there is very little to celebrate. nbc has this report. >> reporter: a defiant and dangerous protest by women in kabul, beaten by taliban fighters for gathering in the street, chanting "bread, work and freedom". a year ago today, thousands desperately trying to escape as the taliban encircled the capital, fighting to get on the

last flights out of the country, handing over their children, many terrified they would be hunted down for working with the u.s. kabul fell in hours, with almost no resistance. the country's former president fleeing in a helicopter. >> and the reason i left was because i did not want to ge ths the pleasure of, yet humiliating a president. >> reporter: the new rulers promised to be more moderate than the taliban of the 1990s. after the u.s. drone strike that killed al qaeda leader this month in kabul, the taliban insisted they didn't know he was living in the capital. the white house claiming in an intelligence report that he was the only key al qaeda figure trying to re-establish himself in afghanistan, adding that the terror group does not have the capability to launch attacks

against the u.s. or its interests abroad from that country. drought and sanctions have destroyed afghanistan's economy. more than a million children are at risk for severe malnutrition, as we saw firsthand back in january. today women's freedoms have all but disappeared. morality police make sure they're covered and traveling with a male escort. girls older than 11 can't go to school. yet some women and girls so determined to learn are studying in secret, a network of underground schools reportedly springing up across the country. >> and you ask what 2,500 u.s. troops can do and what a difference 2,500 u.s. troops in a country can do. well, you see it there. incredible reporting. kelly is such a great reporter. back here in this country

we're following the reaction to the fbi search of former president trump's mar-a-lago property. here is a sampling of what some of trump supporters said about it. >> i don't like the way the country is going, i don't like the way our nation is going, and i can't wait to see trump back in business. >> there's a lot of things to be investigated besides trump in our government, and it just doesn't seem to happen that way. >> president trump has been accused of multiple amounts of things that turn out to be -- turn out to be a load of [ bleep ]. >> there appears to be a witch hunt going on in washington right now. >> wow. joining us is staff writer at "the atlantic," tim alberta. his latest piece is entitled "what comes after the search warrant". the country is tracking toward a scale of political violence not seen since the civil war. if america is a powder keg, then one overreach by the government,

real or perceived, could light the fuse. we've seen what happens when millions of americans are manipulated into believing that trump is suffering righteously for their sake. i fear we're going to see it again. we don't know exactly what the fbi was looking for at mar-a-lago, we don't know what was found. what we must acknowledge, even those of us who believe trump has committed crimes, in some cases brazenly so, and deserves full prosecution under the law, is that bringing him to justice could have some awful consequences. is that justice worth the associated risks? the nation's top law enforcement officers decided it was. we can only hope they were correct. you know, tim, i think the line that merrick garland has put in quotes and said many times, no man is above the law, is ultimately what we have to hold

onto here in the united states of america, and the consequences, yes, could be very rough, but i think the consequences could be worse if nothing is done if a person, man, woman, president, ex-president, whatever, commits a crime and is not held accountable. >> mika, i agree with you and i think most reasonable americans would agree with you. i think what we need to understand is that even as we recognize the fact that we are, as john adams said, a government of laws and not of men, and that no man is above those laws, we do need to understand that we are living through a moment right now in this country that is extraordinarily precarious, a moment in which disinformation and political radicalism is sort of proliferating at a rate that

we are, i think, not entirely even aware of, and that in the physical and virtual spaces of the american right, there is a blood thirst and there is a real capacity for violence. we saw it on january 6th and i had the same conversation with a lot of folks leading up to january 6th and got a lot of the same rolling of the eyes that i've been getting over the last week or so since writing this piece. i just think we have to recognize that, yes, even though it is the right thing to do to make sure that nobody, not even a former president is treated as though they are above the law, that enforcing those laws is very likely going to have some consequences. as a matter of fact, we saw within 24 hours of the fbi executing its search warrant at mar-a-lago that this gentleman in ohio goes to an fbi office trying to kill some fbi officers. and i think that's all too predictable and we're going to

see more of it. >> and, tim, as we always say on this show, because we, of course -- mika and i are both experts in the field of dbt, but two things can be true at one time. no man is above the law, and at the same time i agree with the central premise of what you're saying, if doj thinks they have something on donald trump, it is my opinion, at least, it better not be a close call. this has to be something -- not that the diehard ultra maga supporters will believe, because they just aren't going to believe much of anything that goes against their fearless leader, but certainly some of the persuadable, some of the people more in the middle, you know, this is going to have to be pretty clear-cut, is it not?

>> you would think so. you would think so, joe. and i think the reason also that it needs to be clear-cut is that republican office holders here, i think it's not just appropriate to focus on the hard core maga base, the far right fringe that exists, but the people they listen to. and, of course, we have already seen that there are plenty of republicans who were willing to race out in the hours after the news broke of what the fbi was doing at mar-a-lago and they were willing to sort of assume the worst. they were willing to say to the american people, without having any knowledge of what the fbi was doing there, what they were looking for, the context, they were willing to go straight to the american people and say, listen, they're coming for you next, we live in an authoritarian state, this is a banana republic, you can't trust the government anymore. but there were some republican officials who showed some restraint, and i think what's

going to be really interesting moving forward, do those republican officials, some of whom have been loyal to trump, i'm thinking of a handful of u.s. senators in particular, if in fact what comes out as we learn more and more, if in fact it was clear that it wasn't a close call and they had every reason to go in and what they discovered was damning, then could you potentially see the first real rupture between trump and elected republicans at the highest levels in the u.s. government where they actually -- maybe not turn on him, so to speak, but where they say to his voters, listen, whatever he's telling you, some of these republicans are telling you, they are wrong. they're lying thank you. in fact, what the fbi did was appropriate, it was called for, no man is above the law, and what federal law enforcement is doing here pertaining to donald trump is entirely appropriate. if in fact that were to happen, joe, because it's not a close