♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. we have breaking news today in the back and forth over that highly sensitive information contained in the affidavit that was used to obtain a search warrant for the disgraced ex-president's private residence. just a few moments ago judge bruce reinhart order rd the release of the redacted version of the affidavit by noon tomorrow. in his ruling, reinhart said that the affidavit submitted by doj just before noon today with redactions, those redactions intended to protect doj's ongoing investigation and its sources and methods is, quote, narrowly tailored to serve the government's interest in the integrity of the ongoing investigation. the impending release of the affidavit marks an extraordinary moment in a truly unprecedented

probe into an ex-president's handling of classified material. new york times notes that it is incredibly rare for even a partial affidavit to be released at all. they add this, quote, the submission by the justice department is a significant legal mile post in an investigations that has swiftly emerged as a major threat to trump, whose lawyers have offered a confused and at times stumbling response, but it is also an inflexion point for attorney general merrick garland who is trying to balance protecting the prosecutorial process by keeping secret details of the investigation and providing enough information to defend his decision to request a search unlike any other in history. the impending release of a critical document in doj's investigation into the ex-president is where we begin today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. carol leonnig is here and former national security adviser to

president obama and neal katyal is back former solicitor general and now law professor at georgetown university, all msnbc contributors. carol, first on this news, interesting outcome. it seemed at the beginning that the investigation itself was so sensitive and that affidavit would contain information that might jeopardize it, but it seems that the judge has landed on a heavily redacted document that may or may not illuminate us much at all. >> yes. i think it's going to end up being what the government wants which is very limited information released. it is absolutely correct that it's unusual to say the very least for an affidavit to be released before charges are brought, are about an indictment is brought and what seems to me a good way away from that. so this is an attempt by the

judge to show as little as he possibly can and i would say as much as he possibly can and for the government to show as little as he possibly can, and i think the fact that the government or, forgive me, nicole, the judge has pretty much said he's siding with the government on their choices that we're going to see very little information here. it may add to our timeline, however, right? a time line of when the government learned to be suspicious, for example, of the trump team's claims that there were no more classified information, documents at mar-a-lago or when they had some interviews that led them to be very worried that some of these documents might be, if not falling into foreign adversary's hands being treated as regular paper at mar-a-lago at the president's part-time resident. that's a big issue. i would just emphasize one other thing about this affidavit, nicole, which is it is -- we

keep using the term unprecedented, right? it's unprecedented to have a search of the former president's home. it's unprecedented to have the affidavit partially released, but i think what i'm hearing from sources over and over again at the department of justice is that they realize this is so unusual. they realize merrick garland had to come out and say something to take -- to make clear to the public, this is not some errant fbi agent deciding to raid a former president's home. they realize that some transparency, if not a little tiny bit of leg is necessary when they're taking the steps they're taking and let's put us unprecedented on another part of this chapter which is unprecedented for a former president to claim like a kid on a playground, these documents are mine and to do that for now what appears to be more than 19 months and for his own white house counsel and deputy white

house counsel to argue for returning this information and for it not to be returned and to include top secret special access program information. that's just an unprecedented shocker. >> and i wish we had saved unprecedented shocker for this news cycle, carol, because i feel like we used it up when mike flynn was fired on day 13, but i just want to drill down on what you're saying because in truth, the investigative reporting including in "the washington post" is almost disclosing the kinds of information that is making clear that there were very serious concerns and the post has had a credible and a steady run of scoops about emails and communications between trump's lawyers and the national archives, but every revelation makes the story so much worse for donald trump.

every new kernel hardens the time line and paints more egregious the threat to national security that the is donald trump. >> absolutely. and i mean, hats office to the times, too, for some great work they've done. thank you for the compliment for our post team. i would say that while donald trump kind of orchestrated the leak of a key document the other day thinking that it showed, oh, it's got joe biden's name in it and it showed the president was gunning for me, it didn't show that. what the document and additional reporting that we did showed was the president, the former president has had a chaotic packing of documents, a contradictory bed of excuses for why he has classified records still at mar-a-lago swifrping over in the end of august 2022 and that he -- his own team were urging him repeatedly to return

these documents and if the government did everything it was bent over backwards to be patient and the classified records in the 15 boxes that were returned in the early part of this year. the fbi was supposed to look at those the week of april 12th, at trump's request and at the request of his lawyers, the fbi agreed to put that off for a month while apparently, the trump team was looking for somebody with a national security clearance that could review the records which is something they could not find. the government has, from my reading, of all of the material we have in front of us and all of the reporting that my colleagues and i have done, the government has done everything despite biting its nails, the top secret information is out there floating around in west palm beach has -- has paused and tried to do this slowly, cautiously, carefully and

finally, they just gave up and threw up their hands and had to do the raid as far as i can tell because they saw in surveillance footage that there was access to these records by random people, and that put a "b" in their bonnet appropriately. i think if we had classified records in a shed behind our home we would be raided with a no-knock warrant when that happens and this has been going on for months. >> i want to read you judge reinhart's order. the government has met its portion of the affidavit because disclosure would reveal, one, the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents and uncharged parties. two, the investigation strategy, direction, scope, sources and methods and three, grand jury information protected by the federal rule of criminal

procedure. tell me about what we learned today from what will be released in less than 24 hours from now? >> so we learned, nicole, basically that the justice department won today, as expected and in the passage you're reading says that he agrees with the justice department's redactions and the blacking out of certain parts of the affidavit and i wouldn't be remotely surprised if they weren't blocking out huge chunks of the affidavit because it would be responsible for them to risk the disclosure of key witnesses or grand jury information or anything like that at this point in the investigation. so now what happens here is the justice department could appeal because there is a principle at stake which is we don't release affidavits, period. when that is basically the department's general position, as you said, it's incredibly rare for any sort of release and even a partial release to happen

and sitting in the chair of the solicitor general, and i don't think i would appeal this and the justice department got everything they wanted and as carol says it's an unprecedent investigations. on the other hand, news organizations could appeal and i would expect them to because they want to see more information, that's kind of, you know, their function and so on. i wouldn't be surprised if we see an appeal in the 11th circuit and there's one last point i'd make about this. i what those proposed r dakszs and the part that's not redacting and i expect it will there have damning information and it's one thing to vent witnesses and the grand jury information, that's what the redactions are, but i expect in that affidavit to be a good discussion of all of the attempts that the justice department and the fbi had to try and retrieve these documents

from mar-a-lago, what they thought wases there and what they were hearing was there and that president trump was thumbing his nose at them and that part, i suspect, will come out maybe as early as tomorrow and it underscores what merrick garland is doing here and he's just following the rules, but he's winning by following the rules. the rules are you don't leak information and you don't release the affidavit and the like, but here a court is ordering that to happen and it parallels something that happened yesterday which i know we'll be talking about later which is the release of the barr memo on whether president trump could be indicted for the russia investigation. garland could have released that, but he waited for a court to force his hand and that's standard doj process and procedure and it allows us to look at that and boy, that's pretty damning about donald trump, too. >> neal, we'll get into the substance in a minute, but you're making an important point

that garland is guided by the principle of protection and privacy. would you expand on that? >> the department generally has views, for example, in the affidavit. if you have a law enforcement investigations, you don't want your affidavit justifying the search which is filed ex parte which means the other side doesn't get to see it and it's a federal judge and a federal magistrate judge for good reason because people could hide documents and intimidate witnesses and what donald trump is known to do, not just what trump is known for in investigation after investigation across the country. there is an important principle at stake to say, look, we do not want a federal court to order us to release any information. the judge came back and said, look, if i'm going to have to release some, tell me what i can release without doing harm to your investigation and that's

what the department filed earlier today and that's what the judge accepted. so the department followed its principle to the letter and not just in this investigation, but future loans and now as a result, i suspect some bad information about affidavit again, just following what the judge underscores, he has some wears on the team that are actually harming his interest and they're not careful about what they're asking for and this is a good illustration for it. >> ben rhodes, neal brought bill barr into the conversation, and i want to stay there. one of the things we keep talking about being in uncharted territory as a country covering a search approved by a judge of an ex-president's home and not the what of it, but why because he had classified materials that

could endanger u.s. national security in his possession and the surveillance footage, we know from what has come out shows people not just moving these boxes around, but repackaging some of the materials that may or may not be classified. it makes me want to know a whole lot more about what he was protected from while he was there, about how these function when he was in this much trouble and had the protections of the executive. what do you see when you see these investigations start, and maybe the tip of the iceberg reveal itself? >> i'm really glad you asked that question, nicole, because this is what i've been thinking about the last couple of days because for eight years i was in a white house with the highest security clearance and then for the first year after we left the white house i stayed on with president obama for a year, and the important thing for people to understand is the transition from january 20, 2017, for me to

the '21st was dramatic and for president obama even more traumatic. because you go from being on top of a massive infrastructure that includes the white house staff and the various departments of government to just having a few staffers working for you and by the way, those staffers do not have security clearance. there are two elements and the security clearance, and i have to testify in front of some of the russian investigations in congress and even though i was dealing with documents that i'd seen, i had to get a security clearance on a temporary basis just to read the same documents that i was familiar with in being in government and none of the people had the security clearances and anyone, more likely than not, those are not clear that they should be doing

that and donald trump for his risk taking and criminality, for four years we had an interference for them in the of the white house office and tlieing to keep him fromity in crimes or violating norms and the infrastructure. the that entire infrastructure went away when he ran into interference. no longer was bill barr theror even a pat sip len toe hello him. this is donald trump stripping the pows are of the presidency and violating the law because he's in a facility where he's not supposed to have classified documents and people with expertise to keep him from walking into the legal huge

troubled waters that he's in right now, and so i think it speaks to what happens when you pull back the veil from the wizard of oz here and it's just donald trump and a handful of funkies at mar-a-lago who are break the law and not following the justice department. >> i want to ask you about carol's paper, "the new york times" did four years of reporting about donald trump's disdain for the intelligence community and disinterest in all of its products namely the pdb. it was consumed by jared kushner and the national security adviser and never voraciously consumed by the ex-president. what do you think he took and why do you think he took it? >> well, what that is the $64,000 question, nicole. in terms of what he took, when this started to come out, the 700 pages of classified documents and things like that, that tells me that these are intelligence reports and the

most benign explanation he took some letters from kim jong-un and a few of his favorites from foreign leader phone calls that are classified just because they could be discussing sensitive matter, but that wouldn't get you to the volume of classified material that we're talking about, nor would that get you the kind of redactions that we're apparently hearing about. the fact that the government is so sensitive and the nature of this information being public shows you that this is intelligence material derived from sensitive sources and methods that if they know what those documents say they could find out potentially how they reflect them. he did take sensitive intelligence reports that potentially revealed either military movements or intelligence, and sores that if eblgs pleased would be damaging to europe sensitive security and mar-a-lagoa been the none one bar that a you lous five years

and it was of people getting the access why information. that is the question we have to answer. there's no good answer about donald trump. if he was sentimental about this information, and he wanted it around, it's still illegal and he could release at certain point because he's cherry picking intelligence to help him on certain thing, that's illegal and that's using intelligence collection of the united states government for personal gain which raises significant questions. if it was worse than that, if it was more nefarious and he aimed to profit off of this and leverage from holding this information on other people and then this is someone who is manipulating the taxpayer funded tens and tens of billions a year of american intelligence collection for his own personal gain, there's nothing that would surprise me about that because whatever he did, donald trump did it because he thought it was in his own personal interest. not in any national interest. there's no national interest in

a former president having hundreds of pages of classified documents at a resort hotel in florida, just as there's no legal basis for him to have that information, either. >> carol leonnig, he also said i'm with him, they didn't take much of what he created yet he took it all. we grappled with questions of intent and knowing trump's intent. there's new reporting in "the washington post" that makes clear that trump had the intent to take the classified documents and the knowledge that after the fact that what he'd done was wrong and he needed these documents back, and i want to explore that with you and neal. i want to read some of this reporting and this is the archives asking for these records in 2021. understanding that roughly two dozen boxes of original presidential records were kept in the residence of the white house over of the course of trump's last year in office, by pat cipollone that they need to

be wrote gary stern, the agency's chief counsel in may 2021, a copy fully reviewed by "the washington post." the records of the effort by the government to get these classified materials back into safekeeping seemed to be extensive. talk about what that does in terms of annihilating any future claim by trump that he either didn't know they were there or didn't know they shouldn't be? >> i mean, let's be clear. it's his former white house counsell, the person he designate of being in charge of negotiating with the archives and what records should be moved out of the residence and moved out of the oval and that is the person telling the archives, pat cipollone, yeah. i agree. all of the boxes should be in donald trump's hands and not in your hands in mar-a-lago.

the person that donald trump hand picked along with the slew of other former deputy white house counsels to give him guidance on what to do, said return it, and that wasn't the first time. he's some great reporting by my colleagues, josh stosy and georgeal mainy. when we heard the other did i, that tells you how mean months has been going on, bino. much, much willier donald trump was on alert about what was going on. the fact that the 15 records -- the 15 boxes were returned in january struck us as he's returning something, it was what he knew existed. it wasn't some mystery releasees that they didn't know had left the white house with him on

january 20, 2020. it's not as if that was some surprise to at least him and likely it wasn't a surprise to aides who helped him pack up and leave. >> so, neal, where does this go from here? >> so in the law you need to show an actus reas about criminal act and a mens rea about a bad criminal intent and what carol's paper does is it establishes for prosecutors both of those things. so with respect to the bad act, this information shows it's trump himself, not someone else, not some subordinate who was signing off on these decisions and actively refusing to turn this material over to the government when asked and then as to the criminal intent, it shows that he intentionally did it. it wasn't some of the inadvertent mistake back on january 20th when president biden was walking into the whis.

it was rather something intentional ask persistent is some of the onces like kash patels of the world willing to say anything to defend their guy. these are people who generally try and color within the lines in response to an official inquiry i suspect are going to tell the absolute truth, and so i think investigators now will be pursuing all of those leads and ultimately, i do think that this is the elements of a criminal prosecution for a serious, federal felony were met. i used to handle this kind of top secret information. i can tell you if i did what donald trump is accused of doing here, i would definitely be in jail for a long, long time. i was national security adviser of the justice department. we don't like this stuff and

it's a serious, serious thing. >> charl leonnig for your reporting and for starting us off today. ben and neal are sticking around. when we come back, the news that broke in this hour yesterday. then attorney general's bill barr's justification for clearing donald trump of obstruction and we'll get more reaction to that and what the justice department's spin by barr unleashed in the years that followed. plus the number three house republican went all in on backing some extreme republican candidates this week in her home state of new york. they lost. can her hard right turn into and surrounding and being of maga world cost her her seat in congress? we'll talk with her democratic challenger coming up. later in the program there are now 14 states with near-total abortion bans on the books and democratic candidates all across the country are running on that right being stripped away for

millions and millions of americans this november. a look at what that fight looks like and sounds like and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. stay with us. continues after a quick break. stay with us download the app and earn free food with every order. 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 kids, one year they want all dinosaurs stuff the next, camels. - llamas. - llamas. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. you sure that's not a camel? yeah. whatever you say. (woman vo) sailing a great river past extraordinary landscapes into the heart of iconic cities

is a journey for the curious traveler, one that many have yet to discover. exploring with viking brings you closer to the world, to the history, the culture, the flavors, a serene river voyage on an elegant viking longship. learn more at viking.com

so many people are overweight now, a and asking themselves, an elegant viking longship. "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now there's release from golo. it naturally helps reverse insulin resistance, stops sugar cravings, and releases stubborn fat all while controlling stress and emotional eating. at last, a diet pill that actually works. go to golo.com to get yours. technically when enamel is gone, you cannot get it back. but there are ways you can repair it. i'm excited about pronamel repair

because it penetrates deep into the tooth to help actively repair acid-weakened enamel. i recommend pronamel repair to my patients. the memo from the trump-era doj that formed the basis for former ag bill barr's decision to clear trump of obstruction of justice accusations and charges in connection with robert mueller's russia probe sparked an explosive response overnight from legal experts and former prosecutors.

that memo which was signed by top barr doj officials callahan and steven engel conformed the contract beyond recognition to embolden a then-president who was abusing the powers of his office to protect his political and personal interest. the freedom of information lawsuit prompted the release of this memo reacted this way, quote. the memo supports the chilling conclusion that any president could interfere with any investigation if they believe it could damage them politically. nyu law professor ryan goodman called the memo a get out of jail free card in a statement to "the new york times" neal katyal, i guess the only hoax was the one trump doj played on all of us. >> the question that pete strzok couldn't answer for me, if you thought the mueller report was garbage and it turned out nothing could endanger trump

criminally, why work so hard and spend nine pages tearing it apart? >> 100%, nicole. i think this memo just goes to show what we already knew in a way which is that donald trump got a blanket pass on his illegal conduct for far too long and there are all sorts of substantive criticisms of the memo, some of which you're referring to and others like the nine-page memo blows off the accusations that donald trump was giving pardons to flip witnesses to his benefit. that's not anywhere mentioned in this. the memo gets key supreme court decisions absolutely wrong. there's a substantive critique. what we haven't talked about is the procedural critique because mueller was a special counsel and i regulated that when i was staffer in 1999 and the whole point of the special counsel was to provide an independent

investigation and prosecution of high-level executive branch officials including, of course, including the precedent and what happened here is the appointed mueller special counsel, but when it came time for the key question, are you -- did donald trump commit federal felonies, mueller refused to answer because of a department of justice policy that says you can't indict a sitting president, a policy that goes back to 1973. barr said, well, in that case, i get to decide that for myself, and so he appoints this guy, steve engel who is at the office of legal counsel who is not a criminal division. this is a totally separate part and engel is a political appoint see and this political appointee writes this nine-page tendentious memo and i don't think donald trump committed any crimes. it is absurd start to finish and it is a betrayal of what the

special counsel regulations are all about. >> neal, just a quick follow up. i mean, if the steve engel is running the office that drafted the memo that says the president can't be indicted why can't steve engel author the declaration memo. if you can't indict him anyway, why did steve engel put in writing the very thing that his office made him possible? >> i can't fathom it. again, either substantively or procedurally and why the office of legal counsel is opining on facts and the criminal investigation, i've certainly never seen that done by the office of legal counsel before and as you say, if you can't indict a sitting president what is it that you're actually doing here and the thing that they're doing is providing as professor ryan goodman said they get out of jail free card and it's now a get out of jail card for other folks.

if garland were a political operative and he could use this to the extent there were any accusations of wrongdoing not just by president biden, but any member of the executive branch to protect their guy or their gal and it is fundamentally inconsistent with the rule of law. >> so, ben, you and i both had a hand in sort of the public relations and shaping of a message in politics, and i see this memo. they may think they wrote a legal document, but you only write this document if the mueller report can't stand, if the 23-month mueller probe and their findings and we know from robert mueller's own testimony and press conference that he said if i could say that he hadn't broken the law i would. so the translation is donald trump broke the law, but that couldn't go. that couldn't be released. that couldn't be what came of the 23-month investigation. so it is clear that this document was with the political intent that was not pure and

with a very derogatory intent of smearing and coloring the 23-month investigation and it explains why mueller was so upset and there was reporting in "the new york times" and "the washington post" that mueller called this office and was upset. you can't put any of the toothpaste back in the tube and back to my first question to you, how does it fill out the understanding of how heavily donald trump depended on doj to put his finger on the scale for him? >> i mean, enormously, nicole. the extent to which doj, particularly after bill barr took over was functioning as an extension of the political interest of the trump white house particularly on the mueller report. i had a lot of responsibility for how the information was presented to the public. neal would know first hand that if i had sought out of the white house to manipulate the presentation of criminal cases or cases that implicated the

white house in some fashion, there would have been about a million red flags that went up from within the justice department. not only was the justice department not preventing white house interference. they were essentially an arm of the white house political operation throughout this whole thing, and if you remember when barr released his summary of the mueller report which was not at all really an accurate or complete summary, it was welcomed as a master stroke of a public relations strategy. that's not the role of an attorney general. >> i think what's interesting is that bill barr kind of rescued donald trump from the findings of the mueller report which determined absolutely that there were a lot of concerning contacts between the russians and the trump campaign including contacts that led to criminal prosecutions and that there were lots of efforts to obstruct this investigation and bill barr came in and decided to put that all under a lid for donald trump. he doesn't have anything like

that infrastructure around him right now as i was saying earlier. he doesn't have the wheels of the justice department and as neal said the very peculiar choice of people for political appointees of the office of legal counsel weighing in on criminal issues. he doesn't have that, now, he has a bunch of lawyers that they're engaged in right now and it's interesting to juxtapose these two things because this memo demonstrates how this is benefiting from the ex-president and at the same time we're seeing what happens when he doesn't have this infrastructure today. ? thank you very much for sticking around. a democratic candidate hoping the momentum that we've seen among voters to safeguard american democracy will propel him in november. this time going up a republican powerful leader backing the big

lie and he will join us after a quick break. e and he will join quick break.

in a way that i kept trying to explain this to people as the campaign was building momentum and people were, like, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. and then just volunteers were pouring in and grassroots volunteers were pouring in and yard signs were popping up and it got bigger than certainly me and certainly bigger than the district and it became this

powerful movement and that's when you know. >> yeah. >> that's when you know that something visceral has been tapped and unleashed and now i think that momentum from kansas to now this and it is palpable, and it is actually positive. like, people have something to not only hope for, but to, like, fight for. people are ready to fight. >> music to the ears of democrats and not to the gop that they want to hear three months from the midterm elections and tuesday's results, that gentleman's victory shows clearly that democrats and their voters and maybe more than just their voters are energized right now. evidently unconcerned with all of those pun dit predictions about some sort of red wave in november or the history of how a president's party usually fares, putting up such a fight might have been considered wishful thinking even just a couple of months or weeks ago, but now holding the house for democrats is real. it's a very real opportunity for

them and there may even be a possibility of gaining seats in some surprisingly vulnerable districts. consider this, new york's 21st. it is currently represented by the number three republican in the house. her name is elise stefanik. she replaced liz chain ney leadership. she was once a darling of the gop establishment, but she has made a turn to full-on maga. her opponent, moderate democrat matt castelli and he joined the cia shortly after september 11th helping country hunt terrorists and protecting itself and he was in two national security counsels and congressional nominee for new york's north country mike castelli. tell us what happened after january 6th. >> thank you, nicole. great to be with you here. after january 6th we really saw

this attack against our country and i knew that i needed to step up to honor my oath to the constitution after watching someone like elise stefanik betray hers. she helped to spread the big lie. we've all seen that stefanik has become the defender in chief of january 6th and she turned her back on our democracy, and i didn't spend my career defending our country from violent extremists only to see folks like stefanik embraced here at home. we need someone who is focusing on putting our country before our party and focusing on the security and strength and that's what my career is all about and that's what our campaign is all about. >> i spent my career in politics sort of in the years after september 11th and you did something much more noble and joined the cia and protected our national security, but it does re-shuffle the deck, and i wonder if you view this moment for our country after january 6th and having the same

parallels that propelled you into public service after 9/11. >> absolutely. we saw this great threat at the heart of our democracy and the peaceful transfer of power and these are the hallmarks of our democracy and this race that i'm in now is the front-line battle in the soul for america. stefanik is leading these forces of extremism that are now threatening our freedoms. she would destroy our democracy and we're building this country before party coalition of democrats, independents and republicans that can defeat her because voters are and you add my good friend pt ryan, and we're looking for folks who would fight to protect reproductive freedom, and we're looking for folks who would protect our democracy. that's exactly who i am. i've spent my career fighting

extremism overseas and hunting down extremist leaders and now my mission is to defeat elise stefanik. >> she's a national leader in the movement. it seems like you're having this late surge. tell me how the campaign is going and what the conversations are like with voters in the district. >> voters are tired of the divisiveness and extremism that they're hearing and seeing from folks like stefanik certainly at a national level. they want folks to come together and low pressure us solve the common challenges that we have with common sense solutions. the loudest voices in the room these days seem to be on the extremes. congresswoman stefanik using the platform as the number three inhouse republican leadership that threatens our safety, security and strength and they want someone, i think, that will step up and unify us and that's why we're building a country before party coalition of those democrats who certainly showed up on tuesday to move us forward in this race, but also

independents and republicans, as well. this is an opportunity to build this kind of coalition and to show the country that we're not going to stand for the kind of division that's holding our country back. >> matt, we'll keep an eye on your race. be in touch with any developmentses there and thank you for spending some time with us today. >> absolutely. thank you so much, nicole. good to be with you. >> of course. some breaking news this afternoon, some bad outcomes for the conservative operation known as project baritas closely aligned in mission with donald trump. there were two guilty pleas of individuals who, get this, stole the diary of president joe biden's daughter ahead of the 2020 election. those details and what it means for the ongoing investigation into project veritas next. ct ve.

to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war, forced to flee their homes.

a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger. exhausted and shell shocked from what they've been through. every dollar you give can help bring a meal, a blanket, or simply hope to a child living in conflict. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today with your gift of $10 a month, that's just $0.33 a day. we cannot forget the children in places like syria, born in refugee camps, playing in refugee camps, thinking of the camps as home. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, your gift can help children like ara in afghanistan, where nearly 20 years of conflict have forced the people into extreme poverty

weakened and unable to hold herself up, ara was brought to a save the children's center, where she was diagnosed and treated for severe malnutrition. every dollar helps. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, just $0.33 a day. and thanks to special government grants that are available now, every dollar you give can multiply up to ten times the impact. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special save the children tote bag to show you won't forget the children who are living their lives in conflict. every war is a war against children. please give now.

a pair of guilty pleas in new york today in connection with a years-along federal investigation into something so sick and twisted that happened in the late, frantic stages of the 2020 campaign before president biden's victory. the theft of a diary that was kept by his daughter as she recovered from addiction. amy harris and robert curlander admitted today in court that they were part of a conspiracy to transport stolen materials, the diary, from florida, where ashley biden had been living, to new york. they pleaded guilty to selling her belongings to the

conservative group, project veritas, in the weeks before the 2020 election. why would they do that? let's bring in mike schmidt, "new york times" washington correspondent and msnbc national security contributor. mike, it feels like this might just be the beginning of this story. tell us what happened today, who they were, and what might happen next. >> so, in the final weeks of the 2020 election, as donald trump was going on and on about hunter biden's laptop, there was this other effort to essentially publicly attack one of biden's, you know, biden's other child, his daughter, and what was happening is that these two individuals in florida, the ones who pled guilty today, had stolen a diary that belonged to ashley biden. she had kept it while she was recovering from addiction. they stole it. they took it to a trump fund-raiser. someone at the trump fund-raiser said they weren't interested in it and to give it to the fbi, perhaps learning a lesson from

2016. the individuals that had the diary, the defendants who pled guilty today, were connected to project veritas, this conservative group that has tried to help donald trump in different ways and undermine the media and such. and project veritas looks at this diary and thinks it's a game-changer, thinks, wow, we could really help donald trump here. this could be -- this could be a very significant thing in this very close election. but they were concerned about whether it was really ashley biden's diary, and what was laid out in court papers today is that project veritas asked -- told these individuals who had stolen the diary to go back into the home where the diary had been and to take additional items and that in exchange for those additional items, they were paid for them. now, this is a story about the

intersection of the first amendment and politics and the justice department, sdny. as a media organization, you can be in receipt of stolen property, right? edward snowden stole those documents and gave them out to the media. but as a media organization, you cannot participate in the actual stealing of the documents. you can't go back to edward snowden and say, why don't you go back into the nsa and go break into these things and take these additional items. that brings you into the crime. so, what we see today are these two defendants, one of them agreeing to cooperate, both pleading guilty, and an ongoing investigation. one of the individuals agreed to cooperate in the ongoing investigation that is looking at project veritas and the role that its people played in this. >> it also, though, reveals how sick and obsessed trump and his allies were with the biden kids.

i think that's unprecedented in presidential politics. rudy was running hunter, and it sounds like his allies in the media, project veritas, were trying to destroy and humiliate ashley biden? >> it's also on the -- there's something more insidious about it. i mean, there's -- there is something very insidious about it. ashley biden kept the diary when she was recovering from addiction, so what they were trying to do or what happened was they were selling the diary that she kept when she was recovering from addiction, and then they were trying to make it public to undermine her and undermine her father. >> before the 2020 election. >> before the 2020 election, in the final weeks. so, much of the country that's paying attention to this is looking at the hunter biden issue and the hunter biden laptop, but this is all going on at the same time. and it wasn't just a diary of, like, oh, here's a list of different things that, like, i need to do or i did today. this was a diary she kept when

she was recovering from addiction. >> will anyone else go to jail, other than these two that pleaded guilty today? >> all we know is that one of the two defendants has agreed to cooperate as part of the plea, and that they continue to investigate project veritas. the government has taken very aggressive action towards project veritas. they executed a search warrant at the home of its founder, james o'keefe. they obtained a trove of emails from the group. they've -- they have gone so far as to lay out, in a more than a dozen-page document the government today, new details or details about what happened with this diary and the exchange of money and such. and it's being done by sdny, an office that we know prides itself on its independence and will take on very ambitious cases. >> bottom feeders. mike schmidt, thank you for your reporting on that. the first legal win for the white house fighting new abortion restrictions just as

the president tonight kicks off a midterm election push, hoping to further energize his own party. a preview of all of that after a quick break. don't go anywhere. all of that a quick break. don't go anywhere.

man 1: have you noticed the world is on fire? record heat waves? does that worry you? well, it should. because this climate thing is your problem. man 2: 40 years ago, when our own scientists at big oil predicted that burning fossil fuels could lead to catastrophic effects, we spent billions to sweep it under the rug. man 3: so we're going to be fine. but you might want to start a compost pile, turn down the ac. you got a lot of work to do because your kids are going to need it. we reduce homelessness, address mental health, provide spaces for addiction to be broken, create spaces of healing and restoration. for the first time ever, prop 27 will provide permanent funding for organizations like ours. saying yes to prop 27 means more people get the assistance that they nee they get someone to partner in such a way

to see transformation come to them. yes on prop 27, because there's no place like home. from this day forward, august 25th, women all across texas are no longer free. >> to make decisions about our own body. >> no longer free to choose if a pregnancy is right for us or our families. >> not even in cases of rape or incest. >> and women will die because of it. all because of greg abbott's

abortion law. it's too extreme, so i'm voting for beto. >> who will give women our freedom back. >> hi again, everyone, it's 5:00 in new york. in his first tv ad in his campaign for governor in texas, beto o'rourke made a choice. to highlight the opportunities, choices, and reproductive healthcare denied to women in texas. in fact, texas is one of four states where a trigger law goes into effect this week, meaning that the penalties for providing an abortion there would get even harsher. it's hard to fathom, right? from the "texas tribune," the trigger law criminalizes performing an abortion from the moment of fertilization unless the pregnant patient is facing a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by or rising from a pregnancy. violations of the law are punishable by up to life in prison, and the law says the attorney general shall seek a civil penalty of not less than

$100,000. texas is one of 14 states right now with near total abortion bans or bans after six weeks of pregnancy. politico reports this. "the newly effective laws make good on conservative promises swiftly prohibit abortion in as many states as possible, following the supreme court's decision to overturn roe vs. wade in june and will leave much of theout and plains states with virtually no access to the procedure." we're seeing abortion rights become a galvanizing, powerful, visceral issue for democrats, like we see in beto's ad. democrats are tapping into the anger and fear over the supreme court's decision and now seeing voter turnout levels, especially among women, that indicate they might have a shot in maintaining power in congress come november. "new york times" analyzed data from ten states and found "the total number of women registering to vote in those

states rose by 35% after the supreme court decision compared with the month before the leak of the court's draft opinion. men ticked up 9%." a closer look at pennsylvania specifically finds these staggering figures, according to democratic voter data from target smart. "women have outpaced men by about 12 percentage points in new registrations since june 24." and of the pennsylvania women who have registered since dobbs, there are four democrats for every one republican. it's where we begin the hour. joining us now, cecile richards, co-chair of american bridge and the former president of planned parenthood. also joining us, michelle goodwin, our friend mara gay, a member of the "new york times" editorial board and an msnbc contributor. cecile, i have to start with the women. there's still sex. there's still semen. there's still pregnancy, but there's no longer access to abortions. what is happening to women?

>> i think that's another piece of this story, nicole, that i know you have covered, but it's really important. this was a theoretical issue for a long time. abortion was legal in this country, and even the republicans talked about banning it, making it a thing of the past, it wasn't real, and mow now it's getting real. now we're seeing a 10-year-old girl in ohio, the survivor of sexual assault, having to go to the state of indiana to get access to a legal abortion, which actually won't even be possible pretty soon or a 16-year-old girl, young woman in florida who has no parents, appealing to the judge to be able to actually terminate a pregnancy, being denied that right. the real reality of what this means for women is coming home to roost, and we're only going to see that happen more and more as more states begin to ban abortion, and, as you said at the top of the show, that a

state like texas, not only has banned abortion but now is making it criminal for doctors to provide access to abortion care as much as a lifetime imprisonment, $100,000 fines. this is not what the american people want to see, and frankly, it's not what people in texas want to see either. >> cecile, i'm heartened by the political tsunami that this promises to be and to see these measures fail even in kansas, but i'm sickened by what's happening. i mean, young women in their 20s and 30s going in for sterilizations. pregnant women with nonviable pregnancies being in critical and urgent condition, facing possible sepsis. i think it's 50% fatal. and women, maybe, without voices, just living in a terrified world where unsafe procedures may become the norm. what is sort of the urgent action to help women while the political fight goes on sort of in the other arena?

>> well, you're absolutely right, and i will say, just having talked to folks in texas today, where, again, another abortion ban has gone into effect. every time this happens, the fear for women is palpable, and my friends at planned parenthood get calls, and of course, now, it's not only that it's illegal to get an abortion in texas. it's criminal to actually tell people how they can get access to safe and legal abortion in other states, so it's really important -- you're right, there's a -- there's a long-term and maybe even more immediate term political solution, but we have to be supporting organizations that are reaching out and providing legal abortion access to women. that includes surgical abortion but also many organizations that are now helping women get access to medication abortion online. this is -- we're seeing an explosion of women going on to the internet, trying to find where they can get access to the abortion pill to terminate a

pregnancy safely. so, these are really important options for women, and i think your show and others can do a great service, particularly in these states where there is so little information, to make sure that we're getting the word out, that there are options for women, there are safe places to go. >> michelle, i want to ask you, i mean, because at the same time that they're doing that on their phones, they're also deleting any tracking apps in their android or apple phones, and i think searching how to do that is one of the most searched things in america right now. women feel hunted, and again, we'll get to the politics, but the reality is, things had to get really, really bad before our politics felt this earthquake. >> that's right. i think that even for republican women, they are alarmed by what they've seen by the people who they voted for. i think they're alarmed for their daughters if their daughter is raped by a neighbor or a relative, that they live in states where there are politicians that say, yes, a

9-year-old should become a mother at the age of 10. an 11-year-old. no compare, no compassion. there are mothers that are worried about their daughters in college and cases of date rape or simply that the condom breaks and their 18-year-old daughter no longer having the option for the life that she had hoped to lead, and it is coming home that, as you say, the risk of death is becoming all the more real. we know the risk of death exists. the supreme court knows the risk of death existed. in 2016, the supreme court noted that a woman is 14 times more likely to die by carrying a pregnancy to term than by having an abortion. the supreme court knew that black women are three and a half more times likely to die. the court knew in mississippi, 80% of the cardiac deaths are black women and black women are 118 times, in mississippi, more likely to die due to pregnancy-related complications

than by having an abortion. and yet, the court decided, as it did. and women are recognizing that they do have power and that power is at the ballot box. but we shouldn't overstate it because at the same time that we can see this robust turnout in kansas, we see extreme measures of voter suppression in texas, in mississippi, and other states, and it's the kind of racial redlining. this is truly the new jane crow that we're living in, but women are fighting back, and we will see the midterms be something different than what was predicted before. >> and i think the coalition of people who are energized by this is vast, and i think part of that was, again, michelle, apparent to the court, if they cared. 63% of all americans wanted roe left alone. 93% of all americans oppose bans that eliminate the exception for life of the mother and 85% oppose any ban that eliminates exceptions in cases of rape and incest. but mara gay, that is where the

republicans are heading. >> well, the overreach is clear, and i think it's obvious that republicans know they have overreached. you know, you see it everywhere, and to your point, nicole, the coalition of americans who not only support abortion access but are deeply disturbed to see that access limited and in some places eliminated, is very vast. so, in new york's 19th congressional district this week, we saw a democrat win a really tough special election there, and i think, you know, the dobbs decision certainly motivated many voters in that case that that's what the reporting shows. you see that there are wealthy republican donors who are, i'm told, according to sources, less interested in giving to the party because their wives are actually very upset about the dobbs decision. and then, of course, you see kansas voters and the message that they sent at the polls. so, this is really not breaking

in favor of the republicans. this is not breaking along clean and even lines of polarization in the united states. and of course, the first concern is the impact it has on individual americans and liberty, but i think part of the reason that this resonates so deeply is not only that it's about the principle of abortion access and about the government in our -- you know, controlling our bodies, controlling our relationship with our healthcare providers, the decisions that we can make, but the disregard for the lives of american women is so obvious. when you see these cases, you know, everything from maternal mortality in general to the cases of 10-year-olds being forced to carry a fetus to term, it's obvious that this is about controlling women, not about saving lives. >> cecile, i want to pick up with you, what mara is talking about, this overreach. we've talked about this before.

it's the dog catching the car. the problem is, none of the dogs have the words for what they've done. i mean, the judges that are mandating state-required pregnancies don't even have the words to explain why they're doing so. she's too young to make a decision about abortion, so she'll become a mom? i mean, what do you make of how equipped the judiciary and the political forces on the right that brought us to this moment are for finally achieving what they say they've wanted for decades? >> no, it's fascinating to see that -- and obviously, the big point here is, this is why we should not have politicians making medical decisions for individuals, and i agree with everything that my colleagues here have said. i mean, the inhumanity and the cruelty to women, to people who are facing all kinds of medical issues and need to be able to make their own decisions is so true, but i mean, what's fascinating to me right now, nicole, is seeing that at least

some people in the republican party are figuring out this is not going to work. so, i know today, it's been reported that, in one of the most competitive races in the country, in arizona, united states senate seat, that republican nominee blake masters now trying to strip his website from all of the comments he's made about supporting these kinds of extreme positions. the republicans have nominated people all across the country who not only don't have the right language, they literally -- they believe that women should not have the ability to make decisions about their own pregnancy. i don't even think it's -- there isn't a way you can message your way out of the extremism on the republican party right now. >> well, and they're not running away from it. i mean, i think mitch mcconnell just sent some rescue funds to jd vance, who said, not in an adversarial interview on this show or anything like it, but in a friendly interview, that he thinks women should stay in violent marriages. in some ways, dobbs has flushed

out a world view on the right that none of the republican leaders are running away from. no one has unendorsed jd vance, cecile. >> no, it's true. i mean, it's incredible. but we know -- you looked at all these primary races where sometimes there were options between more moderate candidates by the republican party, but that's not who got nominated. i mean, look at, you know, well, look at pennsylvania, michigan, all the most competitive races in the country, the republicans have nominated statewide candidates who are extreme on the issue of abortion, and i think it's interesting. i know you opened with beto's ad. here's one of the most highly watched races in the country. the first paid advertising in that campaign about greg abbott's extreme abortion ban. you've seen the same in pennsylvania, in michigan. republican nominees, their positions are absolutely indefensible. >> and the republican running

against pat ryan, i think, tried to maneuver himself into more neutral territory. it didn't work. let me show you congressman-elect pat ryan on with my colleague, alex weg ner last night. >> the campaign started right about when the draft opinion was leaked, and even those days after, there were marches and protests and rallies, and we're marching, and i remember this one woman, we're marching with a few hundred people into uptown kingston in the district, there was a woman in her mid to upper 60s just bawling crying, and she was just in total disbelief and said, i cannot believe we are doing this again. and it was just so clear that that decision to rip away a fundamental right and freedom had just struck such a -- such a nerve that i think even transcends the very partisan dynamics in our country right now. >> michelle, let me give you one

more piece of data, and then i'll let you go. go and talk. people who believe abortion should be legal in all or certain circumstances in 1975, it was 75% of americans. in 2022, it's 85% of all americans. this is the tyranny not of the minority but of the extremists. >> that's right. what we saw -- also seen is an evolution over time. since 1973, that was on the long arc towards equality after the chipping away of laws that oppressed women. you know, there were laws that were enacted in this country where women couldn't vote, where women couldn't become attorneys, where women couldn't serve on juries, where women couldn't even operate a bar or serve in a bar, and we're not talking about from the 1800s. we're talking about laws that existed in the 1960s and '70s. a woman can't have a credit card

in her own name. when we're thinking about roe v. wade, it's coming at a time when people are coming to appreciate and understand that women's equality is something that is grounded in the constitution, and should be recognized and defended by the supreme court. by 2022, more than half of the people in law schools, medical schools are women, so there's a deeper understanding, a deeper sentiment about protecting women's rights that extends not only to reproductive freedom, which is important, but what we see in those numbers is a social movement too, a social recognition, a cultural recognition that is far removed from the times in which laws stated that men could rape their wives and would not be punished for it. and courts then recognizing and upholding those laws. or laws that allowed immunity for fathers when they raped their daughter. i mean, i could tell you cases that would alarm your viewers, such as, cases of girls being

gang raped at 9 and 10 years old, and judges saying, well, if only one of those men were married to her, then this would not be a criminal offense. you can't make that up in terms of american history. and so, seeing the figures, the data that you're reporting now, is not surprising. we are a more enlightened society, even though we don't see that coming from the extreme aspects of the republican party. >> mara, i don't do this all the time, but i'm going to play a republican talking about a path to enlightenment, if you will, and understanding the consequences of these abortion bans. >> a 19-year-old girl appeared at the e.r. she was 15 weeks pregnant. her water broke. and the fetus was unviable. the standard of care was to advise her that they could extract or she could go home.

the attorneys told the doctors that because of the fetal heartbeat bill, because that 15-week-old had a heartbeat, the doctors could not extract. there's a 50% chance -- greater than 50% chance that she's going to lose her uterus. there's a 10% chance that she will develop sepsis and herself die. that weighs on me. i voted for that bill. these are affecting people, and we're having a meeting about this. it took that whole week, i did not sleep. >> i guess a long way of saying, i welcome enlightenment if someone now understands something they didn't understand before they voted for it. maybe everyone should understand what they're voting for and maybe all of them should stay out of our uteruses in the first place, mara. >> you have to take a deep breath. i mean, listen, i think we're at a place in our democracy where we need to be able to give

people room to do better, to change their mind, to learn, to grow, and to make better decisions. so, good for representative collins. i hope that more follow that lead. on the other hand, my question for him would be, why did you not understand this before? did you not read the newspapers that were filled with stories and warnings that this had happened in the past when abortion was illegal and that it would happen again? were you ignoring women in your own life who told you that they didn't want you to make laws that control their bodies? why does it take, you know, an intimate example for you to care about the lives of women and people who are not like yourself? i mean, there is an investment in denial, i believe, in the united states right now, about how our decisions and how the -- how the decisions of government

impact other americans who we maybe consider less than ourselves or not as important. their lives, their health, their dignity, and their autonomy over their own bodies. so, that is not an excuse, but, of course, you welcome into the fold anyone who is willing to be science-based and respect the autonomy and equality of american women. >> and to be moved by the tragic situation of one 19-year-old. mara gay, michelle goodwin, cecile richards, three of my most favorite humans, thank you so much for starting us off today. when we come back, president joe biden fresh off a string of big victories is set to rally democrats tonight ahead of the midterms in a political landscape that looks very different than it did a few weeks ago. white house communications director kate bedingfield will be our against after the break. plus, we are one step closer to getting at least some of that affidavit that justified the fbi's search of mar-a-lago.

we'll have the latest developments on a story that has been breaking and advancing all afternoon. and later, one day after a deadly russian attack on a train station in central ukraine, the u.s. is now warning of another sinister plot by moscow. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. stay with us. use" continues after a quick break. stay with us to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war, forced to flee their homes. a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger. exhausted and shell shocked from what they've been through. every dollar you give can help bring a meal, a blanket, or simply hope to a child living in conflict. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org

today with your gift of $10 a month, that's just $0.33 a day. we cannot forget the children in places like syria, born in refugee camps, playing in refugee camps, thinking of the camps as home. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, your gift can help children like ara in afghanistan, where nearly 20 years of conflict have forced the people into extreme poverty weakened and unable to hold herself up, ara was brought to a save the children's center, where she was diagnosed and treated for severe malnutrition. every dollar helps. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, just $0.33 a day. and thanks to special government grants that are available now, every dollar you give can multiply up to ten times the impact.

and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special save the children tote bag to show you won't forget the children who are living their lives in conflict. every war is a war against children. please give now. with xfinity internet, you get advanced security that helps protect you at home and on the go. you feel so safe, it's as if... i don't know... evander holyfield has your back. i wouldn't click on that. hey, thanks! we got a muffin for ed! all right! you don't need those calories. can we at least split it? nope. advanced security that helps protect your devices in and out of the home. i mean, can i have a bite? only from xfinity. nah. unbeatable internet. made to do anything so you can do anything.

it has been a solid week for president joe biden and his white house with yesterday's student loan executive action coming after a month of legislative victories. the president will seek to build on this momentum, headlining an event for the dnc in a few hours as his midterms full court press

kicks into high gear. joining us now to talk about all of it, white house communications director, kate bedingfield. how are you doing? tell me how you guys feel after watching tuesday night's results come in, and everyone -- and i want to know if this was your experience as well, seeing that the landscape has really shifted and appears to still be pretty volatile. >> well, look, i mean, as you know, nicole, standing in front of this building and this place, there are limits on how much i can talk about politics, just one of the many, many things that president biden and this administration does very differently than the previous administration, but what i can say broadly is, you know, the president tonight is going to speak to the choice that americans have over the coming months, and he's going to lay out the contrast between a vision for the country, one where we stand up to the special interests, which president biden has done, and gotten the inflation reduction act passed, now medicare is going to be able to negotiate for lower

prescription drug costs, energy costs are going to come down, stood up to the nra and got the first meaningful gun safety bill in 30 years done and signed. so, president biden's going to talk about the choice between that vision for the country, his accomplishments, and congressional republican vision that's about standing with the special interests and not voting to make life better for families across the country. so, he's really going to lay that out strongly tonight. >> i think of his inaugural address about the things he said about our democracy, a speech right before election day that he gave about our democracy, and the latest polling that shows that democracy really is not just as a campaign issue but as something that american people are thinking about. how does he feel about that, that these things that he sort of came in, reminding everybody, were there for us if we cared about them, if we fought for them and protected them, are now the thing that most americans are thinking about? >> well, that's absolutely

right. i mean, he views it as an existential crisis for the country. i mean, it was, you'll remember well, part of the reason he got into the campaign back in 2019 was because of the threat that he believed that donald trump posed to our democracy. and so, you know, for him, he believes that this is a battle for the soul of the nation, and it continues to be, and i think what you'll hear him talk about tonight is the fact that, you know, we're not done. we're nowhere near done. we have made incredible strides. we've gotten a lot done on behalf of the american people, but this -- these threats are real. we're facing, again, a congressional maga agenda that's about tearing down the guardrails of our democracy, that's about denying people the right to vote, that's about taking rights away from women across the country. so, you're going to hear him really lay out that fundamental choice. it's, as you say rightly, it's something that has motivated him. he believes it's one of the existential questions of our time. >> i had your job exactly in the

white house, and i know a lot of people put at the feet of the communications office all of an administration's woes. but how do you feel about the fact that when gas prices were on the upswing, it was on the news all the time and where i live, they're way down, and no one talks about it quite as much? how do you even that out? >> well, it can be frustrating, and you know, we, as you well know and well remember from doing this job yourself, it's a lot of discussions with your now colleagues in the media about where things stand and making sure that they have the facts. and you know, what we're really going to try to do is spend the next couple of months out making a full court press. you're going to see the president travel. you're going to see the vice president travel, the cabinet, and we're going to be doing what president biden often reminds us is the single most important thing that we can do in our office, which is, tell people how what we've done is going to impact their lives. we're going to talk about the fact that gas prices have come down. we're going to talk about the

fact that we've created almost 10 million jobs, that, you know, if you want a job in this country, you can find one. we're going to talk about the fact that inflation is starting to come down. we saw 0.0% inflation in july. and that has a real impact on the costs, the things that people go out and buy for their family, for kids as they're getting ready to go back to school. those are real costs, and because of the biden agenda, costs of those things are starting to come down. so it's incumbent on our office, as you well know, to make sure that we're out talking to people directly, and we work very closely with your colleagues in the news media to make sure that they know what we've accomplished and how it's going to impact people. >> it is unique. i talked to a veteran of the bush white house economic offices, and i said, what is the real deal with the economy? he said, it's a jobs -- moment for jobs unlike anything we've ever seen. there is so much opportunity out there. but as you're saying, inflation is very real, and people's distress and despair and anxiety

about it very real as well. kate, you're always welcome. thank you for spending time with us today. >> that's always a treat. thank you so much. when we come back, we'll go back to our top story, that soon to be released redacted affidavit behind the historic and unprecedented search of the twice-impeached disgraced ex-president's private florida club, moral. ex-president's private florida club, moral.

for decades, i've worked at the intersection of domestic violence and homelessness. so when prop 27 promised solutions to homelessness,

i took a good, hard look. it's not a solution. 90% of the money goes to the out-of-state corporations who wrote it. very little is left for the homeless. don't let corporations exploit homelessness to pad their profits. vote no on 27. man 1: have you noticed the world is on fire? record heat waves? does that worry you? well, it should. because this climate thing is your problem. man 2: 40 years ago, when our own scientists at big oil predicted that burning fossil fuels could lead to catastrophic effects, we spent billions to sweep it under the rug. man 3: so we're going to be fine. but you might want to start a compost pile, turn down the ac. you got a lot of work to do because your kids are going to need it. okay, back now to the

extraordinary breaking, fast-moving story we started with last hour. a judge has ordered the release by noon tomorrow of a redacted doj affidavit. that was the affidavit that was used to explain to a judge why the fbi needed to search the disgraced ex-president's mar-a-lago home/club earlier this month. judge bruce reinhart says there was, "a compelling reason and good cause for the redactions sent to him by doj earlier today and that that redacted version is narrowly tailored for the integrity of the investigation." it comes as attorney general merrick garland tries to achieve both public defense of the fbi's search and private protection of that ongoing criminal investigation. joining us now to discuss all of it, barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney, now law professor at the university of michigan, also an msnbc legal analyst in high endorsement, and asha is here, former fbi special agent for

counterintelligence, now assistant dean at yale's jackson school of global affairs. such a pleasure to have you. asha, tell us what you expect to see in what sounds like the judge has accepted this highly redacted version of an affidavit. >> yes, thanks, nicole, it's great to be on. so, the department of justice advised the court that originally the redactions would make this affidavit basically unreadable. but i think that even with any redactions, i think we're going to learn a lot. so, first, we're going to be able to just see the sheer length of the affidavit. a search warrant comes late in an investigation, and particularly in a case of this sensitivity and magnitude, there will have been a lot of evidence gathered, and so, you know, the affidavit is going to have laid out all of this evidence, much of which we won't see, but it will be there. the second thing i expect to see are things that don't implicate identities of agents and witnesses or the direction and

scope of the investigation, and that leaves interactions between the department of justice and trump's lawyers and potentially nara and trump's lawyers, detailing the interactions back and forth, the efforts that they went to, to recover these documents short of having to take this step. in other words, they were making many good faith intermediate efforts to do this. and finally, nicole, i think we might see some evidence of obstruction and why they believe that trump was still concealing documents, and this is because in this bizarre legal filing that trump's lawyers filed last week, they themselves disclose that had they had turned over surveillance video to the department of justice. and so, to the extent that they can, you know, lay out maybe what they saw in that video, that made them believe that there were still documents at mar-a-lago, we might see some of that. >> so, barbara, what we know we won't see, and asha referred to some of this, is -- this is from

the judge's order today. "i'm fully advised on the entire record, including the contents of the affidavit. disclosure would reveal, one, the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents and uncharged parties, two, the investigation's strategy, direction, scope, sources and methods, and three, grand jury information protected by federal rule of criminal procedure." but to asha's point, what is clear is that the loony -- it's not a tweet because he doesn't get to tweet, but whatever he posts on that he put out with all the exclamation points, omg, fbi sole my safe, was asinine. they were going back and forth with him and his lawyers and him directing what exactly he would finger and have his fingers on and put in the boxes and tame. he's been hands-on in removing the documents from the oval office to the residence, and then those sticky fingers took those things to mar-a-lago. i mean, he's been involved in every step of this. the record seems to really bear

out that any attempt to paint it as sudden or aggressive or uncalled for, the opposites is going to be proven. >> yeah, i think that's right. you know, i think we start from the premise that court documents are presumed to be public and not under seal. the reason search warrant affidavits get sealed is so that you don't compromise an investigation while it's ongoing. you don't want to tip off the target that you're doing all these things to snoop around and find out if you can gather evidence against them. but at some point, it is no longer necessary to keep that document sealed, because you've typically filed charges against the person. in fact, at that point, the affidavit is usually turned over to the defendant so they have an opportunity to challenge it in court for fourth amendment violations or other kinds of things. so what i imagine here, based on the judge's order, where he says that it has been narrowly tailored to protect those very specific things that he mentioned, you know, grand jury

material, and sources and methods, the names and identities of federal law enforcement agents, and of witnesses. other than those things, i would expect that it will be unsealed, and so as asha was saying, i imagine we will get the chronology of things that were done between trump's team and the national archives, along the lines of that letter that we have seen. but i do think that, as you just said, referring to donald trump's sticky fingers, i think we are going to learn about this history which appears to have begin in 2021 to ask him for these documents back. this was not just, you know, a stray document ended up in my box, how dare you come take it without -- i would have given it to you voluntarily. i fully expect that that story will be debunked by what we see in this affidavit. >> asha, i imagine you're trained in profiling. i'm going to ask you to do some on live tv. today, on his wherever he posts stuff, trump tweeted this. "i am as innocent as a person

can be .. .prosecutors are illegally trying to circumvent for purely political gain, the presidential records act under which i have done absolutely nothing wrong." and then just in all caps, in quotes, "the presidential records act" and then "the justice department, fbi, are leaking at levels never seen before, and i did nothing wrong." what is -- what do you -- what do you make of those? >> well, i think that actually trump is a very good rhetorician. he knows how to phrase things, to put pavlovian buzzwords out there. i think at some point, hillary clinton and pizzagate and uranium are going to come out. but i think, really, behind the scenes, what i think is motivating him -- i mean, he's clearly scared. he's, you know, he does not have the protections of the office of the presidency, which he had for four years, and which largely

shielded him from so many of these things, and he had the levers of power to do it. he doesn't have that. and nicole, i think that this case is -- makes him very vulnerable, because one of the ways that he has protected himself to date is that he doesn't leave a paper trail, and so to get to trump, you need people to flip on him. no one needs to flip on him to prove this case. the paper trail literally leads to mar-a-lago. the papers were there. and i think fact that he was hands on, as you mentioned, that in and of itself shows his direct involvement. no one else really needs to, you know, disclose the conversations that were going on behind the scenes, and i think he realizes that. he doesn't have leverage over people around him that he can manipulate to protect him from this, and he doesn't have the office of the presidency anymore. >> barbara, quick last word. it seems to me, i'm not the lawyer here, but the presidential records act is the least of his worries. i think they mentioned the espionage act as being one of

the potential crimes. >> yeah, and i'm sure that's why he is focusing on the presidential records act. that is one that does not have with it any penalty whatsoever, so that's irrelevant. maybe that's why he's touting that one. the search warrant affidavit relies on the espionage act, mishandling of government records, as well as obstruction. those are the things that he needs to be worried about. and i think those are very real crimes that are hanging over his head, and i think he faces very serious legal jeopardy with those, which is probably why he doesn't want to focus on those. >> usually explains the exclamation points and the caps key as well. barbara mcquade, asha rangappa, thank you so much. ahead for us, after a deadly russian missile attack on a train station in ukraine, united states is now issuing a new warning about what moscow will do next. that story after a quick break. don't go anywhere. story after k don't go anywhere.

there's a monster problem and our hero needs solutions. so she starts a miro to brainstorm. “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro.

kids don't always take the best care of school supplies. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. while they...

0oh... uh... figure their stuff out. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade is more than a trading platform. it's an entire trading experience. with innovation that lets you customize interfaces, charts and orders to your style of trading. personalized education to expand your perspective. and a dedicated trade desk of expert-level support. that will push you to be even better. and just might change how you trade—forever. because once you experience thinkorswim® by td ameritrade ♪♪♪ there's no going back. - i'm norm. - i'm szasz. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week,

a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. ukrainian president zelenskyy is today vowing retaliation after russian forces targeted a train station until the central part of his country. the death toll from that attack has risen to at least 25 people, including 2 children. dozens more have been wounded. ukraine had been bracing for attacks as the country marked not only the holiday commemorating its break from the soviet union in 1991, but also six months of war with russia. president joe biden spoke to zelenskyy today about the newest aid package for ukraine, it's worth almost $3 billion in u.s. military assistance, as well as

a host of other issues as russia gears up for a more gruesome and violent phase of the war. u.s. intelligence is warning ukraine that russia may try to hold sham referendums as early as this week. it's a move by the kremlin to falsely show that ukrainians want to join russia in cities like kharkiv and kherson. let's bring in retired u.s. navy admiral, our friend, james stavridis. msnbc's chief international analyst. tell me what you make of this moment. certainly, very treacherous for ukraine and for their civilian population. but it seems that they're also making some important gains on the battlefield. tell us how you evaluate it all. >> i think you've got it about right, nicole. in other words, russia's offensive operations have really stalled, and the ukrainians are clearly gearing up for offensive operations. the recent war crime, striking a

train station, killing civilians, including children, is yet another page out of the awful playbook that putin is generating here, and i think, sadly, you're just going to see more of that. he is someone who has dug his teeth into this. he's not going to let go, and it's up to us to continue giving the ukrainians the tools to go on the offensive. they're doing so very effectively. the recent addition of $3 billion from the united states just announced by the president, i think, is a step in the right direction as well, nicole. >> the campaign of targeting civilians is so blatant and so flagrant and so brazen. why not a designation of state sponsor of terror? >> i think there is very little reason not to go forward with that. and the ukrainians have been pushing this, correctly, for

months. our allies, many of them, would, in fact, support this. the clicker for this, nicole, will be at the international criminal court. that set of prosecutions is coming together. i think that is probably going to happen rather than later, and from my perspective, can't happen soon enough. >> russia is warning of show trials, i guess we'd call them, in mariupol. what is your counsel for the world in term of how to treat them. they're designed as part of russian propaganda, but the heinous nature can't be ignored. what was your counsel for immediate why organizations? >> i think there are three key things to focus on here. from a media perspective, i know that our network, many others in the world, are going to cover these for exactly what they are, a mock show trial like the spectacle of brittney griner

being dragged, put in a cage. you're going to see that. it's going to be awful to watch. it simply needs to be continuously hammered home that this is not business as usual, and it's something that the west has to focus on. so, yes, there's a media component here. but i think even more importantly, nicole, is keeping the flow of weapons, keeping the sanctions on, keeping the diplomacy operational and together the way we have so far. i'll close by saying, the next big step for nato, adding sweden and finland to the alliance, that's going to be formally done this fall. already effectively approved, going through the process now. that's a good example of setting a unified force against putin. we've got to continue to do that in the face of all the dirty tricks he's going to be pulling out over the months ahead.

>> james stavridis, thank you so much for spending time with us on the those headlines. we're grateful. quick break. we will be right back. eak. we will be right back. wrap their arms around us, could we put little handles on our jackets? -denied. -can you imagine? i want a new nickname. can you guys start calling me snake? no, bryan. -denied. -how about we all get quotes to see if we can save with america's number one motorcycle insurer? approved. cool! hey, if bryan's not gonna be snake, can i be snake? -all: no. love you. have a good day, behave yourself. like she goes to work at three in the afternoon and sometimes gets off at midnight. she works a lot, a whole lot. we don't get to eat in the early morning. we just wait till we get to the school. so, yeah. right now here in america, millions of kids like victoria

and andre live with hunger, and the need to help them has never been greater. when you join your friends, neighbors and me to support no kid hungry, you'll help hungry kids get the food they need. if we want to take care of our children, then we have to feed them. your gift of just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month at helpnokidhungry.org right now will help provide healthy meals and hope. we want our children to grow and thrive and to just not have to worry and face themselves with the struggles that we endure. nobody wants that for their children. like if these programs didn't exist me and aj, we wouldn't probably get lunch at all. please call or go online right now with your gift of just $19 a month. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this limited edition t-shirt to show you're part of the team that's helping feed kids and change lives. if you're coming in hungry, there's no way you can listen to me teach, do this activity, work with this group.

so starting their day with breakfast and ending their day with this big, beautiful snack is pretty incredible. whether kids are learning at school or at home, your support will ensure they get the healthy meals they need to thrive. because when you help feed kids, you feed their hopes, their dreams, and futures. kids need you now more than ever. so please call this number right now to join me in helping hungry kids or go online to helpnokidhungry.org and help feed hungry kids today. lily! welcome to our third bark-ery. oh, i can tell business is going through the “woof”. but seriously we need a reliable way to help keep everyone connected from wherever we go. well at at&t we'll help you find the right wireless plan for you. so, you can stay connected to all your drivers and stores on america's most reliable 5g network. that sounds just paw-fect. terrier-iffic i labra-dore you round of a-paws at&t 5g is fast,

reliable and secure for your business. we have an update on first lady dr. jill biden's covid-19 rebound case this week. she tested positive again yesterday after a negative test on tuesday, but thankfully, she reports that she has not experienced a reemergence of any

symptoms. good news for the first lady who says she's grateful to have the company of the first cat willow, who won't leave her side as he recovers in delaware. more good news for all of us in covid vaccines. the biden administration is -- moderna will be a booster for dull adults who have received first and second shots. same for pfizer for everyone age 12 enter up. the fda is expected the produce both of those new vaccines by labor day. we'll be right back. right back. it's so easy. and more customers today are relying on their cars advanced safety features, like automatic emergency breaking and lane departure warning. that's why our recalibration service is state of the art. we recalibrate your vehicle's camera, so you can still count on those safety features. all right, we're all finished. >> customer: thank you so much. >> tech: thank you. don't wait--schedule now. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

in order for small businesses to thrive, they need to be smart. efficient. agile. and that's never been more important than it is right now. so for a limited time, comcast business is introducing small business savings. call now to get powerful internet for just 39 dollars a month. with no contract. and a money back guarantee. all on the largest, fastest reliable network. from the company that powers more businesses than anyone else. call and start saving today. comcast business. powering possibilities.

thank you so much for letting us into your homes during another busy day of news. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. hi, ari. >> hi, nicole, thank you so much. i'm ari melber. today the judge ordering a lease of more information about the trump search. we have that story coming up. and later we're going to do something we've never done before. sharing some of my childhood stories with discussion from nardwar who you see there. i'll try to make sense of why i'm bringing this up with you. right now we begin with resurgent republican energy. it's a big shift from when d.c. pundits were recently saying things like this. >> this red wave that we're going to see in 2022 -- >> president biden answer agenda in democratic control of congress in jeopardy. >> i think we'll pick up between 25 and 70 seats in the house. we'll probably pick up about four seat at least in the senate. >> looks like it will be pretty bad for democrats. that was the talk.