days's judicial races, money disparities can matter gray deal. i think very few candidates for senate, governor, or major house races these days, much less presidents, whose racist because of money. they're all gonna have. enough some would have an advantage, and that's where you would want to be, you can basically do everything, every i do have. but i think that's right, i don't think these races will be decided by money. particularly basically the u.s. house level. e level. >> i love this. i just want to say, when you are bringing up candidate quality, i remember the time of christine -- i'm not a witch -- o'donnell, and todd aiken. lessons have not been learned. >> and the point that david plouffe just made there is that mcconnell had to crack that, it

2010 and 2012. and he saw, since this should have been on the board -- >> yes -- >> go away, twice, before they gotten in 2014. so, he's definitely [inaudible] >> so, this is a triggering moment for mcconnell. >> yes, exactly. >> thank you, chris. thank you for joining us this hour. we have a lot to get to. tonight, a judge in florida says he will likely release a redacted version of the fbi affidavit behind the search of donald trump's florida country club home. new york times justice department reporter katie benner joins us live. and in a new york courtroom, trump's longtime top executive pleads guilty, admitting he conspired with the former president's company to not pay taxes. and now he will testify against the trump organization. to craig, the new york times reporter who has led the reporting on down from finances, is here in studio tonight. and, he is a member of the biden cabinet, dispatched to take the presidents case to republicans and fox news. transportation secretary pete buttigieg joins us live. but first, we start in

september of 2015. donald trump was three months removed from his famed escalator ride announcing his presidential bid. he had already risen to the top of the republican field, leading in all the polls, and he found himself showing off his trump tower office to the wall street journal. >> this is shaquille o'neal's shoe. >> oh my god! is that a real issue? >> -- he took it off after he handed it to me. i carry like this. tom brady's super bowl helmet. >> wow. >> this is mike tyson's belt. >> shock shoe! tom brady super bowl helmet, mike tyson's belt. we have known for a while that donald trump likes to collect memorabilia, if you will. and so when trump arrived at the white house, well, it was no different. here is the new york times today describing trump's time in office. quote, white house aides described how excited trump was to show of all the material he had access to, including letters from the north korean

leader kim jong-un, which he routinely waved at visitors, allowing his advisers. some of those letters were among the trove that mr. trump had with him at mar-a-lago. so, is that why federal agents retrieved within 25 boxes of documents from trump's florida home last week? did he just want to show off his 11 sets of classified papers to friends and guests? papers that the fbi took last week? hey, guys, look, look! this one is marked classified! that one, over there! it is marked top secret, check it out! sure, maybe. or it could be something more nefarious. because if that more innocent explanation is true, then why has trump not answered the single most important question of this entire saga. why didn't he just gave the documents back when the government asked for them, before a search warrant was even approved? why not simply hand them over. i mean, trump has been anything but quiet when it comes to literally everything else

related to the fbi's search of his palm beach home. he was the one that first told us, so far told all of us, that the fbi was, quote, rating his home, breaking into his safe, taking his passports, several of them. trump has even argued that the whole search warrant should be released. let us not forget that the fbi did, in fact, which we've 11 sets of classified documents as part of that search. including some documents labeled top secret. we learned yesterday that federal agents are still sifting through all those documents more than a week after the search. and today, in a federal courtroom in west palm beach, a federal magistrate judge held a hearing on whether or not to grant the request of several media organizations, including our own, nbc news, to unseal the fbi's sworn affidavit that served as the basis for the judge to sign off on that search warrant. and that affidavit is where all of the -- forgive me for this -- that's where all the juicy information exists. that document is the roadmap,

tomorrow the government's own description, laid out by an fbi agent, as why the government thought there was probable cause to believe evidence of crimes, plural, could be found at mar-a-lago. the justice department told that federal judge earlier this week that releasing the affidavit, the one currently under seal, would harm the departments ongoing criminal investigation because, again, that is where all the juicy stuff is. in court today, arguing for the doj was the head of the justice department's counter intelligence division. and interestingly enough, trump's lawyer -- yes, the former crossfit attorney and one america news anchor, christina bob -- she did attend. but she just watched. christina bob did not argue on behalf of her client, the former president. this was a hearing about something he is apparently incensed about. and yet donald trump did not want an argument to be made on his behalf, which is interesting. here is nbc's report from

inside the courtroom. quote, a top counter intelligence and national security official argued that detailed and reasonably lengthy document needed to be kept completely under wraps because it contains substantial grand jury information in a unique case with national security overtones. he also said the government is very concerned about the safety of the witnesses in the case, whose identities could become compromised if the affidavit is unsealed. the government lawyer pointed to amateur sleuths on the internet, who could maybe find personal information. this is a volatile situation with respect to this particular search, across the political spectrum, he said. and with one side, in particular. the justice department also made the case that the criminal investigation is in its, quote, early stages. but despite the justice department's objections, the judge ruled that it was, quote, very important that the public have as much information as it possibly can about the search.

the government said -- the government, the judge said -- had not met its burden of showing that the entire affidavit should remain sealed. instead, he ordered the justice department to submit a proposed redacted version by next thursday at noon. he also ordered some other documents from the warrants to be unsealed. these documents do not include anything particularly revolutionary. but i do want to point out something that isn't one of them. one of those documents is dated august 5th. and it is the government's motion asking the judge to allow the doj to file the mar-a-lago search warrant under seal. and the department gave an explanation as to why they wanted the search warrant to be kept secret from the public, making their argument the justice department, writes, quote, the justice department submits that theories, quote, good cause because the integrity of the ongoing investigation might be compromised and evidence might be destroyed. it is not a surprise for the government to think that evidence might be destroyed if

the existence of a search warrant got out before the they executed it. but to see it, in simple black and white, text about a former president is just astonishing. it is against that backdrop that it does look like we will see at least some version of this fbi affidavit, world you see stuff is, as soon as next thursday. joining us now is katie benner, a justice department reporter for the new york times, who is covering this story and who has also landed several major scooch related to the investigation into january 6th. katie benner, thank you for coming into the city and joining me tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> let's start first with a curious behavior of christina bobb, who is representing the former president in all this. do you think there is a reason why she did not actually choose to speak in the courtroom today? it's sort of -- maybe one could draw the inference that trump doesn't actually want this affidavit unsealed. what did you make of it? >> i'm not really sure what trump's motivation is or what her motivation is. but i think we have seen,

through his presidency, and post presidency, that is what's powerful statements come on social media, before cameras. he does much better in those venues than he does in a court of law. >> well, according -- he has made quite a bit of hey, if you, will over all of this. the mere fact that he is not saying anything, to prove his case in court, is kind of interesting in the context of all of this. but i have got to say, throughout all of this, trump has created a lot of smoke that he himself could have cleared if he wanted to. do you know what i mean? like, there is the question about why donald trump just simply hasn't explained why he hasn't given those [inaudible] back. >> it's interesting that you say this, because if you look at his behavior in the russia investigation, he really played against the fact that he knew that robert mueller was never going to seek anything. he was really able to use that to his advantage. he said kind of the same thing in the beginning of the revelations about this investigation. >> yeah. >> he assumed attorney general

merrick garland would be, much like mueller, silent, if he were to fill that void completely. but the justice department, interestingly, has found ways to fill the narrative void itself without compromising sources and methods, without speaking directly to the investigation, without saying anything in particular about donald trump. and i think you are seeing a recalibration happen in terms of how trump and his supporters are going to respond. >> right. because i think trump's learned behavior from the mueller investigation was, poke the bear, poke the bear, poke they are, nothing is gonna happen. and mueller had a press conference shortly after, [inaudible] released the information about the raid, the seizure, whatever we are calling it that president. and basically call trump swab bluff a little bit. >> absolutely. >> what has emerged in all of this, as you talk about the recalibration, is how deadly the department of justice is about following up on some of trump's claims. roll of rolling stone saying, tonight -- [inaudible] the fbi has begun asking administration officials whether they have heard of the

so-called standing order trump's claims to have given them. in recent days, the person said, the feds had sent interview requests, including to former and icy personnel. they standing order is a standing order to classify material, which is trump's kind of excuse for all of this and why he took the documents. i had a standing order to declassify. i had in previous times, nobodyt have followed up on that. but here is a doj calling people who are on the nsc and saying, hey, do you know anything about? this >> yeah. >> how do you think that affects the mindset inside trump blind land. and what is the meaningful impact in terms of this investigation? >> yeah, i think we are seeing down trump run up to get the facts that he does not control the justice department. and these are not his appointees anymore. so, they are actually just taking incredibly normal investigative steps, the kind of steps that prosecutors would take if presented with a claim, when they are investigating something, and they would try to make sure that it's true. -- it seems unusual, because of

the way that trump has been treated in the fast past, or because of his power of invincibility. and it's true that all of these things that are happening -- questions are being asked of the former president. >> if only there was a simple question, katie benner, of why trump took them. we don't know why he won't give them back. we are not exactly sure why he took them in the first place. but maggie haberman, your colleague at the new york times, had an interesting -- we will call it, well educated theorizing -- we played that tape of donald trump which a killer neil shoe, because he likes taking things, right? but she has an intriguing point she makes in the article today. it's, as mr. trump repeatedly had material sent up to the white house residence. and it was not always clear what happened to it. he sometimes asked to keep material after his intelligence briefings. but aides said he was so an interested in the paperwork during the briefings themselves that they never understood what he wanted it for. how do you read that, katie?

what could that mean? there is a lot that you could read between the lines there. and i want to know how you interpret that data point. >> i think it's is another way of saying that donald trump was not a typical white house official. he was not a typical president. and so the reasons for which someone would want classified, top secret, or sensitive information may not apply here. he not only loved trophies but he loved anything that had to do with his business interest, that had to do with his personal interest or his personal grievances. as you can imagine, in the course of being presented with something like the presidential daily brief, you could see information like that kind of come to him, and catches attention, almost like upward seeing something very shiny. >> yeah. and a bit craven, to not be interested in it in terms of how it affects his running of the country but how it might benefit him personally, down the line. i do want to ask, because we are all talking about mar-a-lago consistently, are we taking your eyes off the ball in terms of the january 6th investigation? because benny thompson, the chair of the committee, at the january 6th committee in congress, is saying they are having daily depositions, that

nearly all of trump's cabinet has been cooperating, willing to talk to the committee, i mean, what can you tell us about this sort of momentum over there and the doj's investigation, which seems to be catching up with the committee's work? >> sure. i wouldn't say that we are paying too much attention to mar-a-lago. because it is such a historically bizarre and strange and momentous thing to happen for former presidents residents to be searched, by warrant, by the justice department. i don't think that we will keep our eyes off of the january 6th committee for too long, particularly because liz cheney just lost her reelection. and she is going to fight to stay in the public spotlight as she decides whether or not to run for president. and the microphone that she has as the committee. the committee, to this point, has been having those interviews and depositions every day. and they are gathering more material and we can expect when that next hearing comes around, it is going to be as explosive as the committee can make it. >> and instead of losing the cooperation of former trump aides, they are gaining it. interesting developments all around. katie benner of the new york

times -- justice department with the new york times. katie, thanks for joining me. >> thanks for joining me. >> when we come, back the other courtroom that donald trump was focused on, the one in new york, where his longtime executive pleaded guilty to working with trump's company to rip off the government in attack scheme. and then said that, yes, he will testify [inaudible] trump organization. new york times investigative reporter susanne craig joins us here next. and transportation secretary pete buttigieg joins us live to talk about his one man campaign on the right-wing airwaves. we will be right back. right back. the day of the heart attack, i was scared. i didn't know what to do. seeing my daughter have a heart attack, it shook me. aspirin helps reduce the chance of another heart attack by 31%. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.

♪♪ allergies don't have to be scary. (screaming) defeat allergy headaches fast with new flonase headache and allergy relief! two pills relieve allergy headache pain? and the congestion that causes it! flonase headache and allergy relief. psst! psst! all good! when you really need to sleep. flonase headache and allergy relief. you reach for the really good stuff. zzzquil ultra helps you sleep better and longer when you need it most. its non-habit forming and powered by the makers of nyquil. >> once the hearings started,

there were no cameras allowed, but thanks to the dutiful work of courtroom stenographers, we do have some idea of how it went down. he was just one of the charges. the judge -- mr. weisselberg, it is alleged that you, together, with the trump organization, engaged in the seam constituting an ongoing course of conduct with intent to defraud more than one person, and to obtain property from more than one person by false and fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises. and so, obtained property with a value in excess of $1,000 from one or more such persons, specifically the united states

internal revenue service, the new york state department of taxation and finance, and the new york city department of finance. is that true? >> the defendant -- yes, your honor. >> donald trump's longest serving employee, allen weisselberg, walked into new york courtroom today, and pleaded guilty, again, and again, and again, to committing fraud, together with the trump organization. the judge literally used to the phrase, together with the trump corporation, over and over today, while reading the charges against allen weisselberg. weisselberg ended up pleading guilty to 15 felonies -- 15 -- all relating to fraud and tax evasion that occurred at the former presidents business. he is set to serve anywhere between 100 days and five months in prison at new york's notorious jail on rikers island. a lot of the media attention on this case is focused on the fact that allen weisselberg did not agreed to testify against trump himself as part of his plea agreement with the government. but weisselberg did agreed to testify against the trump

organization. and that is important. because it means that prosecutors will get to ask allen weisselberg about the crimes he committed at the trump organization. it will be able to ask him under oath who are the others involved in the criminal conspiracy that weisselberg has just pleaded guilty to taking part in. and we do know that there are only a handful of people who could have been involved in that conspiracy, because countless reports over the past few years have revealed that the trump organization is not a place where the decisions are made from without the sign of without someone out the last name trump. one of the reporters who has done some of the most extensive and detailed reporting on trump's business and finances is susanne craig. susanne craig which part of the team of new york times reporters who won a pulitzer prize for their in-depth reporting on trump's financing. that definitive reporting exploded the myth that donald trump was a self made billionaire -- she is exactly the person i

want to talk to you today. susanne craig, thank you for joining me. >> thank you. >> let's just first out with a sort of thing everything is trying to parse today. how meaningful is the difference between testifying against the trump organization and against testifying against trump? -- >> it's meaningful, but people are saying, how can he do that and not testify against trump? donald trump -- i've covered him for a number of years, his finances. he, up until the time he was [inaudible] you still saw, in every check, he is so entertaining -- testifying against donald trump. we are not really going to know how that goes until october, if it does go to trial, and it doesn't settle. i imagine what it is going to go is, yeah, donald trump was all for these perks. and said, take a car, and you can have one for your wife. these are some of the things that allen weisselberg is accused and pleaded in court today of dealing.

but did donald trump, no is the question. maybe donald trump said do this, and assumed that the taxes were going to be paid on them. because all of these things are fine to get four employees. but the problem is, whether or not reported to the irs as compensations. so, i think if i am imagining that is how that is going to go, it's going to be a case of, he didn't know. and there's no probably paper trail that knows, probably, that he did now. >> that would seem to be the suggestion, by the mere fact that allen weisselberg accepted the deal, or created the steal. >> it seems hard to believe. but in order to bring a case against donald trump, you have to show the criminal intent. and if he is not willing to testify and say, the boss knew, then he is going to say, it's kind of an, i alone did it. and maybe a few of the people that he mentions. but he is going to say, i was responsible and it was my fault. and that is going to hit the trump organization pretty hard, if it goes to trial. and the jury is going to hear that. but that is sort of where i kind of see it coming down, if it goes to trial.

>> would of the trump organization? how secure is its financial position at this point? can it weather this next chapter? >> it is hard to say. from what we have seen in their taxes, and that was up until 2008, most of their businesses do not make money. and they have had some hard years since then. they have had covid, january 6th, a number of businesses walked away from them. one of donald trump's big moneymakers heading into the white house was these on one of licensing deals, where he would get a couple million dollars here and there, to put his name on a hotel. all of those things have hurt him. and into this mission, we have seen himself so one of his old tragedy was, the old post office. i don't think people do that unless they need money. and he did that. we don't know exactly how much cash they are sitting on. but these things hurt. he is potentially, in new york state, looking at a civil fine that could be substantial. tens of millions.

it could go up into the high, close to [inaudible] but that fine, whether he is facing, if he goes to trial, -- that is not tax deductible. he is looking at -- you know, when you go to court, in a criminal case, they are not going to put an individual in jail because it is a corporation. that is going to be another fine, it could be substantial. he is going to start writing some, potentially, big checks, if these things don't go his way. >> and he is in the habit of having other people write checks for him, right? like, the rnc is paying all his legal bills. now it is time that donald trump may, in fact, have to pony up himself. >> yeah, and you could see additional headlines, with potentially more assets are sold. not just the fines are adding up, but the businesses, historically, they just are not making money. he has got a few things that make money. and that helps him out. but this is not a great news headline for them. >> you reported, back in 2020, about trump's audits. he was always saying, i cannot release my tax returns, because

i'm under audit. is he still under audit? >> he was under audit. we don't know if he still is. but that audit is very serious. and if it goes against him, we don't know the outcome, if there has been one -- that is a potentially another 100 million plus dollars that he's gonna have to repay the irs. there is a lot of things brewing in the background financially that are problematic. kgrounand you see pop up -- he doesn't talk about his businesses very often. occasionally, it pops up. for example he hosted the liv golf tournament, very controversial. i'm sure that brought in a lot of money. there are things that come. in that one off. you see, he's out, there and some monies come in. but there is a lot of storm clouds out there for his finances. >> and if he is convicted on the other legal fronts, then all of his lenders can call in their deaths as well. >> we don't know the confidence of the loan. but it is something called collateral damage. and a lot of loans have terms and there -- we don't know with his do -- but they say, if you are

convicted immediately, you have to pay the money back. so, that is another thing that is potentially hanging over him. and we don't know if the loans that he has, reciprocally, have that covenant. that is another thing that is weighing on him. most do, so they might. >> you would want to think that the money problems are the thing that is probably most deeply affecting him, where the threat of money problems. but i have got to ask, you are someone who has followed the incident out, the trials and tribulations of the trump organization instance and it's associated consigliere's. allen weisselberg is going to rikers island. this week, a doctor was found dead in rikers island, like, killed in the jail. the correction department captain stabbed in the neck at rikers island complex. this is not club mid med. this is not cushy. >> this is on the one hand. and then you've got to think covid -- >> are you surprised that he is going to, jail for trump, effectively? >> i think it is a pretty good

deal for him. when i think about the calculation he made, that he wanted to go to trial, and face, that and just have it continue to linger? or could he get this deal? with good behavior, he will get out in 100 days and he is probably going to have a lot of protection inside? i mean, i'm sure there was a lot of soul searching that went down on this. but i guess i am more just surprised at this juncture that i am that he's going to jail -- [laughs] and i really shouldn't be surprised that anything. it gives me some energy to say. it >> well, when susanne craig a surprise, we should all be surprised. thank you so much for joining me -- >> congratulations, by the way, on the new show. it's been great. last night was just fabulous. >> thank you so much, that means a lot. >> susanne craig, investigative reporter for the new york times. thank you again for your time, energies and reporting. still here to come tonight, as the biden administration celebrates a big win with the inflation reduction act becoming law, transportation

secretary pete buttigieg joins us live to talk about the biggest investment this country has ever made in fighting climate change and how he is going to sell it to the gop. okay, mayor pete! one prilosec otc in the morning blocks excess acid production for a full 24 hours. unlike pepcid, which stops working after 9. 24 hour protection. prilosec otc one pill, 24 hours, zero heartburn. i'm jonathan lawson here to tell you about life insurance prilosec otc through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance

on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling.

so call now for free information. panera chefs have crafted a masterpiece... succulent, seared chicken... a secret aioli... clean ingredients... in a buttery brioche roll. made fresh, to leave you... speechless. panera's new chef's chicken sandwiches. $1 delivery fee on our app. what can i du with less asthma? with dupixent, i can du more... crazy commutes... crowd control- have a nice day alex (thanks ms. ellen) ...taking the stairs. that's how you du more with dupixent, which helps prevent asthma attacks. dupixent is not for sudden breathing problems. it's an add-on-treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma that can improve lung function for better breathing in as little as two weeks.

and can reduce, or even eliminate, oral steroids. and here's something important. dupixent can cause allergic reactions that can be severe. get help right away if you have rash, chest pain, worsening shortness of breath, tingling or numbness in your limbs. tell your doctor about new or worsening joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop asthma medicines, including steroids, without talking to your doctor. are you ready to du more with less asthma? just ask your asthma specialist about dupixent. large out-of-state corporations have set their sights on california. they've written prop 27, to allow online sports betting. they tell us it will fund programs for the homeless. but read prop 27's fine print. 90% of profits go to out-of-state corporations,

leaving almost nothing for the homeless. no real jobs are created here. but the promise between our state and our sovereign tribes would be broken forever. these out-of-state corporations don't care about california. but we do. stand with us. between two initiatives on sports betting. prop 27 generates hundreds of millions every year to permanently fund getting people off the streets a prop 26? not a dime to solve homelessness prop 27 has strong protections to prevent minors from betting. prop 26? no protections for minors. prop 27 helps every tribe, including disadvantaged tribes. prop 26? nothing for disadvantaged tribes >> loads are dying of old age. vote yes on 27. and come every spring, the bottom strap out.

yep. you have to be careful, driving the kids over these roads. >> what is a citizen going to do? ♪ ♪ ♪ >> that was a clip from a genuine film that general motors made in 1954. it was called, give yourself the greenlight. and it was hollywood quality propaganda about highways. it framed traffic as a national crisis that was destroying the american dream. >> [inaudible] paid for. >> so, you've got a little hole in the [inaudible] away from the city smoke, out from the shadows of the factory. into the sun and clean air. raise a few kids, some flowers and vegetables. the big dream coming true. but it backfires into a pipe dream. exhaust pipe dream.

every night, it takes longer to get home, wasting more time and gasoline. no wonder everybody is acting so nervous. what is a citizen going to do? >> what can a citizen do? ♪ ♪ ♪ to help find out, a better highways contest was recently conducted. purpose? arouse nation wide thinking on how to plan and pay for the safe and adequate highways we need. >> as insane as this movie was, general motors was not alone in making films like these. ford made them, tao chemical made them. basically, every company that sold cars or asphalt tires, turn themselves into production companies and made movies in the 1950s, movie selling americans on the concept of highways. the reason is the federal highway eight act of 1956. companies were either pushing for that 51 billion dollar bill

to pass, where they were trying to convince americans to let them build highways through their neighborhoods, once the bill didn't pass. and it worked. the bill passed. the legislation built 41,000 miles of new highway. now, there is no doubt that the implementation of our country's new highway system was very often flawed, particularly since it often divided communities, especially those of color. but it became the largest public works project in the nation's history. it completely changed america. and now, today, with last year's bipartisan infrastructure act and this week's inflation reduction act, the biden administration is attempting the biggest infrastructure transformation our country has seen since that act in 1956. those pieces of legislation actually aim to correct some of the very real problems that the initial highway system imposed -- the pollution, the carbon emissions, the destruction of primarily black and brown communities. the goals of this law are ambitious. they fund a national network of electric vehicle charging

stations and encourage americans to switch over to electric cars with tax credits. the laws try to make public transit good enough, to convince americans to maybe even get out of those cars that they sit in. taken together, all of this could be another major shift for this country. but it is one that is going to have to be sold to the american public. and unlike in the 1950s, no a corporations are pumping out well produced films to help convince americans that environmentally sustainable transit is a worthwhile investment. this time around, one of the main salesman for this usually transformational part of the biden administration's agenda is transportation secretary pete buttigieg. secretary buttigieg has made a name for himself as one of the most effective communicators in the presidents cabinet, someone who has become known for his willingness, and also his ability, to speak to those across the political divide. but this time, he really has his work cut out for him. because attacking this part of biden's agenda is the

conservative media's bread and butter. >> let's start right at the top. pete highway to hell. that is the focus of tonight angle. >> mayor pete is pushing electric cars on struggling americans. >> in november, he told americans in rural areas, the poorest parts of this country, to go ahead and buy electric field goals, get a prius, even though they cost more than 50 grand. that's a month, he reminded us that our highways are racist. were recently, the transportation secretary has been telling us about the one thing that is going to fix our high fuel prices and clogged commercial airline travel. and that is, of course, abortion. >> like i said, transportation secretary pete buttigieg has his work cut out for him. he joins us live, coming up next. ng u next we won! yes! noooo...

noooo... noooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and each sheet is 2x more absorbent, so you can use less. i'll hold onto that. bounty, the quicker picker upper.

i'm jonathan lawson here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price?

you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information.

new astepro allergy. now available without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free spray. while other allergy sprays take hours astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can... astepro and go. >> this is pete buttigieg, biden's transportation secretary, seemingly out of touch with what it takes to own an electric vehicle in this country. listen. >> i am still astonished that some folks -- and i felt this, testifying in congress yesterday -- some folks seem to really struggle to let go of the status quo. >> struggle to let go of the status quo, astonished that there isn't a bigger transition to evs. you can put it up on the screen. the average cost of an electric vehicle in the united states today. senator, we wrote it down, didn't round down or up.

$66, 997, for a new ev. >> that was fox news, the day after transportation secretary pete buttigieg testified before the house transportation and infrastructure committee last month. if that fox news host had listen to what secretary buttigieg had said in that hearing, she would know that he had already offered a counter point. you can buy a brand-new, fully electric, chevy bolt, for 20 night $25,600 right now. and that doesn't even take into account how the biden administration's new electric vehicle tax credits can be applied in the purchase of used cars. so, how does the biden administration get past the relentless accusations and alarmism from the right? a man with that answer is joining us now. pete buttigieg, president biden's secretary of transportation. secretary -- mr. secretary -- thank you so much for being with us tonight. >> thanks for having me on, and thanks for sharing that 40s from the 50s.

that's fascinating. >> we are all fascinating fascinated by what is happening in america and what has come to pass. but i have got to ask you, because you are the one man band, at least the loudest and most effective one man band, in talking to the right, which has been highly resistant to renewables and electric vehicles. do you think you are going to be able to convince the viewers of fox news that what is happening here, with a biden administration would like to do, and indeed what the country must do in this century, is moved towards renewables? do you think anyone is listening to the message that you have been offering on fox news? >> i think so. look, obviously, you have a political apparatus, an opinion apparatus of commentators, politicians, trying to keep everything the same, trying to keep electric vehicles more expensive than they have to be, trying to keep people, locked into yesterday's energy.

but i think people are looking towards the future and looking for solutions. and at a certain point, there is going to be a disconnect between these populations and opinion hosts, who will go on a segment of a program like that, trying to get everybody to think that an electric vehicle in his country starts at $66, 000, when they same viewers are going to watch the commercials during the commercial breaks and see with the prices are. and what they won't see, is that we are fighting to get those prices lower. unless somebody like me is out there to talk about this -- that's part of why, for example, the inflation reduction act is going to benefit so many americans. we are the ones fighting to make evs cheaper, because we know if we make them more affordable for more americans, then more americans can save at the pump. and of course, that is also going to help us build up a u.s. made ev industry, with american jobs, american soil and american workers, all while helping us to fight climate change. i am under no illusions that

everybody here in washington is coming to this conversation in good faith. but i am also under no illusions that people who don't already agree with us are going to have any idea what our message is if we don't go out there and talk about it to anyone who will listen. >> yeah. and by no means, is anyone trying to shame you for talking to fox news or talking to republicans. because that is part of the job, right? but it seems like you are battling something more than just the economics of this. this feels like a cultural battle as much as anything else. so much of the american myth making revolves around the open road and the gas powered engine. those highway videos from the 1950s -- some people are still very much entrenched in that sort of thinking about what kind of country this is. and i wonder how you think you combat that. people want to hold on to this past of america that is no longer our president and certainly is not going to be our future. but how do you get them to let go of what you call -- i think -- euphemistically, perhaps, the

status quo. how do you think about your work in that vein? >> i think the most important thing to remember is, if we want to be true to a tradition, we have got to remember that that tradition was about looking to the future. in other words, the best things about our past had to do with getting out of the past. and the worst things about our past are the things we do not have to repeat. so, when we are thinking about how not just roads but transportation in general should look going into the 20 twenties, 2030, east 2040's -- making it work by the 2050's in a whole new way -- it is not going to meet the needs of this country to have the mentality of the 1950s. we know better. in some ways, we knew better than. but we definitely know better now when it comes to climate, when it comes to how our cities are laid out. of course, there is a history to it, there is a romance to it. and some of that should be honored. some of that will always be with us -- the open road, road trips are always going to be an important

part of what it is to live in america. but we also need to create more options for people, more opportunities for people, whether you live in a big city or a smaller community with, for example, making it safer and easier to get around with public transit or on foot on a bike -- so, whether you own a car or not, you don't always have to drag two tons of metal with you everywhere that you go. this is also an issue of equity. we have got to make sure that we have ways of organizing our infrastructure for the future that don't exclude people, or worse, divide or segregate, something that we have seen a lot of in this country. but there is no reason we have to do it all over again just because that is how things worked in the past. >> i wonder, politically, how you guys are thinking about this moment. because it is obviously a huge -- it is a huge piece of legislation for the president. and we have seen some increasingly positive numbers in the midterm races, or at least in the projections about the midterm races. i think there is polling out today that has democrats up by 4%, generally speaking, broadly,

in the senate races that are happening this november. we have some senate seats that look like they could go into the democratic side of the ledger, raphael warnock to keep his seat, -- john fetterman in pennsylvania, mark kelly. -- do you think this plays? does the i.r.a. -- or is it gas prices? i think because you are the transportation secretary and have to think about gas prices. how much of this, this sort of lofty proposition of new future, vis-à-vis that administration, and how much of this is about just people saying, oh, my $3 gas is $3 a gallon, not six? >> i think people are looking around at how their lives are different, how they are shaped by forces around the world and political decisions made in washington. that is one of the reasons that gas prices is something that is on everyone's mind. obviously,, gas prices are not controlled by any individual policy maker in washington. but they are part of what it is

like to live in the american economy and americans hold those in charge responsible for the overall conditions. and to some extent, we have leaned into that. the president took a lot of steps to help stabilize gas prices, not that he controls them. but things like releasing the oil from the oil reserve was designed to bring some relief and breathing room instability. i think that has contributed to this falling of gas prices. i think what is going to be very important in talking about the inflation reduction act -- and, for that matter, the bipartisan infrastructure law that we are so excited to be implementing in my department -- is not to get so hung up on talking about the legislative mechanism where the finer points of the policy. and really focus on the difference that it is actually going to make. i mean, look at the inflation reduction act. part of what that contains is lower prescription drug prices. and most people are on board with that, think we should have done it a long time ago. it really was kind of the american people, the president and democratic senate and house members on one side of this policy issue, big pharma and

republican senate and house members on the other. but that is not how the american people end up. i think i saw somewhere, something like 70% of republicans, out around the country, think it is a good idea to let medicare negotiate prescription drug prices, even if you got 0% support among republican members of the house in the senate, when the vote came up. so, talking about these specific things are going to make a difference in your life, whether it is a more affordable electric vehicle, whether it is more affordable prescription drugs, whether it is the tax credit said i want to help you make your house more energy efficient, save on your energy bills, or the fact that right now we are now able to announce improvements to ports, improvements to roads, and bridges, and neighborhoods around america -- a whole new round of grants that we just rolled out, that are going to benefit everything from airports to pedestrian crossings, that people are feeling. and that is where i think we need to keep the focus. >> yeah. unfortunately, what we are hearing on, for example, on fox

news, is pablo pablum, about racist highways, which, in typical fox fashion, is not, accurate, to be euphemistic. and glosses over what is a really serious issue. we talk about this 1950s highway act. and what it did is pave through black and brown neighborhoods and destroy communities of color. you guys are addressing that in the ira. and you guys are -- i want to ask you a bit more about that. you have pledged three billion dollars to remove some of the highways that the federal highway act built and destroy those communities. can you tell us more about what that means? and where you are looking to do this, since so many communities were touched and affected by this? >> yeah. one thing i have noticed is that, everywhere i go, i raised this concern, that there is often a highway or an interchange or a railway that divides one neighborhood for another, that removed a

neighborhood or is even segregating a community. heads not and you can just see in peoples eyes that they are picturing their communities version of that. this is not something that just happened in the south or just happened in one place or another. we see it everywhere. it happened in pittsburgh, it happened in st. paul, minnesota. it happened in the south as well. every part -- it happened right here in washington d.c.. and the point here is not to diminish our ability to get around roads and highways. it is to connect people, where infrastructure is doing the possibility opposite of, that dividing. the point is to connect, not to divide. and yet, in many places, it is actually connecting somewhat dividing others. and the thing that strikes me is, why wouldn't you want us to be dealing with that? when we are preparing the vision for the future. now, there is a lot of different shapes that this can take. in some cases, and again, you are already seeing atlanta, for example, working on a project to do just this -- sometimes it is a very intense project, where you are going to

be capping an entire highway that is running through the heart of the city, putting something over it so that it is connected. and maybe who have newland that can be used for communities, for park or developed. sometimes it is not going to be as big an intervention of that. it might be more about reducing transit or pedestrian crossings, to safely get over or under that railroad or highway. over or unde the whole point of this initiative it is that it is going to look different in different communities. i'm not going to sit at the d.o.t. headquarters and figure out what is right for the community. we are going to invite them to come to us, to apply to us with their ideas, about how this funding could help them get better connected. because, again, everywhere i go you see this is an issue. the very fact that our american english vocabulary includes the phrase, wrong side of the tracks which, of course, is a very racially loaded phrase as well -- tells you everything you need to know about infrastructure, whose purposes can to connect, is can also be dividing.

>> such a practical and poetic point. more connection, less division. people buttigieg, this is why you are the secretary of transportation. thank you so much for being with us tonight. thank you good luck in your efforts. when she was only 16 years old. it's all right there in the census. see where a few details can lead with the 1950 census on ancestry. frustrated with occasional digestive upsets? align women's probiotic can lead naturally helps promote a balanced gut and soothe occasional digestive upsets.

plus, it supports vaginal health. it's recommended by gastroenterologists two-times more than any other probiotic brand. try align. new astepro allergy. now available without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free spray. while other allergy sprays take hours

astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can... astepro and go. we ran out of time again

tonight, so we are going to put out one extras segment that we had planned online, at msnbc.com slash alex wagner tonight it's a. good one. now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, my friend. >> alex, you are kidding, you had another segment on the way? >> it is a good one, an important one. why leave it on the cutting room floor. let's give it to the people on the internet. >> listen, if you need more time, just let me know. just ta