hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. big day of news. the investigation into donald trump's handling of government documents including some of the country's most sensitive national security secrets is moving in important ways on two fronts today. one involves the decision to appoint a special master to review the documents seized in the search of mar-a-lago. the other involves the special master himself. a lot of news on both fronts today. let's start with doj's appeal of the decision temporarily blocking doj from using the documents seized from donald trump's residence. that appeal is now before the 11th circuit court of appeals. donald trump's lawyers in that matter are calling for the court to reject doj's request. their main argument is that doj has yet to move that some of the records seized are classclassif

even though it is donald trump, who has not provided a single shred of evidence proving that they're not, proving that he declassified any of the records that he kept at mar-a-lago for up to 18 months. now to the other front, the special master process itself. just a couple hours ago, lawyers for the justice department squared off with donald trump's legal team for their first public hearing before judge raymond dearie. he was appointed special master to review the documents seized in the search of donald trump's residence last month. during this hearing, dearie, who was donald trump's pick, his hand-selected suggestion to be the special master, told donald trump's lawyers to put up or shut up on claims that trump declassified the records. here's how politico describes the hearing. quote, judge raymond dearie pushed trump's lawyers repeatedly for refusing to back up the former president's claim that he declassified the highly sensitive national security-related records discovered in his residence.

quote, you cannot have your cake and eat it, too. we have more today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. with us at the table, we have enough for a dinner party, finally. jonathan lemire, politico's white house bureau chief. brian goodman joins us, former special counsel at the defense department, now an nyu law professor and coed or the in chief of "just security" and andrew weissmann is here, professor at nyu and former justice department prosecutor. most importantly, though, this conversation, he was in the room. he was at the special master hearing. do tell. >> so, let's start with some atmospherics. >> please. >> which is, the hearing was supposed to start at 2:00 and it 2:00, judge dearie comes out on the bench, like clockwork. and that is judge dearie.

there's a real tradition in the eastern district that they are responsible, they adhere to rules and order, it was a prompt, efficient hearing, it ended at 2:40, with dearie having given everyone an opportunity to be heard. but he also conducted it like an adult in the room and everyone had to behave themselves. that was sort of the atmospherics. with one exception, which we'll talk about, there were no histrionics on the part of either side. and in terms of the merits, the key is -- you know, it really was put up or shut up, but it was said in a -- with a -- >> in a dearie way. >> in a judge dearie way, exactly. and he, at the outset, made it clear, he said, you may have, trump team, you may have litigation reasons and strategy as to why you don't want to tell me or the world in a court of law that these documents are classified. that's fine.

but if you don't do that, i have in front of me a case, the government has set forth sufficient evidence that these are classified, for god sake, they bear markings that say they're classified. he said, if you don't want to actually say anything at this point, that's fine, but i'm going to rule. and that was really the theme f the hearing. because when they started talking about whether there would be a need for people to actually have clearance to see not just top secret documents, but top secret compartmented documents, judge dearie said, you know, you may be able to decide this issue where i don't even need to see them. that we don't have to get into that issue. he didn't say that's what he's definitely going to rule, he wants to hear from the parties, et cetera, but it seems pretty clear in terms of his thinking that he's going down the road of, if these are classified

documents, and i have no contrary evidence, then that sort of leads to a conclusion which is, i'm not returning these documents to you. so, if you don't put up, then you're not going to get the relief that you're seeking, which is to have the documents returned to you. >> it also sounds like even if you do put up, then the process begins, because it sounds like the person that trump picked, and there's some neat reporting about why he thought he would go his way, sick and twisted and very trumpian, but he's a fias judge, he knows exactly what we're talking about. talk about what the sort of difference -- you don't have to talk about the atmosphere, but what's the difference in terms of the legal arguments being made in front of judge dearie opposed to eileen cannon. >> he said, let's assume that these documents are presumptively classified. he wasn't going to go ahead and make a ruling, he said, it is

the obligation of the government to make sure that these are not shown to people needlessly. that is their obligation. that is a completely different mind-set than, you know, when they were in florida and -- you're not in florida anymore, you know? you are now -- >> what happens in florida stays in florida. >> exactly. >> i want to ask you about the exception. what was the exception, when there were histrionics? >> yeah, so at some point, there was a discussion about whether the judge would consult with the national archives. and the government had sub milted in its letter a one line saying, we really encourage you to do so, not a lot of meat on the bones about why. and jim trusty, the, frankly, the only lawyer who spoke for the former president, who, by the way, he kept on describing as the president and saying he's the president's lawyer, he --

the one time i was waiting to see what judge dearie would do, because he went on a political attack of the archives. he talked about them being a political entity. the archives. >> the national archives? >> that's like saying it's a political entity, my public library is a political entity. he seemed to equate what sandy berger did to being the archive's fault that they wanted those documents to be taken. and so, the argument was that the judge should not be consulting with such an overt political body, as the national archives. judge dearie basically said, i don't actually see the need right now to consult with them, so this is a moot conversation, but in his, again, his very polite way, he said, of course, i do think, you know, you might be painting with a broad brush

there. >> oh, wow. >> which was his way of -- judge dearie is no fool. he knows exactly what's going on. he called them out in an adult way. that's the one place where i thought that jim trusty was not reading the room and decided he was going to go on a planned die tribe that clearly was coming from his client. >> tell me what each side -- for the doj side, you know, one who was there, is it a name that we recognize from the filings that we've seen and what did they argue and what did they want out of this hearing and do the same for me for the other side. >> yeah, great question. so, there were five lawyers from the government. one of the lawyers was from the taint team, which was necessary, because the judge needed to hear what the taint team -- >> explain that, the filter team? >> exactly. this is the filter team that had culled out things that were potentially attorney/client privilege. so, there were a report from that lawyer saying that, you

know, i separately have pulled out that information, we have given it to the trump team already. we're creating an inventory of that, they handed the inventory, actually, up to the judge right in court, so the judge was very pleased. he said, it's great to see progress being made, as the judge says he wants to act with responsible dispatch. and maybe one backdrop to this is that what we learned today is that it was judge dearie who had proposed a four-week schedule, not to the end of november, but four weeks. >> oh, wow. >> that was faster, just to be clear, that was faster than what the government had proposed, because the government's letter had talked about coming back in a few weeks with progress reports, and it's pretty clear judge dearie does not see this as complicated, that this is just not that big a deal. so, anyway, going back to your point, the government wanted to report on the progress of the taint team, the so-called attorney/client information and

there was very little that the government otherwise had to do, other than sort of report about having a vendor, certain mechanical things. the main person speaking with julie edlestein. i don't think the lawyers spoke of any substance. she was asked by the court about what happens if the 11th circuit doesn't grant a stay and interestingly, she said, we will have to get back to you, because i'm confident we'll be looking at other appellate options. >> wow. >> which means the supreme court. >> so, doj is preparing to appeal to the united states supreme court if they fail in the 11th circuit? >> well, she didn't quite come out and say that, but you know, it was -- >> one could deduce. >> yes. it was clear what she was saying is, this is so important to the department that i'm not sure we'll leave it there. obviously they would have to see the decision and make an evaluation, but i thought that

was notable and the it was basically telling judge dearie, don't count on this being -- if the 11th circuit rules against us, don't count on this being over so quickly. so, that was basically it from the government side. jim trusty did all of the talking for the trump team. and, you know, he had a tough -- tough sell here. you know, he was doing something that is very typical of lawyers in a criminal case, and that is delay. it's famously been said by bennett williams that in a criminal case for a defense lawyer, an adjournment is an acquittal. and so, this is not new to judge dearie, which is -- jim trusty kept on saying, everything's premature, we need more time, it's going to take a lot of time. everything that was being proposed, he kept on saying why things were going to take longer. it's very clear judge dearie is

not going to have any of that. judge dearie made it clear after he heard from both of the parties about his proposed schedule, that is the court's proposed schedule. he is going to issue an order. and that's, you know, judge dearie is no pushover. he's going to expect everyone to adhere to the order and make rulings. so, i think that's what he was -- he, the court, was trying to get out of this. >> and just one more question, just to make sure i understand the process and what was on the line today for the government. if his ruling is to sort of express satisfaction with the work of the filter team or the taint team, does the investigation, the criminal investigation and the national security damage assessment proceed in that four-week schedule? best-case scenario those four weeks are how long we wait until the criminal investigation to trump and the national security assessment can proceed? >> i think -- there is a potential for it being even faster. i would say if judge dearie

adheres to the four weeks, i'd say that's the worst case scenario. >> oh, wow. >> that he is contemplating that from his perspective, it will be done. now, it is important to remember that whoever is the losing side, potentially each side could have something to want to gripe about, they get to go back to florida and judge cannon gets to, you know, consider those issues. i have to say, i've always thought with judge cannon subcontracting this to a senior respected article three judge, i think it would put a lot of pressure on her if she was thinking of reversing his rulings, because he's the kind of zwlauj no matter which way he rules, we're going to be thinking, there's a lot of merit to it. >> and she selected him ultimately, right? >> exactly. >> she selected him perhaps because he was on a list provided by donald trump. there's some interesting reporting in axios about why donald trump might have liked him. quote, lawyers and advisers to

the ex-president believe dearie's role on the court that approved controversial warrants used to survey former trump campaign aide carter page in '16 and '17 made dearie a deep skeptic of the fbi. dearie was one of the judges who signed off on the fisa warrants to surveil page. two of the four approved warrants were later declared invalid after a doj inspector general report found a series of misstatements. trump's lawyers are betting that has made dearie more skeptical of the fbi than the average. i think that this could be seen as delusional. and strange this is a team that find eileen cannon. so, tell me how team's trump judicial form shopping is going on your scorecard? >> well, i think it royally backfired on themselves. >> with dearie? >> with dearie.

we are refreshingly back in a form that looks and smells and tastes like the rule of law and a judge running a courtroom in the right way. so, there's speculation based on the carter page fisa application is a bit nutty and that they could in fact generalize that he has now a disposition against the fbi in such a way. and he's obviously not that kind of a character. i think he's just abiding by the law and he's very sensible in his understanding of national security concerns and expediting this process, i'm sure that's always weighing on him. so, i think the idea of dearie is actually a fantastic favor in a certain sense to the rule of law and that we'll see how this operates under his care, but as andrew says, and it goes back to judge cannon and she could overrule him, she has that power. but right now, i think things are on the right track, let's put it that way. >> and what happened today either reassures you or troubles you? >> well, i think the part that reassures me the most is that he gets it on the classified information. he's not giving the trump side

any excuses in a certain sense that it is time for them to pony up. if they want to make a claim that they declassified any of these records, they can do it, but if they don't want to do that, then he has to -- he has to default to the judgment of the intelligence community, that they already put classified markings on these documents. any other judge in america would do the same thing, which is say this information is classified, unless you want to come and tell me that you did something different, and i think they don't. it seems as though they don't ever want to make that claim in a court of law where they would be subject to penalties and federal crimes of lying to a court. so, that's the most sensible thing. and then we have this four-week schedule, but one other benefit from the order of judge cannon, she said he has to prioritize the 100 classified documents. if he does that, issues an interim ruling. she gave him the power to do that. we could put the criminal investigation back on its footing and we could put the intelligence damage assessment back on its footing with respect

to the 100 classified documents and that would be really important for u.s. national security. that is the urgency of the current situation. >> when i think back to the alarm that was felt by every single sort of -- anyone that had ever touched any part of u.s. national security, either military or fbi or doj or cia and talking about these lags, this inability to perceive that the criminal case, which is inextricably linked in the national security implications for the country, i wonder your reaction to today's development and not that they're dueling, but these two judges that are now the prominent figures in the matter, judge dearie and judge cannon. >> yes, nicole, i think what we're seeing is just the importance of a judge who not only understands the law, but is willing to apply it. you mean, you can only imagine

that in the post-election cases, if judges had been willing to entertain unfounded assertions of voter fraud. i mean, we would have gone the crazy rabbit holes that we saw judge cannon go down. and here, we have national security issues at stake and i think one of the big miscalculations the trump team has made is that by virtue of being on the fisa court -- remember, the fisa court is created in recognition of the fact that the executive branch has national security obligations that are so important that they can even override certain civil liberties concerns, that this balancing act can tip in the government's favor. this is what dearie understands. and this is the mind-set that he is going into as he's approaching this. i think that, you know, it doesn't erase the critical importance of the time needed to actually interview witnesses, find out who these documents

could have been disclosed to, and what potential, you know, might be -- what documents might still be missing, for example, that could still be exposed, but i think dearie understands that and hopefully we'll move forward quickly. >> i want to turn to the criminal case against donald trump. there's some interesting reporting today by maggie haberman in "the new york times", which goes to trump's knowledge of what he was doing at the time. one of the elusive piece of the trump puzzle. "the times" is reporting a one-time lawyer warned him late last year that trump could face legal liability if he didn't return the documents. that's according to three people. the lawyer set to impress upon trump the seriousness of the issue and the potential for investigations and legal exposure if he did not return the documents, particularly any

classified material. trump thanked him for the discussion -- you can just picture that, right, good talk -- but was noncommitment about his plans for returning the documents. say tomato, i sa. >> i imagine it was an abrupt good-bye. hershmann is a face we're familiar with, he testified during the january 6th committee. that is another witness for the doj as they piece together that trump knew that he had material he should not have had but he hung onto it anyway. this can't be part of one of the -- they thrown so many stories and excuses up against the wall, oh, other people threw stuff in boxes, the president didn't know what was in there -- it is clear he's now been warned by a person that, in fact, you have material you should not have. you should not have that. at any point. and this just adds to a case

that is being built. one delay now, briefly, it seems like, because of what's happening with the special master. but perhaps not that long. and i think from the doj's perspective, this doesn't change the timetable that much. we do not know if there will be an indictment, but all along, it's going to be after the midterms. trump is not on the ballot, but they would adhere to that 60-day guideline to not have any -- what could be perceived as an overtly political prosecution. that doesn't seem to change here. even if trump lawyers are successful in bogging this down a little bit, that's been their go-to tactic throughout, delay, delay, those delays may not help very much. >> yeah, i want to ask all of you about the criminal investigation and what happens to that on the other side of dearie. i have to sneak in a quick break. when we come back, as we've been discussing, much more on this investigation, the mar-a-lago investigation, that warning we're talking about from eric her shman, plus, a criminal investigation has been opened into how the governor of florida

moved human beings from texas to florida and then to massachusetts. what crimes he might have committed. and new that apparently he's done it again today. later in the program, the definitive account of how dangerous and how insane trump's time in the white house was and the grave danger he poses today. superstar reporters and coauthors peter baker and susan glasser will be our guests. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. g 4 hours or more - can be overwhelming. so, ask your doctor about botox®. botox® prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine before they even start. it's the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. so far, more than 5 million botox® treatments have been given to over eight hundred and fifty thousand chronic migraine patients. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of

a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they'd talked to their doctor and started botox® sooner. so, ask your doctor if botox® is right for you. learn how abbvie could help you save on botox®. it's nice to unwind after a long week of telling people how liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need! (limu squawks) he's a natural. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪

we're back with everyone. andrew weissmann, talk about the criminal investigation and

again, the nonlawyers have sort of two tracks in the same way we talked about, the coordination and collusion prong and the obstruction prong, it feels like we talk about the criminal investigation, as well. there are the acts, thanks to the mueller report, we know there's the act and there's the nexus. it feels like what is public facing is filling out all of those boxes to check, as well. >> yeah, so, with the herschmann reporting, the reason if i were still in the government i'd be sitting there, going, this is a great additional piece is, we know about a lot of circumstantial evidence that helps prove the defendants, in which case, this is trump, his knowledge and intent. that is going to be critical. you need to have proof beyond a reasonable doubt. there's lots of circumstantial evidence, like, how did all these documents get there, they weren't returned, that there were lies being told that they had been returned, but you're looking for what actually did

donald trump know? so, having a former white house counsel saying, i told him that, why classified information has to go back to the archives, that they're not yours, that there are criminal penalties and there could be investigations resulting from that, is devastating evidence. that is exactly what you're looking for. because you want to be able to tell the jury what was in the mind and how you can sort of infer from these facts what's in the mind of your defendant. so, this is really strong evidence. i have to say, i strongly suspect that he is not the only lawyer. we've heard about pat cipollone going into the grand jury and being interviewed, the same thing with pat philbin, the white house counsel and deputy white house counsel. they were actually nominated by the former president to be the former president's representatives to the archives, so, they clearly are not going to sort of be run over the bus by donald trump.

they're going to be saying, we tried to do our job. so, i suspect that is exactly what the government is pulling together to help prove that knowledge, that really critical knowledge piece. >> the intent. >> yep. >> it doesn't hurt that after cassidy hutchinson, mr. herschmann is the best witness we've seen, laced with plenty of f-bombs and you have to be kidding me, he almost looked at the clowns around trump including trump with the same disgust that normal people do. talk about the power of eric herschmann as a witness. >> we've seen it. he's credible. he's obviously very reliable, because his information is being krob ra krob rated. and he is a powerful witness, because he served donald trump. and he had his lines he drew with january 6th, saying this is over the limit. and we know from maggie's reporting, her piece about him is that he said in respect to the current crew that are

surrounding trump, he had -- he didn't take their bull, because they were trying to constrain his testimony before the grand jury and he said, you guys are off-base with this, i'm not going to be put between you and the justice department. >> right, right. >> and i thought that was very important, because it means he's corroborating with the justice department when they come calling, as he's cooperated with the january 6th committee. i think he could be very powerful. and the timing of the interaction that he has with trump is really important. it's right at the end of 2021 and back to maggie haberman, trump himself goes through the boxing, they return some of the materials to the national archives, so, i think that's very incriminating. >> what do you think about sort of the degree of, i mean, i guess trump's hands are always in the proverbial cookie jar, but as you see the high level figures popping up in the multiple criminal

investigations, what do you think their degree of alarm is? >> rising. and dramatically. big names, like herschmann coming forward, it's those dozens of subpoenas that went out, a few people having their phones seized. we reported that there's a lot of people in trump's orbit who have gone dark, gone quiet. text chains have gone silent. people who used to work for the former president together. there had been a sense of invisibility, that he managed to escape one political thing after another, and that this suddenly felt different. it feel like the walls were closing in, and it's in georgia, it's in new york, it's of course the department of justice. and there is a sense that the trump circle has grown very, very small. there's a few people around the former president who he relies on, who he trusts at this point, most of whom, including people who used to be his close advisers, no longer in that orbit at all. and there's real worry here, people aren't sure -- we

remember the former president was seen spotted landing at dulles airport in washington, turned out he was going to see his golf course, but at that moment, it wasn't just the liberals on twitter that were hoping, wishing that was trump going to doj, it was others, as well. waiting for the shoe to drop. >> he just replaced all those old people at the qanon saturday night. do they think they're missed? does anyone feel like this is different, in terms they might get caught in participating in criminal acts or do they feel like they've been cast aside by a new crew? >> it's a little bit of both. there are some people who are in their silo who think they were doing the right thing for him and their country. most of us at this table would disagree with that. >> who is that -- >> the jason millers of the world who are still there. steve bannon, who is one foot in and out, repeopledly. and others recognize they have been cast aside. some of whom chose to leave

because of january 6th. >> and that's cassidy hutchinson -- >> exactly right. and you have -- there is a growing sense, though, with the adults out of the room, and this is so key, also, to what happened after the election, between election and january 6th, so many of the adult figures who were left departed. they looked for new jobs, there had been a covid outbreak in the white house, peopler with not there and that vacuum was filled by rudy giuliani and sidney powell and michael flynn and that sort of thing that's happening again. those are the characters, the only characters left around the former president. >> how do you evaluate the criminal exposure of these sort of dead enders? >> so, you know, one of the things you do when you're a criminal prosecutor, you look for people as you are going up the chain, you know, this is when we were doing paul manafort, we saw, wait, there's rick gates, you look for people who are around the person and you think, would they be -- do they have criminal exposure, can you build a case on them and then you can flip them? obviously mark meadows is, you know --

>> flashing red light, right? >> there's so much that -- and he has to decide, as we used to say, which side of the v he's going to be on, which is, in the united states versus, is he going to be on the united states side,cooperator, or on the defendant's side? and the one other thing important to note is, and it's hard not to read this in light of what's going on is, merrick garland gave an incredibly powerful speech at ellis island on saturday, it was very emotional. it clearly resonated with him personally given his history and his wife's history. and he went out of his way to talk about the rule of law and how there's one rule for everyone. it -- to me, that means that, assuming they build a case where there is enough evidence to charge donald trump, that merrick garland is going to be looking at the precedent within the department for charging people in this circumstance. we're very aware of those

circumstances, and i just think that is going to be determinative -- which, i thought it was hard to listen to that speech and not know what he was saying is, i am going to, because i believe it in my core, it's fundamental to this country, to get this right, and to make this decision. and it doesn't matter that he is the former president. it was like, the anti-judge cannon. i am not going to give him more on this determination. and god knows he has given him a lot of rope in terms of -- and leeway, but on the decision to charge, i took that as a real message that he had the backbone and it was sort of core to what he thought was important to this country. >> the pain, i mean, it's so hard to deduce where the pain and emotion is coming from, but asha, when you look at these three now very active pillars of just what's public facing, we don't know what we don't know, in terms of the conduct of the ex-president is under

investigation, but you look at the pressures bearing down on this one attorney general, how did you hear that speech? >> i agree with andrew. and, you know, i think that what we saw today with judge dearie was an application of that principle. there's one law. and trump was being treated as anyone else would. and just to make a connection, when we were talking earlier about the investigations with january 6th, i do think that it's important to look at trump's arguments in the mar-a-lago case as really an extension of the big lie that led to january 6th. i mean, we think -- these are discreet investigations, but the through line between them is that trump continues to assert that he has equal presidential power to the current sitting president. and that is the argument that he's making, that is an argument that unfortunately was actually entertained to some degree by a

sitting judge. and at some point, i think with merrick garland, he's going to have to, you know, assert that trump isn't above the law and that the law's applied to him like anyone else and, by the way, that the current executive branch is the current executive branch and that he is now on ordinary person. >> asha that is so important and so profound and it is so hardwired into the messaging to his followers, i mean, the fact that trump's lawyer was in judge dearie's courtroom today referring to trump as the president, that's what he needs his followers to hear. the legal arguments that sound assign to someone like me, who has never gone within six inches of a law school classroom, sound normal to a supporter who think he's the president, about actual executive. what do you think of the stakes

in front of judge dearie and the doj? >> i think, just from what we know, we are at a moment in our history where we really have to walk the walk that no man is above the law. you know, the closest we've come before this was richard nixon and in that case, there was at least some appearance of contrition and remorse and consequence that he, after he stepped down. there's been no consequence here. so, what is at stake is really not just the account ability to trump, but really, the message it sends to the people coming after him. i really think that there is a mold that is being formed of people who are taking notes and wanting to follow in these footsteps, and so, that is what's at stake. and what we don't know is really the damage that this may have caused. to our national security. as andrew points out, you know, periodically on twitter, we still don't know why he took these documents and what he did with them or planned to do with them. i mean, it's now been almost two

months. and we're still waiting to hear that. and that, i think, is going to be explosive, potentially, if we're able to ever find that out. >> all right, because andrew and asha have talked about it, we found that sound from merrick garland from the weekend, we'll play that for you after a quick break. asha, jonathan, thank you for starting us off. ryan and andrew, stick around. we will be right back. when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis persists... put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when uc got unpredictable,... i got rapid symptom relief with rinvoq. check. when uc held me back... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc got the upper hand... rinvoq helped visibly repair the colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief. lasting, steroid-free remission. and a chance to visibly repair the colon lining. check. check. and check. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots,

some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older... with at least 1 heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq... as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. put uc in check and keep it there, with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq. and learn how abbvie could help you save. as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those... ...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com when it comes to giving your home a fresh spin,

wayfair makes it easy to refresh or remodel. so you can switch up your style. get an upgrade. and make it shine. no matter what project your tackling, wayfair's got everything you need to give your home a fresh spin. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪

♪ well the sun is shining and the grass is green ♪ ♪ i'm way ahead of schedule with my trusty team ♪ ♪ there's heather on the hedges ♪ ♪ and kenny on the koi ♪ ♪ and your truck's been demolished by the peterson boy ♪ ♪ yes -- ♪ wait, what was that? timber... [ sighs heavily ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you've built with affordable coverage.

the rule of law means that the law treats each of us alike. there is not one rule for friends. another for foes. one rule for the powerful. and another for the powerless. one rule for the rich, another for the poor. the rule of law is not assured. it is fragile. it demands constant effort and vigilance. the responsibility to ensure the rule of law is and has been the duty of every generation in our country's history. it is now your duty. >> wow. that was powerful. joining our conversation, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney. and lucky for us, an msnbc legal analyst. andrew weissmann, you called up that sound, and we played it and

it certainly delivers. i also hear the weight of everything resting on doj to prove what he says is true. >> absolutely. you know, i think there are two things that the department needs for backbone and it needs sort of hypercompetence. we don't know about that, meaning putting cases like this together, you need to have really smart, experienced people and as attorney general garland has said, they can't make mistakes. you just can't afford to do that. that's one part. the other part that is equally important is backbone. is having somebody like the attorney general saying that if this is warranted, i am going to do it. and it will be my decision and i'm behind -- i will stand behind you. and to me, that's, again, it may be, this is, like, a rorschach test and you read into it, but i think it's hard not to in this situation. and what merrick garland is saying, this is fundamental to

his view of what it means to be the attorney general and to have the rule of law and to have a working democracy. i actually agree with him. i've been in the department for years. and i think what's so important for the people in the department to hear him say that, not just to the new citizens who he was speaking to in that speech. >> let me just press you in this one narrow manner. i listened to it and also thought it was a speech that robert mueller might have given when he was the country's fbi director in the years after 9/11 and through the time that he led the mueller investigation. and yet, there's a real sense, you've written about it, that that investigation came up short of holding donald trump accountable. what's different now? >> so, i think there are two things. one is, it's important to remember that robert mueller was within the department of justice and was supposed to, under the rules, just report to the attorney general. he did not --

>> that's where things went bad. >> exactly. and he did not have the power to decide to indict or not. now, that's not a total out. he could have written a different report, and that is a fair criticism, i've made that criticism, there's two -- i think there are two legitimate sides to that, but i think that's an important issue. the other is that i do think merrick garland has learned from how donald trump operates and as you've talked about, sort of this vacuum that is created if the department doesn't take its opportunities to speak. so, they have done that, in various filings, i think they've done a really good job of making sure that the public understands what they've done so that they're not just hearing a bunch of spin from donald trump. and i think this speech to new citizens was another example of that, that i think merrick garland and robert mueller are similar in that they're private people and they have a lot of backbone and are strong people,

but i sense with merrick garland that he is pushing himself to meet the moment that he's in and to be making these statements and learning from what has happened in the past. >> joyce, i want to bring you in. one of the things that merrick garland's justice department is doing is now certainly seeing to cruise ahead in its investigations into january 6th. and one of the developments that was reported overnight is that eric herschmann, who we have been talking about in the context of informing donald trump that the classified documents he took and hoarded at mar-a-lago, was something he could be in criminal trouble for. he's also been subpoenaed by doj. big day of his for one of the most memorable january 6th witnesses. let me just play some of his testimony and ask you what value he adds to those investigations. >> i said, are you out of your effing mind? i said, you're completely crazy.

i said to him, are you out of your effing mind. and i only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth from now on. orderly transition. get a great effing criminal defense lawyer. you're going to need it. i said [ bleep ] -- sorry. congratulations. you just committed a felony. the best i could tell, the only thing you know about environmental and elections challenges is they both start with "e" and i'm not even sure if you even know that. >> he -- by the time january 6th had happened and he ended up a witness before the congressional committee investigating january 6th had, what do they say, zero effs left to give and that was his testimony. talk about him now as a witness at the disposal of doj. >> well, he's obviously the witness you want to put on the stand if you're a prosecutor. he's colorful, it's very memorable testimony.

he has the gift of good lines and a good way of getting across substantive information in a way that tends to be something that juries will remember. and that of course matters a lot to prosecutors when they're trying a long, complicated case. that said, nicole, i think it's important to focus on what this investigation means. something like 40 subpoenas in the last couple of weeks, they've seized some phones from key players. they're beginning to go through those phones. this looks a lot more to me like early stage investigation than late stage. this is what you do when you're churning through the witnesses and trying to figure out what your universe of evidence looks like. it doesn't look to me like they're at the very end where they've got indictments drafted and they're just trying to fill in a couple of gaps in the evidence. so, whether or not mr. herschmann is ultimately a

witness in a criminal case remains unseen. it's important that his access to the president, though, gives him the opportunity to testify, if he will and if the privileges that he may or may not assert permit him to, that he's the witness that can talk about what donald trump said and what he did, what he was told and how he was reacted. and that's all critically important, as you were pointing out earlier in the show, for proving not just what trump did his acts, but for proving his state of mind, which is an essential element of the government's case in a criminal prosecution. >> it is always so much better to hear it from you, joyce. no one's going anywhere. we're going to switch gears. florida governor ron desantis has a criminal investigation, potentially brewing, for him, after his political stunt of moving, relocating, shipping humans across the country. our experts weigh in on that next.

alright, limu, give me a socket wrench, pliers, and a phone open to libertymutual.com they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need... and a blowtorch. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq

saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 2 days. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight.

this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. shingles. some describe it as pulsing electric shocks or sharp, stabbing pains. ♪♪ this painful, blistering rash can disrupt your life for weeks. a pain so intense, you could miss out on family time. the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older, ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ron desantis just might be in legal trouble after the -- should we call it a stunt? sadistic stunt he putted exploiting migrants, human beings to score political points. the texas sheriff opened an investigation into the venezuelan migrants he shipped from texas to martha's vineyard. >> they were taken to martha's vineyard from what we can gather for nothing -- for little more

than a photo-op, video opponent and then they were unceremoniously stranded. somebody came from out of state, preyed upon these people, lured them with promises of a better life which is what they were absolutely looking for with the knowledge that they were going to cling to whatever hope they could be offered for a better life to just be exploited and hoodwinked. >> just in the last few minutes we learned that the migrants who were flown to martha's vineyard are now suing governor desantis and other florida officials in massachusetts federal court alleging that they carried out a premeditated fraudulent and illegal scheme centered on exploiting this vulnerability for the sole purpose of advancing their own personal financial and political interests. we're back with everyone. ryan, do you think there are important legal questions here? >> i think so and i think

governor desantis needs to get good legal counsel. >> busy representing -- maybe he can fly some lawyers in. >> i think it's also the piece with what we've been talking about, to have attorney general garland talk about one rule of law and that is not different for the powerful versus the weak. i'm thinking governor desantis when i hear that as well as trump and that he can't get away with this. if another human being without a position of power coerced migrants in taking them across state lines to another part of the country and stranding them there and the coercion is based on false pretenses, everything the sheriff said can be framed as a legal position as to why that's a crime. a federal crime and crime in texas. so if he was anybody else, he would be definitely under criminal investigation and he would be in deep trouble. so i think that's what he's looking now down the barrel of and it's the way in which the system is supposed to work. >> joyce, your thoughts about these two fronts, legal

potential legal peril for ron desantis? >> i think ron is absolutely right when he says that the civil case may be very telling. it may be very forthcoming. desantis is well educated. he went to yale and harvard law school, presumably he can think through these sort of issues in advance and there are some hallmarks here of a very carefully crafted strategy that permitted these people to just unforgivably mess with the lives of these migrants who were vulnerable people in the first place without exposing themself to some sort of federal criminal exposure. and what i mean by that is that these people were primarily asylum seekers, we're told. that means transporting them because they were here legally at that point won't have the same implications it would have if they had picked, say, a group of folks who were undocumented. looks to me they might have been

very clever here about how they executed this just really revolting political scheme and sometimes when people are too smart they can be too smart by halves and prosecutors like to sit down and read the criminal code from front to back to find crimes that suit the behavior. so, yes, it's important news that this civil lawsuit is proceeding and that it's a means of holding them accountable. i wouldn't rule out criminal action as well. >> wow. all of you, thank you for being not just our expert and eyes and ears but for being in the courtroom, our intrepid courtroom reporter today, a real treat. when we come back susan glasser and peter baker will be here on their new book and the threat donald trump still poses right now. that's next. oosing a treatment r your chronic migraine - 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting 4 hours or more - can be overwhelming. so, ask your doctor about botox®. botox® prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine before they even start. it's the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine

treatment. so far, more than 5 million botox® treatments have been given to over eight hundred and fifty thousand chronic migraine patients. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they'd talked to their doctor and started botox® sooner. so, ask your doctor if botox® is right for you. learn how abbvie could help you save on botox®. republicans in congress call them "entitlements." a "ponzi scheme." the women and men i served with in combat, we earned our benefits. just like people earned their social security and medicare benefits. but republicans in congress have a plan to end

so-called "entitlements" in just five years. social security, medicare, even veterans benefits. go online and read the republican plan for yourself. joe biden is fighting to protect social security, medicare and veterans benefits. call joe biden and tell him to keep fighting for our benefits. when it comes to giving your kitchen a fresh spin, medicare and veterans benefits. with wayfair it's easy. so you can get an upgrade. change your scenery. and make it shine. so no matter what project your tackling, from refresh to remodel, wayfair's got everything you need to give your home a fresh spin. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪

there were so many who wanted to show they were objecting that they'd set up

these sign up sheets in the cloakroom, and as i was sitting there, a member came in, and he signed his name on each one of the state's sheets then he said under his breath the things we do for the orange jesus. and i thought, you know, you're taking an act that is unconstitutional. >> orange jesus. hi, again, it's 5:00 in new york. we talk a lot about him, orange jesus around here as congresswoman liz cheney says a fellow republican described him while at the very same time objecting to the 2020 election results on donald trump's behalf, fraudulently on january 6th. the disgraced ex-president is now the subject of the unbelievable new book by peter baker and susan glasser called "the divider." it describes in stunning detail the villain of a white house, past and the culprit of what they describe as an active crime scene, in more than 700 searing

pages, they retell the story of how every hour of every week of every month of every year of his presidency foreshadowed the insurrection insider he would become when he lost fair and square to president joe biden. how from the start he did not care to follow or to learn the rules. how he was always a liar and a divider who pitted americans and his own white house staffer against each other. they write this, quote, within weeks it was apparent that the trump white house was a place for almost no one trusted anyone else. and for good reason. everyone lied all the time about everything. recalled one aide who was there at the start, trump's own former advisers warned the authors about his dangerous unstable mental state and ignorance. his former national security adviser john bolton, secretly enlisted a republican member of congress to use flattery to get him to reverse major policy decisions he viewed as reckless

or dangerous. bolton's staff coordinated with the republican senator to, quote, try to contain trump more explicitly on north korea. all of it made crystal clear in a resignation letter that mark milley, the highest ranking military officer wrote one week after trump's infamous lafayette square photo-op but never sent. he writes this, quote, it is my belief that you were doing great and irreparable harm and it is my belief you're ruining the international order and causing significant damage to our country overseas. the authors say this is not yet a book about history, not at all, but one about the still impulsive, still dangerous, still most powerful leader of today's gop which trump proves

for them in their interviews with him in which he dished out insults for several republicans and people he hand-picked to advise him but, quote, people he had no words of criticism for, putin, xi jinping, kim jong-un, the january 6th rioters or white supremacists. as for his own vice president, trump said he would not pick mike pence as his running mate if he ran again in 2024, quote, it would be totally inappropriate, trump said, mike committed political suicide by not taking votes that he knew were wrong. triple negatives get confusing. a party in which january 6th is now the admission test led by a disgraced twice impeached ex-president who showed all the symptoms of an ininsurrectionist leader right from the start is where we start with the authors of the new book, "the divider," peter baker, "the new york times" chief white house correspondent, also msnbc political analyst and susan

glasser, it is so nice to see you. staff write irfor "the new yorker." i'm going to start with you. we read the book and i hope we get to all this. but tell me what for you is the thing that you walk around and are like i can't believe we were able to report this on the record? >> well, nicolle, i have to say we are a little upset with liz cheney because that orange jesus quote would have been really great to include in the book, certainly a chapter title it would have warranted if not changing the book title altogether but, look, i think you just quoted from the resignation letter of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff that he wrote out, even though we knew in a general sense that there was this running conflict throughout all four years of the trump presidency between trump and the generals so alarmed by what he was trying to do to disrupt american national security, for me as a journalist over three decades i can never remember

being more just mind blown, the first time that we had access to the full text of that letter and understanding that the sitting leader of the united states military of the nonpartisan u.s. military believed the president of the united states was doing dpraf and irreparable damage that he did not subscribe to many of the principles that the united states fought for in world war ii. this is really for me a -- it captured this extraordinary moment in american history, and it is the reason why peter and i decided to devote the time after trump left office to try to find out more about what happened during his presidency. >> susan, i went back and looked at some of your national security coverage while trump was president and what was public facing in office is all building to what you completely blow out in the reporting on the book and i wonder if you can just sort of encapsulate for me whether you knew or whether it

was known that his own military leaders, cabinet members saw him as a threat to the international world order or whether some came out after he turned on the government he ostensibly led on january 6th. >> yeah, it's a really good question. i mean, had anyone known the extent of that conflict and the fears of the u.s.' national security leadership at the time those would have been banner headlines in "the new york times" and every other news organization. there was a general sense of, you know, conflict, you would hear reports, people reported them contemporaneously like when jim mattis, the first trump defense secretary laughed and i remember hearing it's much worse than you can even imagine but we didn't know chapter and verse on what it was. i wrote a story, nicolle, i remember vividly back in 2017 after trump's disastrous first nato meeting in which i wrote a little about this from my

sources that trump was attacking, nato was refusing to say that he believed in article 5, the all for one, one for all common defense principle and taken it out of his speech. that was big news at the time but i didn't know and was amazed to hear senior officials tell peter and i in reporting this book that they believed trump was much closer than we knew at the time to withdrawing from nato. >> peter, you are one of the best white house reporters, but this was not your first rodeo. you covered the white house in which i served. i think you were still at "the washington post" or were at "the washington post" then "the new york times" then you covered obviously the obama white house and wrote incredible compelling deeply reported books about both those presidencies. this book is so different. it is an indictment of a failed human being. it is a collapse of character and i wonder if you sort of widen the lens of your own reporting about american presidents, how reporting this

book out felt? >> well, it is different than other books, but it's different because of the facts set. the facts that are presented in the book are what would be called damning by anybody because of what he actually did. you are know, my view, we take the approach, journalism the same, look at what's in front of us and try to discover what's not shared and try to present it to our readers and what we found as opposed to other presidencies of a story never seen in american history, never seen a president so willing to push the boundaries of the constitution, to warp the traditions and attack institutions that have served us 246 years in the same way that he has, so that to understand january 6th, our thesis became you had to understand january 20th, 2017 and every day that came in between because it was an inexorable four-year march to this violent conclusion that was eminently predictable if we understood what he was doing at the time and tried to understand at the time. we decided it was worth going back after we left, after he

left office, tried to learn more and i'm sure there will be more to come but this is an important moment, i think, to take stock. >> peter baker, you write about you're able to report out a president whose fact set suggests he didn't want soldiers wounded in service of the country marching in military parades, you report out lindsey graham, most public defender called him a mother f-er it is a searing portrait of the american presidency and who occupied it. i ask susan, was the reporting on the book the first time you saw that version of him that mark milley feared that the international world order was in danger, that john kelly advised people not to work there because he was so bad? >> yeah, look, we spent four years trying to report out as many of these stories as we could during the presidency and what we discovered is when a presidency is over or at least a president leaves office that

people are more willing to talk than they were when he's in office, right, so people were more willing to tell us and share things that they had not before. we were able to report things out we didn't know before or expand on things we did know and understand them better, right? i think one of the things we were surprised by learning new details and new complex common stories we had reported at the time but didn't fully understand as well as learning things we didn't know at the time. a funny small thing but where people heard president trump talk about buying greenland they thought it was a one-off, you know, thought balloon or whatever but, in fact, this had been going on for years because one of his billionaire friends had been trying to push him toward that and forced the whole national security apparatus to try to draft a plank and came up with an options memo like a lease-back provision and took it seriously. we didn't know that at the time. one of these things you can learn after an administration leaves office and talks about the importance of doing books like this so we can learn more about what happened. especially because it may happen

again. >> susan, one of the perfect examples or illustrations of this is the mueller investigation which was so brilliantly coveredly so many news organizations, especially "the times," you learned something new about how trump wanted to try to deal with that. tell that story. >> well, you know, he was constantly searching, as you know, and as is detailed in the report constantly searching for people to, you know, rid him of this meddlesome special counsel and he is also as you know infuriated by his first attorney general jeff sessions for recusing himself from this and, you know, that was i think one of the more extraordinary dramas of the first couple years of the trump presidency and we found out that he actually was repeatedly seeking basically a loyalist, someone who he thought would do his bidding as the attorney general and actually going to not one but two

different members of his cabinet at the time seeking people who would be agreeing to go and replace jeff sessions and presumably take over and eliminate the mueller investigation. obviously that didn't happen but what he found in bill arr who did an enormous amount to distort and shape the public's impression of the mueller investigation that turned out to be misleading when we actually got to see the report ourselves and bill barr is a great example because he's both an enabler and a facilitator of donald trump. but then he says after the election i'm off the train. he wrote a critical memoir and spoke out and said there was no election. widespread election fraud that would warrant overturning the election but bill barr is also a bit disingenious when he says,

oh, my goodness, he went crazy after the election. but really this was the trump all four years. >> exactly. i want to read some mother -- you're both brilliant and beautiful writers. i want to read -- we talked about article 5. this is what's in the book about it. trump had been briefed early in his tenure about article 5 and how mutual defense in nato worked. quote, you mean, if russia attacked lithuania why'd go to war with russia? he responded. that's crazy. he hinted many times that he wanted out of nato. a senior defense official recalled. he never said, do it. but he got really close. a senior white house official confirmed, quote, he wanted to pull out of nato on a number of occasions. that was actually much more serious than people realized. peter baker, i remember on that trip the national security team calling back to the states on multiple occasions and i imagine they were doing far more aggressive and frantic outreach

to reporters like yourself. he's going to do it. he's going to do it in the poland speech. we read it in there. oh, it didn't happen. it will be in the next speech. how -- i think what the book reveals is we were -- it felt like we were on the edge of a knife and we were actually already being cut by that knife and your article 5 reporting is an incredible example of that. >> well, imagine how impactful that would be today, right, when vladimir putin invades ukraine in part because he's trying to drive a wedge in nato, imagine if nato had been fractured successfully the way donald trump seemed to want to do it. if the united states had pulled out of nato what would that mean in terms of vladimir putin today? nato has been -- after having been torn apart during trump's presidency, so it's not an esoteric or abstract question but with great deal of geopolitical import right now. >> peter, i also remember the deep divisions inside the senior

west wing staff between the access of ivanka and all the press offices at one point and john kelly and some of the people who wanted to at least reach toward something looking more professional. this manifests itself in some really amazing reporting about suicide pacts, about staffers who said if you go, i go. about red lines, i used to ask that every single day. what makes them leave? in disparaging john mccain doesn't make them leave, if good people on both sides of a kkk rally doesn't make them leave, i mean there was a red line. we just didn't know what they were. talk about that. >> yeah, one of the through lines in this book, one of the enduring questions in every single interview we did was this moral struggle between staying and working for somebody they didn't believe in that they didn't think was adherent to the

constitution and a lot of times they said if i left it would get worse and, you know, that's a rationization but on the other hand you could find places where that was true. what he wanted them to do and the first aides refused to. john kelly used the example of john mccain. he told the president if you refuse to support him, the american people will come and piss on your grave. pardon me. but that was his language and he did succeed arguably, of course, belatedly in convincing trump to support that funeral and keep the flags half-staff. but at what cost, right? everybody there who worked for him, it feels like paid a cost in some way or another and the question was how long they were willing to take it or how long he was willing to put up with it. >> susan, the book also i think has an incredibly full picture of the doubts that the national security leaders had about

donald trump's integrity and his fitness and i know there's been a lot of reporting, the book, you know, by anonymous who we, of course, know who that s the 25th amendment comes up almost like a punch line now but i wonder if the national security officials ever sat down and really worried about the guy who's finger was on the buttons? >> yeah, i mean i think the record is pretty clear that this was a through line again from january of 2017 on, you know, that trump was determined to test and push the boundaries in a way that no modern president ever had been and that they viewed him, i think, as reckless and as not fully committed in many ways to, you know, or even understanding of many of the pillars, how our national security works. now, we, again, had publication of this even donald trump as a candidate made it clear he had no idea what the nuclear triad

was. it's not a matter of factual ignorance. in his repeated efforts to test the boundaries. there's this incredible scene. literally the first new adviser are gathered around the table there. there's only one holdover from the end of the obama administration, that's the chairman of the joint chiefs at the time, joe dunford and there are meant to be briefing trump on the national security threats around the globe and it's a disaster, right? it's the kind of vintage trump. he's rambling off on other subjects, complaining. at one point according to our reporting he's complaining about south korea and how much money they charge for his hotels for their tvs. this is in the first national security briefing of his presidency and it's such a disaster that reince priebus calls a number of the advisers and says, we better go to my

office and figure out what the heck to do after this terrible meeting. and dunford in his role as the uniformed, you know, sort of senior statesman there says, okay, well, let's not worry too much about it. once he settles in we'll figure out what the trump doctrine is and how it works and jared kushner cuts him off and basically says, no, that's not how this is ever going to work, general and, of course, jared kushner was right. he understood who his father-in-law was and the military establishment didn't know but they quickly learned that this was a president like no other. >> to say the least. we'll ask you both to stick around with us. much more to come from peter and susan's fantastic new book, "the divider" including some of the most dangerous yes men who remain in the disgraced ex-president's or not and later in the hour one issue that dogged the current president has been the price of gas. those prices have been coming down steadily and a lot.

the energy secretary, jennifer granholm will be our guest at the table to talk about why president joe biden might not be getting the credit that they think he deserves. and how to explain the political party that delights in the shipping of human beings, migrants, fleeing communism while staying silent on its wholesale embrace of qanon, charlie sykes will be here to try to explain that. "deadline: white house" comes back after a quick break. don't go anywhere. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements,

which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. >> tech: at safelite, we take care of vehicles pay as little as zero dollars with the latest technology. we can replace your windshield ...and recalibrate your safety system. >> customer: and they recycled my old glass. >> tech: don't wait. schedule today. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ♪♪ giorgio, look.

the peanut butter box is here. ralph, that's the chewy pharmacy box with our flea and tick meds. it's not peanut butter. i know, i know. but every time the box comes, we get the peanut butter. yes, because mom takes the meds out of the box and puts them in the peanut butter. sounds like we're getting peanut butter. yes, but that is the chewy pharmacy box. ♪ the peanut butter box is here. ♪ ♪ the peanut butter box is here ♪ alright, i'm out. pet prescriptions delivered to your door. chewy. there's a reason comcast business powers more businesses pet prescriptions delivered to your door. than any other provider. actually, there's a few... comcast business offers the fastest, reliable network... the protection of security edge... and the most reliable 5g network. want me to keep going? i can... whether your business is starting or growing, you need comcast business.

technology solutions that put you ahead get started with fast speeds and advanced security together for $69.99 a month for 12 months. plus find out how to get up to a $650 prepaid card with a qualifying bundle. trump and i, we've had a hell of a journey. i hate it being this way.

from my point of view he's been a consequential president but today first thing you'll see, all i can say is count me out, enough is enough. i've tried to be helpful. >> never mind lindsey came back. peter baker and susan glasser, authors of this great, new book. susan, what's amazing is -- you have great colorful language i alluded to earlier. they all know he's a garbage human being, a terrible president and threat to national and domestic security and they all go along with it. why? >> that's the enduring mystery, nicolle. the self-abasement of many of these folks has been pretty extraordinary and, of course, there would be no trump presidency to speak of without them, you know, one of the things that's very clear, right, donald trump without the lindsey

grahams and the rest of the republican infrastructure that's supported him, he would have been another angry old dude shouting at the television in between golf games and, of course, it's this -- trump in the white house is the story of people like lindsey graham and, you know, there was a remarkable moment where he, you know, we ran into him on a washington street literally and he told us how he thought that, you know, trump was a lying mother f but he also said but he's a lot of fun to hang out with and graham seemed to be absolutely dazzled by this kind of access to power and celebrity that trump offered him, you know, it really -- it's pretty amazing in a way i used to say, right, that donald trump was like holding up a mirror for other people's souls and obviously part of this book, what it shows us in the mirror isn't all that flattering to many of these folks. >> it's so -- such a good point,

peter, sunday night "the times" reported that the rally saturday night that i think looked really weird, people holding up their finger and there was background music playing while trump was talking which wasn't a hallmark of a lot of rallies, always walk on and walk off music but wasn't always background music while trump was rambling. that changed. the fingers were up. the times reports the song played is identical to the qanon theme song. this is where republicans have led the united states of america. this is where republicans have turned the republican party into a qanon cult. what came the closest to remorse in terms of reporting you did for the book? >> whose remorse? >> anyone in the republican party. who comes the closest to feeling any remorse for what they've ushered in? >> that's a good question. you know, there are obviously people who were talking to us who were trying to, you know, cleanse their soul, cleanse

their reputations, you know, rewrite history for their own benefit, to rationalize or explain away their involvement. there are only really a handful of people i think we talked to we feel like were completely willing to say, you know, big mistake, never should have been there. you know, people -- not even necessarily household names, you know, people like miles taylor you mentioned earlier, the book, elizabeth -- i got in and i was wrong. i made a mistake and it was much worse than i anticipated. a lot of others were trying to basically say, look, you know, he was a terrible person or president but they didn't want to be associated with saying things on the record. even now to that effect. they might want to tell their stories but they are still reluctant to cross him too

overtly and remarkable what power he still has power over people who don't believe him and is a threat to the country and yet are still very much i think, you know, intimidated or nervous about getting on his bad side. >> it's a really, really beautifully written, incredibly reported story of, as you both said, some of the things we knew were happening but didn't understand everything that was grinding and churning under the surface, thank you so much to both of you for being here. peter and susan's new book, "the divider" is out now. peter baker and susan glasser, thank you so much for spending time with us and congratulations. when we come back, we will shift gears to the current occupant of the oval office president joe biden who is on a roll lately. helped in part by gas prices that are going down very quickly for which his team doesn't feel like he gets much credit for. we'll try to change that. energy secretary jennifer

granholm will be our guest at the table after a quick break. don't go anywhere. ♪things are getting clearer♪ ♪i feel free to bare my skin♪ ♪yeah, that's all me♪ ♪nothing and me go hand in hand♪ ♪nothing on my skin♪ ♪that's my new plan♪ ♪nothing is everything♪ achieve clearer skin with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. in another study, most people had 90% clearer skin, even at 4 years. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪it's my moment, so i just gotta say♪ ♪nothing is everything♪ serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections, or a ler ability to fight them, may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to. ♪nothing is everything♪ now's the time to ask your doctor about skyrizi, the number one dermatologist prescribed biologic.

learn how abbvie could help you save. as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those... ...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com when it comes to giving your home a fresh spin, wayfair makes it easy to refresh or remodel. so you can switch up your style. get an upgrade. and make it shine. no matter what project your tackling, wayfair's got everything you need to give your home a fresh spin.

♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ kevin: i've fought wildfires for twenty years. here's the reality we face every day. this is a crisis. we need more firefighters, more equipment, better forest management to prevent wildfires and reduce toxic smoke. and we need to reduce the tailpipe emissions that are driving changes to our climate. that's why cal fire firefighters, the american lung association, and the california democratic party support prop 30. prevent fires. cut emissions.

and cleaner air. yes on 30. i'm telling the american people we'll get control of inflation and their prescription drug prices will be a hell of a lot lower, health care costs will be lower. their basic costs for everybody. energy prices will be lower, in a situation where they'll begin to gain control again. i'm more optimistic than i've been in a long time.

>> that was president joe biden on "60 minutes" remaining optimistic about not only state of the u.s. economy, but particularly energy costs. they have continued to go down week after week after week especially over the last four weeks, gas prices which earlier in the summer were as high as $5 a gallon are down 25% to about $3.74 nationwide. the plummeting gas prices are making americans feel better but overall state of the economy with consumer sentiment reaching a three-month high at 58.2% that gives the administration another boost of some momentum heading into the midterms. joining us is energy secretary jennifer granholm. i said i haven't seen you since you've been in the cabinet and miss all of your smart political insight so maybe at the end we'll pick your brain a little bit but tell me -- i mean, answer two questions for me. one, what is happening and, two, what is not getting out? >> well, number one, what's

happen something that the president sort of unleashed the kraken which is the strategic petroleum reserve back in the late spring. he said because the prices were starting to go up this is, of course, as a result of putin's invasion of ukraine, he said i'm going to release a million barrels a day from our strategic petroleum reserve for the next six month, 180 million barrels, that has had an impact. obviously there's been other activity on the globe and the globe that is also done that but really the point was we wanted to make up for the gap which was the amount of russian oil, because, of course, oil is traded on a global market, what is the gap that we had to fill with our strategic petroleum reserve and so now we're seeing supply and demand start to balance out. it's been almost 100 days, 98 straight days of gas prices falling as a result of that leadership. caveats all over because anything can happen globally. one of the big challenges, i think, will be if china opens up

again and everybody starts to drive because they've been in this lockdown because of covid. there will be an upward pressure on prices because demand will go up. we want to increase supply. we've been asking our international allies as well as domestically to increase production at this moment so people aren't hurting, and all of that has been happening, as well. >> it seems like there were some -- i mean, i remember when the president came out and pauled it the putin tax, tried to explain to the country that gas could become more expensive because of our support of ukraine and you still have upward of 90% of americans support ukraine in the war against russia but it was they didn't want to pay more for gas. did that -- was there sort of an all hands recognition that that was a political reality and an economic reality. >> absolutely. i mean, people were hurting and, you know, there's cross currents with the clean energy agenda as well, right? we're asking for increases in

production for today so that people can make sure they can have reasonable prices at the pump and, you know, by the way, that's just like so expensive for people. right now if they have two cars, they save about $140 a month in fill-up costs based from the peak so it is a real impact on the ground. but we also want to move, transform our economy to clean energy so we are not at the whim of what's happening globally and that means moving toward electrification over time and bringing down the prices of those electric vehicles so people can afford them so there's a lot of cross currents happening, but the good news is that because -- i mean we're all so obsessed with inflation, right? gas price, fuel prices are a big chuck of inflation, one of the reasons why you started to see it level out last month was because of these prices coming down and we hope that will continue. >> what are the talks or preparations? i mean i know in europe there's a lot of angst and hand-wringing about what the winter could

usher in, the war in ukraine continues to rage on, what are the plans to sort of stay ahead of this and keep prices or try to keep prices where they are? >> there's the oil and gas prices and then there's the natural gas prices, in europe natural gas prices are through the roof because, again, putin is essentially using energy as a weapon and turning off the supply, i mean, you know, europe has been and so obvious to everybody now way overreliant on the supply from one country whose values they don't share and so this is why this push toward being energy independent through clean energy is a global push and, in fact, you know, with the passage of the inflation reduction act really sends a message the united states is serious about being able to build our own clean energy and be independent here and we want to be able to help our allies as well so that means exporting liquefied natural gas and helping them out and

partnering on technologies that reduce their carbon pollution like clean energy technologies. >> will you go to puerto rico and help them? i think it's five years ago today that hurricane maria hit them and devastated them. they are now out of power again. that grid is so fragile. will you go over and try to advise them? >> we have been. we have a team that's been working on puerto rico now for two years really, in fact, our national renewable energy laboratory and several of the other labs have actually -- are working on a road map of getting puerto rico to 100% clean electricity so they're not reliant on unstable sorts so hearing anecdotally the people who had solar panels on their roof and energy and batteries that backed it up, their power did not go out so that's one of the options is to get people completely saturated with solar panels and storage. but we also want to make sure

the grid itself is resilient. so as of right now, the latest report from today, we have a team on the ground there as well so the latest report right now is that there's about 200,000 people whose power has been returned -- excuse me, 300,000 people whose power is restored but 20% back on. we expect this will be much better than maria, obviously much less of a category 1 versus category 4 but much more, much greater coordination right now than existed five years ago. so that's a hopeful sign but that grid is definitely fragile and the overall goal is getting to 100% clean electricity will require significant investment which the federal government has -- our federal government has been putting forward to make sure we help puerto rico. >> you have to imagine the trauma that's all unearthed to go through this again almost. >> terrible. >> i want to ask you about a

different hat that you wore. you were governor of michigan. it feels like ground zero for all the looney stuff happening in american politics right now and i wonder how concerned you are when you see the efforts to really sort of strike the matches of disinformation and to use the big lie to disenfranchise voters in michigan. i wonder what your concern is. >> coming from michigan obviously having been the governor there and, you know, when i was governor there it was the tea party and it was some of that but now it is just amped up to a shocking level really, a shocking level for all of us who love our country and who have taken oaths, you know, in support of the constitution and who were raised saying the pledge of allegiance and what are you pledging if you're not believing in democracy, right? it's just so -- it's so alarming. i can tell you that taking that hat off because i'm -- i can't

say anything partisan so i'm so optimistic and encouraged about being in the position that i'm in right now because this movement toward a clean energy future and the jobs that will be created especially bringing back manufacturing jobs i believe has bipartisan support and there are lots of aspects of the zero carbon economy that actually do have bipartisan support so i'm enthused to be working hand in glove on that with all who care about their future of our planet. >> i spent a lot of time talking to voters in michigan and they care about the issues. they do care about jobs and do care about the energy. >> they care about manufacturing jobs. that's why i love the inflation reduction act invent advising those jobs to come back. so tired of seeing them go to china, to, you know, other low wage places and what this does it levels the playing field and brings back all these

manufacturing jobs to the united states in building out this whole energy sector. so exciting. >> you still -- you can take off the hat and still deliver the message better than just about anybody else. very nice to see you. >> great to see you. >> in new york today. secretary of energy jennifer granholm. thank you for being with us. over the past few days, we have seen, we have covered the cruelty and the insanity of the american republican party. we've watched it reach dizzying and alarming new heights and we've heard nothing. we actually looked. we tried. we opened our lines. we reached out. nothing from republican party leaders after their former president fully embraced publicly embraced the dangerous qanon conspiracy. our friend charlie sykes will be our guest after a quick break to tell us where we go from here.

when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis persists... put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when uc got unpredictable,... i got rapid symptom relief with rinvoq. check. when uc held me back... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc got the upper hand... rinvoq helped visibly repair the colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief. lasting, steroid-free remission. and a chance to visibly repair the colon lining. check. check. and check. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older...

with at least 1 heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq... as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. put uc in check and keep it there, with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq. and learn how abbvie could help you save. ♪ ♪ this... is a glimpse into the no-too-distant future of lincoln. ♪ ♪ it's what sanctuary could look like... feel like... sound like... even smell like. more on that soon. ♪ ♪ the best part? the prequel is pretty sweet too. ♪ ♪ time. it's life's most precious commodity, especially when you have metastatic breast cancer. when your time is threatened, it's hard to invest in your future. until now. kisqali is helping women live longer than ever before

when taken with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant... in hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer. kisqali is a pill that's proven to delay disease progression. kisqali can cause lung problems, or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain... a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. avoid grapefruit during treatment. your future is ahead of you, so it's time to make the most of it with kisqali. because when you invest in yourself, everyone gets the best of you.

our former president is apparently suggested if he is prosecuted his supporters should stand up to our constitutional order and the rule of law, stand up and through whatever means are needed prevent his prosecution, prevent the application of the law. it is hard to see this as anything but a direct threat to our constitution, to our republic and a credible one at that. one can only wonder is this where the republican party will go next? the prosecution is inappropriate

because maga will violently oppose it? >> devastating and terrifying proposition there put forth by congresswoman liz cheney about her own party. a party that with the exception of her and adam kinzinger at every turn has put its undying loyalty to the ex-president over everything else. let's bring in charlie sykes, editor at large at the bulwark and msnbc contributor. i sometimes don't expect to hear from this zombie republican party but i actually did expect them to stand up yesterday. especially people who serve on the intelligence committee or have any understanding of the threat environment in preor post-9/11, pre or post oklahoma city. playing music while the people held up one finger. to not have any rebuke of the

imagery, to not have any rebuke of the alignment with the qanon brand and mission was to me almost the scariest thing that's happened yet. >> you know, it's easy to get numbed by this. you know, your program today has been fascinating listening to peter baker and susan glasser, who remind us that what we've known for years now that donald trump is reckless. he is unstable. he's ignorant, immoral, dishonest and the reality is he's more dangerous than ever. he is now very openly threatening violence, chaos, anarchy if he is held accountable in the rule of law. he is embracing one of the most dangerous conspiracy theories out there and i listened to the reaction you had, if there was any mythical red line, any point at which trump would go too far this would be it because you would think that on earth 2.0 in

a rational political universe you would have responsible republicans saying, okay, we are conservatives, we are republicans, but you cannot implicitly or explicitly threaten violence in response to legal action. you cannot do this. this. it is dangerous to embrace something as extreme as the qanon conspiracy theory. and it's been absolute crickets. there's been absolutely nothing from any republican. and at this point i suppose, nicolle, we can't -- i do think that -- and again, we've talked about this over the years, right now, i think it's very, very clear that donald trump poses a much greater and more imminent threat to the constitutional republic than he ever has before, and i think that we

ought to take those threats and his attempt to intimidate the department of justice very, very seriously. >> i'm alarmed by what you're saying but i'm so glad you're saying it. let me just be clear -- i don't care about the modern republican party as a political story. i don't care how their senate forecasts look. i don't care how much money they have. i do care about the -- in the words of the current fbi director appointed by donald trump, the single greatest threat to our homeland is domestic violent extremism, and right now, the single greatest amplifier of extremist messages and iconography is donald trump. where are all the people who backed everything that we did as a country to protect ourselves after other attacks and threats? >> well, again, this has become a story we've seen over and over again. we're seeing grownup republicans, the so-called good republican who rallying around

the most extreme candidates out there, whether it's blake master or doug mastriano, but this is a tell there's been no response to what donald trump is saying. but i also think this is one of those key moments. also very interesting split screen, listened to what merrick garland had to say the other day at ellis island. i'm glad you played a sound bite of his speech where we talked about the rule of law, but you the fragility of the rule of law, and how we can't be afraid to advance the rule of law. here you have an attorney general who's trueing this red line, in if he cannot blinking when donald trump the former president is basically saying, you know, nice little democracy you have there. it would be a shame if anything happened to it. >> let me show you what the am kinzinger offered up as an explanation. >> i think people in many cases fear more than they fear death, they fear being digged out of their tribe. we're tribal people by nature

any way. it's evolutionary. but when all of a sudden the people you love lose respect for you or divorce you over text message, whatever that is, that's a terrible feeling. i've lived it. and i think when you look at that kind of stuff it explains why leaders don't lead. and when leaders don't lead and tell people the truth, you can't imagine the people that follow them, that look to them for guidance that are hearing the truth are going to believe anything different. >> it's a really good explanation andarticulation. but what people don't realize is i remember in 2015 calling donald trump a disgrace. it's black and white. it was so binary. and i wonder what you think the prospects are for more add. kinzingers and liz cheneys. i'm not hopeful. >> i wish i could be. kinzerring is right in describing this phenomenon.

i was thinking the sense of futility in the republican party. people are thinking, look, if republican voters, if the base is not going to listen to general mark milley, not going to listen to mark kelly, bill barr, or people in other positions to see exactly what donald trump was and how he behaved as president, if those people are not going to move the needle, what can i do to change the dynamic other than throw myself on a political hand grenade like liz cheney? so, there is this sense of not just cowardice, but the sense of futility to do anything about it. but this is a very, very dangerous moment for america. and you know, i don't want to -- i don't want to have my hair on fire here, but you know, when you have the former president of the united states with the largest mega phone on the right openly talking about the american people not standing for something, we've seen the potential for violence. in fact, it's not just potential

violence -- we've seen crazied individuals who have sent pipe bombs to people in the media. we've seen people who shoot up fbi buildings. we've seen what happened january 6th. this is a real moment for people to put country over party, and yet it feels naive to think that it's going to happen right now. and i think mainly because they watched other people with great credibility, great access, great insight into donald trump and his erratic presidency speak out and have no effect whatsoever other than to be excommunicated by their fellow republicans, so i don't think it's going to change. >> charlie sykes, you have put words to my despair since seeing those images sunday and hearing nothing. thank you so much for the conversation today. >> thank you. >> another break for us. we'll be right back. >> another break for us. we'll be right back. or more - can be overwhelming. so, ask your doctor about botox®. botox® prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine

before they even start. it's the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. so far, more than 5 million botox® treatments have been given to over eight hundred and fifty thousand chronic migraine patients. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. in a survey, 92% of current users said they wish they'd talked to their doctor and started botox® sooner. so, ask your doctor if botox® is right for you. learn how abbvie could help you save on botox®. bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspired by real stories of bipolar depression. i just couldn't find my way out of it. the lows of bipolar depression

can take you to a dark place. latuda could make a real difference in your symptoms. latuda was proven to significantly reduce bipolar depression symptoms. and in clinical studies, had no substantial impact on weight. this is where i want to be. call your doctor about sudden behavior changes or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. now i'm back where i belong. ask your doctor if latuda is right for you. pay as little as zero dollars for your first prescription. oh, that i can't believe i scored this price feeling! pay wayfair always deliversrs small prices for big dreams. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ pst. girl. you can do better. at least with your big-name wireless carrier. with xfinity mobile you can get unlimited for $30 per month on the nation's most reliable 5g network.

they can even save you hundreds a year on your wireless bill over t-mobile, at&t, and verizon. wow. i can do better! yes you can! i can do better, too! now you really can do better! switch to the fastest mobile service - xfinity mobile. now with the best price on two lines of unlimited. just $30 a line.

the january 6th select committee's public hearings were the news events of the summer, and they will be back very soon. well, at least one more time. chairman bennie thompson told reporters this afternoon that the select committee's next public hearing will focus on a theme the committee has not yet covered. and while thompson would not confirm the floated date of next wednesday september 28th, he did say that this next hearing would be the final one. quote, unless something else develops, end quote. meanwhile, the committee began putting forward forums to shore up our elections and u.s. democracy. liz cheney and zoe lofgren introduced a bill yesterday, the

presidential election reform act which would reform the election certification process, including making absolutely clear that the vice president's role in certification is merely ceremonial. thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these truly extraordinary time. we are a grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. >> we begin with the trump team and the justice department in court today with the special master actually pressing on donald trump's lawyers for evidence. nbc reports that the judge was basically skeptical of the thrust of the trump argument, pressing trump's lawyers for refusing to substantiate trump's claim that the declassified mar-a-lago documents, somehow, that there were declassification claims that could be supported. indeed, the judge seemed doubtful of the entire defense, telling trump's