discrimination in voting. that's because congress -- it gives congress the power to enforce that. that's because, obviously, we fought a civil war, and then had a civil rights movement 100 years later because black folks were being disenfranchised, and the voices were not being heard. >> as justice ketanji brown jackson i thought pointed out very well today, deuel ross, who was before the court this morning, thanks very much. i appreciate it. >> thank you for having me. >> that is all in on this tuesday night. alex wagner starts right now. good evening, alex. >> -- i love that she made in originalist argument to that supreme court. >> do you think the people that wrote the reconstruction amendments we're thinking about race? >> context, maybe. thanks, chris, as always. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. tonight, donald trump, with one of his biggest legal headaches before the nation's highest court. earlier this evening, trump's lawyers filed an appeal to the supreme court over --

mar-a-lago. trump undoubtedly is hoping to get a favorable ruling from the courts six conservative justices, three of whom trump appointed. now, trump's lawyers are not explicitly trying to prevent doj investigators from looking at the documents taking from his beach club. but they are attempting to get the review of the documents back before the court appointed special master, which could potentially throw some sand in the gears of the departments investigation. despite recent reporting that trump's legal team was perhaps looking to soften its tone in this case, the filing today by trump's lawyers is filled with more angry screens against the department of justice. they accused the department of feigned concern about reported -- to pin some offense on trump. it is the latest in a series of aggressive and bellicose moves by trump, which he's employed for a very long time to move away from scandals and legal

quandaries. and it's more evidence of the mindset with which he approaches both the powers of the presidency and the keeping of the nation's secrets. in a post on his social media website following the filing today, trump told his followers, i want my documents back. that's what he said. i want my documents back. because trump still believes that the classified government records seized from his home, his beach club, belonged to him and him alone. today, veteran new york times journalist maggie haberman has released a new book about donald trump's life and time in office's. it's called confidence man the: making of donald trump and the breaking of america. the book is full of previously unreported stories about trump's erratic behavior in the white house, including new details about what else trump's mishandling of classified information we. and one passage -- trump battled with his own national security team over his desire to play fast and loose with sensitive secrets,

including by tweeting out pictures of things he knew or classified. what trump tweeted a sensitive picture of damages and rainy and space facility without -- ink out classified details, because he liked how the image lacked. if you take out the classification, that's the sexy part, he protested as they tried to make changes. white house chief of staff john kelly tried to prevent intelligence from being taken upstairs to the president or left in trump's possession after briefings. trump's behavior illustrated why kelly was concerned: trump waved items such as his letters with kim jong-un, which he appeared to believe the north korean leader had himself written, at visitors to the oval office, including reporters. in an interview with haberman last fall, trump denied taking those letters from the north korean leader with him to mar-a-lago, claiming, no, i think that's in the archives. those love letters were recovered from mar-a-lago by the national archives a few months later.

in the course of her reporting for this book, haberman also -- penchant for throwing paper records in the toilet. literally. she obtained these previously released images of -- flush down the toilet in an apparent violation of the presidential records act. there is more, of course. the book paints a vivid picture of a man who seemed to have little, if any, respect for classified material, who lied with little hesitation, who flooded institutional norms, who flashed important documents down the toilet. is it any wonder that we are where we are here? with thousands of government documents apparently stored in a basement at trump speech club? if anything could've seen this coming, it is maybe maggie haberman, and boy is there a lot to unpack and her new book. joining us now is the woman herself -- maggie haberman. she's the author of the brand-new book out today, confidence man, the making of donald trump in the breaking of america. i've been waiting for you to come back into this building instead on the site with me.

it's been a long time, my friend. >> it's good to see you. >> congratulations on the buck. it is so top full of information, but it also paints a full picture of a man not just at the start of his presidency, but the genesis of donald trump as a political animal, our presence in our pop cultural landscape, if you will. i'm gonna ask you, as someone who knows and well, whose talk to him, i mean, in some ways people think you're sort of the singular voice on all things trump. when you look at what's happened at mar-a-lago, when you look at the various defenses he's implied, does any of this surprise you? >> now. and i read about this in the book. want to make clear. there are so many people who've done so much work on donald trump over the decades -- i was -- but trump is a person of a few moves. a handful of moves, and the challenge for people around him is figuring out which one he's using at any given moment. and it can sometimes be

unclear. but what we're seeing with what he did with taking the mar-a-lago documents, and then how he has handled addressing questions about it, is entirely in keeping with his dna over the course of his life. >> the disregard with which he traded these documents, and the disorganization to -- it would be shocking to most people on the outside. was it shocking to you? when you look at the toilet filled with documents, how can any of it be surprising? but has any of the actions he apparently undertook -- as any of that surprise you? >> what surprised me was the volume of material he had. that continues to stymie about the story. in that first tranche of boxes that be returned to the national archives, they discovered that there were 184 classified documents. actually, i'm not sure if they discovered it or the doj ended, but they discovered there are 184 individual classified documents --

that wasn't it. there were more that they retrieved in response to a subpoena. -- trump's lawyer signed an attestation saying, yeah, that's a. we gave back all the documents with classified markings and then, of course, we found out that there were many other documents. >> 11,000 documents. >> there were 11,000 pages, and more than 100 additional individual documents with classified -- >> right. remember, -- >> each of those documents could have several pages. it continues to be surprising. >> it's not just kim jong-un's love luverne. it's not shaquille o'neal's shoe. it's not the momentous he would waive around to talk about. it's a massive amount of paper that he has rolled away. it's sort of implies some intentionality in all this. i wonder if we can even draw those conclusions. >> one of the things that was striking about this was that in those boxes, it was all jumbled together. the doj has talked about this.

there were news clips, right, in with confidential material, and shoes -- >> razor blades, umbrellas -- >> at the material. one of the things about him, and this is in effect he had in the white house, it's in effect he's had on our political culture. he has this flattening effect where everything is kind of the same and context less. i read about this in the book. that is what this reminds me of with these documents. it's all the same. he's classified materials, but the same as these news clips about my time as president and my razors and my golf balls -- i think it was a raincoat, i was told, and one of the boxes. this is of a peace with who he is. but it's a reminder that things that other people consider secret, he doesn't. >> and that the rules don't apply to him. i want to read another expert from the book that has been less discussed. the degree to which he's making in and run about some of the checks and balances -- or checks that exist, especially when it concerns classified information and national secrets. right? and why than one occasion, when

trump agreed to relinquish his personal phone, he managed to acquire another. advisers believed he had sent a staffer who had worked for him prior to the presidency to buy one at the store without any of the standard security precautions. at one point, trump left his phone and a golf cart at new jersey club. a senior white house lawyers notes documenting the frantic search firm misplaced phone for six hours specify that it was not our phone, apparently meaning it was not a government issued device. so it sounds like trump sent someone to verizon to get a phone for him so he can make calls that were kind of unmonitored. and then, promptly loses it. >> it was very keen on keeping his own phone. and kudos to my former colleague, alex burns, who's the first person to hear there was an issue with the phone and a golf cart. we initially reported that detail a couple years ago. but there's some new reporting here relating to it. you know, aides were a little stunned that he would suddenly have another stone -- phone after he --

he didn't want people knowing what he was doing, but he didn't trust the government. one of the fascinating things about the donald trump presidency, explore this, it's just ali deep level of paranoia. and what that meant for somebody who was overseeing this apparatus, that he didn't trust. >> he didn't trust the government. and the government didn't trust him. at the end of his presidency. -- we read it in the introduction to the segment. john kelly doesn't believe trump can have access to these documents. -- shoe box in the oval office. that's a staggering development. we know there's always been this institutional deep state desire to protect trump from himself. but the degree to which they really didn't trust him with anything, it sounds like. >> now, and this was an ongoing issue with the classified material where he would sometimes -- my colleagues and i wrote about this recently -- he wanted to keep stuff. and they weren't really sure why, or what it meant. they would try to get things

back, but for the most part, they felt this if you can't say no to the president of the united states. and he is the president, and he wanted it. his argument would be, and his aides are the people closest to him now, they would say he had a reason not trust the government. look what happened in various investigations, and would go on and on that way. and whatever value those complaints have, and it's nothing to do with why he wanted this classified information. this was not all about the mueller investigation, this was not all about crossfire hurricane, and the origins of the russia probe. this was about all manner of other issues according to our reporting. and it's still not clear why he picked certain things, and why -- >> the impunity. one of the things i'm so important about this book, is it contextualize his decision as a president within the broader cross currents of his life. the person he became as a figure in new york city society. also, who he was a child. when you talk about this impunity, that's not something that was gifted to him as president. it's something he always had.

and this is another story that i think is really important. kind of the citizen cain rosebud moment. well, i won't put that level of import on it. it sounds decorative who becomes lighter. and trump's senior year of high school, the school administration gave trump a promotion to captain of a company. classmates questioned whether he deserved the portage de just post, and they suspected it was granted to him because of his father's influence at the school. as a captain, trump was charged with leading other boys in the unit. but he did so at a remove, a former classmate route. when one student in a company was brutally hazed by another, the story of this quote was that donald trump stayed in his room, listening to his record player. the haze student complained to his play parents -- jump was removed from his position. he refused to concede defeat, insisting that he had really been giving a promotion to another title. the shadows, the echoes of what later transpired after the

election in 2020 are impossible to miss. and you, can you talk a little more about the person he was even in his teen years when it came to questions of loss and defeat? >> i think you raised a question -- i just want to go back to -- his sense of entitlement. i think people lose track of this because he talks like somebody who -- a lot of voters who support him will say, he sounds like me, he expresses his thoughts like me. the reality is, he was the son of a wall of mine, and he grew up with a child of privy lynch, and that in a certain way, there are people who grew up with privilege who don't expect that systems don't apply to them. but that wasn't him. and expected that things were always gonna be set up for him, and he refused to accept the world in a way that was not on his terms. now, i think he did more earlier, when he was a younger kid, but by the time he gets to the end of high school, you know, he's pretty much figured out who he has. >> and he doesn't have to

accept the world as it is. in a twisted mind. i mean, there's also a part of this book where we are talking about, where you talk about trump decides he is going to refuse to leave the white house and the days after the 2020 election loss. and that is a remarkable anecdotes that you talk about. and it's also something that people use for in terms of the, buck and win this hole you no attempt to steal the election transpired. talk to me a little bit about how we were you made and make decisions as to what to leave in the book, what's a report out, and the process and which you did that? >> so i turned on earnest to the project after the second impeachment trial which ended i think in february of 2021. and a book is different. a book takes time. i wanted to paint a broad architectural portrait of a person's life. and not as a person's life but of our country, of how he came

to be, how a celebrity of such culture came to see him as an avatar for what's at least of the country, what it wants it, and certainly a party of what it wanted. how he had infused himself into the pop culture fabric for such a long period of time. and that takes time. that's a process of going back and talking to surges over and over again and learning more and more information. you know, i provided a significant amount of reporting to the times throughout the process. and that wasn't indifferent, and that's an entirely different experience doing a book. and one thing i think about a lot was i spoke to several years ago, i talked to someone who i knew had cooperated a bunch of these books been coming out during the presidency. and there is a story in one of them that the person had refused to tell me. and i had caught wind of it, there was some reason why i was upset. but i asked a question of why do people do this? why do you talk for books, and you won't for a daily report? and their answer was there's no immediacy to it?

it's not coming out tomorrow. i'm talking -- >> yeah and it's a problem for future me, essentially what this person was suggesting. and i think that informs a lot about why people want to talk when they do. >> interesting. i mean yes, there is a decision on the part of the sources say that this is going to happen in the future, and the blow back i catch if i catch any, will be in some future undetermined times and place. when you talk about trump and the future, and what's going to happen, i want to place an exclusive audio that you've had generally given us. regarding trump and potentially his greatest opponents. his greatest challenger, if he should run again in 2024, florida governor ron desantis. this is from your interview with him i believe in, what? >> it was last. year >> last year, september of last year. let's take a listen to that. >> well, how does that tell you that he wouldn't run a few? ron >> i didn't, i never asked, him but if -- if -- let's put it this way.

i think i'd win very easily against anybody. >> well, so i ask you a question -- that >> i'm 98% of the approval. >> so it's like back to trump's approval ratings. what, what do you think he thinks of ronda santas? >> i don't think he thinks very highly of him. he thinks he made a, created him for the republican party. for the governorship of florida. and he thinks that he ought to be referring to trump. trump's view of his endorsement to people is a, he thinks that it revolves people over the line and a primary. and often a. does >> it does! >> to be, clear he is not wrong when you talk about the strength and the republican party. that is very real. and i think that something people have really struggled to accept. just because trump says so many things about himself that are not true, and he does, it doesn't mean he's weak within the party. >> right. >> a lot of the track to hope that he is -- >> to be clear, it'll help him in the primary whether it gives them the win in the generals, another thing, but his party's power almost annihilated. >> it is eroded somewhat, but he, runs i think he would

likely see a lot of people who said he would not be with them, come back. and i'm not clear that ron decide this wants to go up against the donald trump meat grinder. because most people have struggled with that. >> it is a meat grinder among many other. thanks maggie, you are -- i mean i don't know if this is a badger, but you have chronicled this man in a way that literally, and there's 1 million books written about trump. you can possibly that's very special and it's a very deep and appointed dive into the man himself. a testament to your work as a journalist. it's great to see you, and talk with you about this, i wish we had two more hours to chat. new york times senior republican reporter maggie maggie huber, mitt confidence, matt making of donald trump and the breaking of america. thank you for being here maggie. >> one final thing, in maggie's new book, she describes discussion she had with trump last year in which the topic turned to georgia republican senate candidate bushel walker. and in particular allegations that walker had threats and women. trump told her that ten years ago, maybe it would've been a problem. 20 years ago it would have been

a bigger problem. i don't think the problem today. just ahead, steve kornacki joins me to discuss the latest allegations to walker's candidacy and whether it will have enough facts and one of the most important senate races in the country. but next, donald trump calls on the supreme court to give him a lifeline in the spiraling mar-a-lago investigation. we will have more details on that coming up. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪♪ here goes nothing. hey greg. um...hello? it's me, your heart! really? yes! recording an ekg in 30 seconds. tada! wow that was fast! good news, pal. i'm not detecting any of the six most common arrhythmias. what next? let's get some fresh air. been cooped up for too long. yeah... ♪♪ get kardia mobile card at kardia.com or amazon. alice loves the scent of gain so much,

she wished there was a way to make it last longer. say hello to your fairy godmother alice and long-lasting gain scent beads. and now, get $10 back when you spend $30. that's a seriously good deal. 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 ♪ ♪ ♪

>> late this afternoon, donald trump out an emergency application with the supreme court asking the court to allow the special master, judge raymond dearie to review the roughly 100 classified documents that the fbi seized from his beach club in august. trump asking the supreme court to block part of a ruling by the 11th circuit court of appeals, a court that ruled against him. last, month that court said the justice department can use those classified documents in its investigation and that those documents did not fall under the special master's review. while trump is not technically asking the high court to stop the doj from using the classified documents in the doj's investigation, he is now asking that the court make those documents a part of the special master's review. which ultimately could

complicate the doj's investigation into the seemingly pretty important classified documents. or at least we think. and its argument tonight team trump right quote, president trump was still the president of the united states when any documents bearing classification markings were delivered to his residents. at that time, he was the commander in chief of the united states. as, set his authority to classify or the classified information bearing on national security float from this constitutional investment of power in the president >> so the argument is basically trump has all the power. he can declassify what he wants, when he wants. he could convert a presidential record even apparently a classified one. to a personal one. if the supreme court grants trump's request and the allows judge dearie to review those documents, that also means, and this is important, that team trump would get to see those classified documents! the supreme court tonight has ordered the justice department to respond to trump's request by next tuesday.

joining us now is charlie savage, new york time national security and legal reporter. charlie, thank you for being here tonight. i need you to help me understand exactly what can happen to these classified documents. as they pertain to the justice department. if the supreme -- talk to me about the imports here in terms of the departments investigation and what trump is trying to do. >> sure. so the status quo right now after the appeals court intervention to remove these documents from the special master, the trump appointed judge had ordered, is that there is unfettered access for this 103 documents or classification markings. criminal investigators could present them to a grand jury, they can ask this is questions based on their contents. they could pursue criminal charges based on their mishandling or obstruction in not returning them. they can try to figure out what happened to these documents

that were in the empty folders that have classification banners that were stored in the jumble alongside these ones that they were able to recover. so trump is trying to partially rollback what the appeals court did in unleashing the governments continue this investigation and this area. he is saying, for now, you can put -- what the special master's review to look at these things -- to see whether or not they were subject to executive privilege, or attorney client privilege. that means we, the trump people, need to be up to see them. we need to have security clearances to be able to do that. et cetera, it's a huge mess for the special master if the supreme court were to grant what he is asking for. on the other hand, it is another huge investment at the state, for the justice department, because they're not asking the supreme court to tie its hat again with respect to these documents. >> okay, so if the department doesn't continue on with its investigation, what that happens, if the supreme court grants this request, and you

would get sudden review the classified documents. that's happening in parallel as a department of justice is doing in this investigation. where do those things intersect? i would assume that if dearie somehow decides, you know, some of these classified documents are indeed privileged, that then affects the doj's investigation -- is that right? >> that's exactly the right question to ask, because that's where this gets tricky. if the justice department takes investigative chap steps based on these documents and knock on peoples doors. they learn something else, leaks to something, else that leads to something else. and then down the world road, it's not just judge dearie, exceeded carat in that that tranche was in fact privilege that they should have not looked at it. it creates opportunities for all kinds of mischief. what does she then do? because these investigators have been exposed and information that she decided should not have seen. but that could be in december, or january, that she makes that decision. so all kinds of things could

have happened by then. at minimum to those people need to be removed from the investigation? does she say the whole thing for the, poison treaty as they say, and staff have to be thrown out? does it give trump legal defense down the road, if he's indicted over the stuff, an opportunity to investigate the investigation and try to turn the tables back on the government, says you used information, you have no right to use, et cetera, et cetera. therefore the charges had to be thrown out, or something some kind of sanction like that. so it is very tricky, because of that, on the possibility dangling it these documents do get resubmitted for privilege review. that said, the government seems very confident that the idea that executive privilege has anything to say here, asserted by a former presidents, over the objections of the current president, to keep executive branch information from being reviewed by the justice department, part of the executive branch for criminal investigation. they think it's crazy to even suggest that it might be the case! so if judge cannon or to rose

that way, they will have a strong appeal. not to get in such a mess at all. alex? >> i'm sure they would rather >> i'm sure that rather not have to get into such a mess. this is directed to clarence thomas who oversees the summits like it, and he's likely to review that the full supreme court. charlie savage, new york times national security and -- thanks for your wisdom. we needed that. >> thank you. >> i'm next, the story that is rocking republican politics. once would've been enough to do a republican candidates chances. but donald trump's -- herschel walker paid his girlfriend to have an abortion in 2009. well that information even effect his candidacy? the great steve kornacki joins us to understand what is happening in the great state of georgia coming up next. hi, i'm debra. i'm from colorado. i've been married to my high school sweetheart for 35 years. i'm a mother of four-- always busy.

i was starting to feel a little foggy. just didn't feel like things were as sharp as i knew they once were. i heard about prevagen and then i started taking it about two years now. started noticing things a little sharper, a little clearer. i feel like it's kept me on my game. i'm able to remember things. i'd say give it a try. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. ♪limu emu & doug♪ 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. showtime. whoo! i'm on fire tonight. (limu squawks) yes! limu, you're a natural. we're not counting that.

only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ new astepro allergy. only pay for what you need. no allergy spray is faster. with the speed of astepro, almost nothing can slow you down. because astepro starts working in 30 minutes, while other allergy sprays take hours. and astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid free allergy spray. now without a prescription. astepro and go. worker's comp was about 20% of my total expenses. i needed a worker's comp policy that wasn't going to strangle my business. when we got the quote back from pie, it was a sigh of relief. we did it online, and it was done very quickly. we saved about 30% when we switched to pie. working with pie was extremely easy. i can grow my company while not

breaking the bank. ask your agent, or get a quote at easyaspie.com.

do you remember about a month ago, when south carolina republican senator lindsey graham decided to take a big crazy swing on abortion policy and propose a national ban on abortion? to remember that? he said explicitly that if republicans get control of the senate this november, they would federally outlaw abortion after 15 weeks. it was almost like he was trying to make an eye for the

democrats before the midterms. when that happened, basically every republican running for election or reelection distanced themselves from graham. i say basically every republican, because there was one very notable exception. georgia republican senate non a mini herschel walker. walker told politico at the time that he would back grams federal ban, saying he was a proud pro life christian who would always stand up for unborn children. last night, the daily beast reported that in 2009, herschel walker urged his then girlfriend to get an abortion, and then paid for the pro-choice suture himself. now, i should mention nbc has not independently confirmed that reporting and herschel walker denies the story. but because it's such a major allegation against walker, the daily beast appears to have really done their due diligence and getting the receipts. literally. they verified this woman's claims with the receipt from the abortion clinic. a bank deposit receipt with an image of a signed personal check from herschel walker. and, the get well soon card

that walker sent that check inside off. the daily beast also corroborated the details of the claims with a friend the woman told at the time of the abortion. so,,, if this reporting holds up, it shows a massive amount of hypocrisy that you would think might tank a political campaign in a normal year. but especially in a year -- front and center on the ballot. this is not a normal year. a national war but republicans are doubling down on herschel walker. the president of the mitch mcconnell aligned -- said today that they are, quote, full speed ahead in georgia. the national republican senate committee put out a statement calling the story a smear, and saying republicans would stand with herschel walker. and is now too late to pick a new republican candidate. for that party right now, herschel walker is too big to fail. joining us now is steve kornacki, nbc national

political correspondent. steve, thanks for being here with us tonight. i hope that you're enjoying the reprieve from being at the -- >> sit down. >> yeah, sit down and have a conversation with me, my friend. will you tell me about what -- are the contours in georgia have been shaping up? they've been a number of scandals that herschel walker has in some ways whether. have any redounded to reverend raphael warnock's benefit? >> the context for this is what you're referring to -- the trouble that walker had had even before the story. he was paying a price for it in the polls. if you look at the senate race in georgia, and you look at the governor's race, and the polling average, there's an eight-point difference between those two races. kemp, the republican governor, is running eight points better even before this than herschel walker. so there was a gap between those candidates.

-- there been some other revelations early in the campaign. his performance on the campaign trail had not exactly been reassuring. i think he's been struggling as a candidate. he's running in the state -- until 2020 election, it had been over a red state at the presidential level. it went for biden in 2020, but barely. so on the midterm climate, that helps just any republican. we've certainly been in contention for the seat, but i looked at this as a situation where he was already testing the limits of voters in georgia. and i know we live in a very different era of politics now than we did a generation ago, so the question is really, while this really matter? this doesn't have to matter much more than a point or two points, perhaps, to make a significant difference in a race like this. >> warnock's numbers have been basically holding steady throughout the late election season. it's not accurate? and is it more that -- are we seeing the split ticket here when you talk about kemp's numbers being high and warnock's being study where

you're gonna maybe have -- voting for raphael warnock in the senate race? >> i actually think it's not too hard to imagine -- went to war with donald trump and they both won republican primaries about against trump backed opponents. if you're a voter in georgia who doesn't really like joe biden, doesn't really like the democrats, but also doesn't like donald trump, that's a kind of voter that charges democrats are able to get to -- and might say, hey, can't is perfectly acceptable. -- that disconnect. the other challenge though -- he has to finish ahead of walker, obviously, but georgia runoff state. if he doesn't get to 50% plus one, there's a libertarian in the race. we've seen this in georgia many

times, voice to get two or 3% of about. this could get forced into a runoff. we could see the same -- senate control comes down to a georgia runoff. and, then you look at the dynamics. walker, warnock, in a runoff, you start to wonder if any of the personal stuff matters at all to voters or if they're purely voting on party. because the states would be absolutely clear in that case. you're voting for senate control. >> that runoff would be, i believe, december 6th. i'm gonna ask you. does this remind you of john jones and -- euphemistic, generous, and given the sort of hypocrisy on display potentially in this latest herschel walker scandal, but i mean, doug jones won that seat by the harris jinyintian. this is déjà vu all over again. >> it's the other thing to keep in mind to. doug jones did win in the december 20 c-17 race.

so it certainly had an impact in that -- would've been well positioned there. but again, i think we're talking about impact here. if there is an impact from the start, my guess is it would be minimal. a pointer to. but like i'm saying, given that he's not brian kent, he's not running seven points ahead of raphael warnock right now, he's running a point behind. one or two points, if you are herschel walker, is absolutely critical. >> literally every vote matters in the state of georgia. every vote matters period, but especially at that moment. steve kornacki, national political spore spawned and, a friend, it's great to see. up next tonight, justice ketanji brown jackson. she schools an alabama solicitor general as the court takes up a challenge that can get the voting rights act. we'll be right back. we'll be right back.

ever notice how stiff clothes can feel rough on your skin? for softer clothes that are gentle on your skin, try downy free & gentle downy will soften your clothes without dyes or perfumes. the towel washed with downy is softer, and gentler on your skin. try downy free & gentle.

mission control, we are go for launch. ♪ um, she's eating the rocket. ♪ lunchables! built to be eaten. ♪ president reagan today signed a

25 year extension of the 1965 voting rights act. the president who originally favored only ten-year extension and came late to endorse his version had nothing but praise for its a day. >> the right to vote is the crown jewel of american liberties and we will not see it flustered diminish. >> that's what president reagan and 1982, and we have seen the luster of that dual, the right

to vote, diminish twice in recent memory. first in 2013, shelby versus hold, or on the supreme court got a checks in five of the voting rights act. when the courts and validated the law that were crisis with a history of racial discrimination to get federal approval before changing the way that they hold elections. then, last, year the supreme court ruled in case making it harder for minority groups to use section two of the voting rights act to challenge voting laws. today, the republican-led state of alabama took another swipe at the voting rights act with the case at the supreme court. one that centers on whether alabama's new congressional map, violates another part of section two. that statute prohibits voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race. black people make up more than a quarter of alabama's population. the states new congressional map only designates one majority black district, district seven, that's the awkwardly place blues watch right on this map here. the group's challenging this

map argued that it is diluting their boating powered by creating a supermajority in that one district, spreading black voters out across the other six. but if the justices side with the state of alabama, that section two of the voting rights act should not require the state to consider race when drawing its congressional map, well then that would further erode the protections that the b r a is supposed to be providing to historically and represented voters. joining us now is janai nelson, president and director counsel of the angelo acp defense fun. she was president for oral arguments at the supreme court this morning. thank you so much for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> i think a lot of folks are very worried about what is going to happen here, given the courts track record. you were in the room, how did you read some of the comments of the conservative justices that seem to be somewhat skeptical of the case that the state of alabama was making here?

>> yeah, well i had the pleasure of being in the court room because one of our attorneys was arguing before the court, well was a, and a credible attorney who's been working on voting rights issue in the state of alabama for years. and what i observed was that even the conservative justices seem to think that alabama was engaging in a bit of overreach in suggesting that the standard for interpreting section two of the voting rights act, the standard that this berry supreme court has used for decades, was somehow flawed, all of a sudden! with no basis! for suggesting that the court should change its interpretation of the statute. so what we saw was, conservative justices trying to steer this state a ball about not towards a little bit of a narrower path. and alabama did not seem to want to do that. and still seemed to want to erode the foundation of the

voting rights act. section two. and i am -- i hope that the court will not follow alabama down that very wrong path. >> when you talk about the narrow path, can you try out what that actually is? because if they don't go -- the court doesn't follow through with alabama's proposed -- the suggestion that they shouldn't have to take race into account when drawing their congressional maps. what could the supreme court do here? and what could -- or what damage could the voting rights act sustain, in your mind? >> well, first, i think the easiest path for the court to follow is the one that it charted for itself for many decades, and that is to affirm the lower court's decision in this case. this is a cookie cutter textbook, section two violation. you have black voters, as you described, who comprise 27% of the states population and only are able to elect a candidate of their twice in one out of seven districts.

so what the court should do is follow the lower courts, the three judge panel that said, alabama needs to go back, read to its maps, and make sure that black voters have more than one district in which they have an opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. now the court seemed to question a few different ways and wish to go about it. there were lots of conversations about the role of race in determining whether there was a violation of the -- acts. to me that such a curious question because, the voting rights act was enacted very specifically to counter racism and racial effects in our democracy, and our electoral system. so of course we are going to think about race and consider race! as we enforce the voting rights act and make sure that we are continuing to engage in racial discrimination. >> right, that was the entire point of the voting rights act! right? race was central to its!

our newest supreme court justice, justice ketanji brown jackson brought up the sort of, herbert and of an originalist argument on that front. is that right? i thought of that as a nod to the originalism that is practiced by the conservative members of the courts, although the senate a different flare? >> yes, i would say justice brown jackson's this exquisite discussion of the 14th amendment was as much for the oral list and a lip against as it was for her colleagues on the courts. it was clearly oh way in which to show that even if you were to consider an original intent, even if you were to follow the conservative doctrine of originalism, you cannot evade the injustice of this case. that you would still winds up in the right place, recognizing that even the founders, even those who were amending our constitution, after reconstruction to ensure that racial discrimination would not

continue to weigh this democracy down -- that even those individuals were thinking about race! they were confronted the facts of racism in our history, in our country, and trying to construct a remedy for that. and the voting rights act, you know, as you noted, was enacted about 100 years later, because we didn't quite solve the problem with the reconstruction amendments. so the voting rights act came into do that work, and is still doing that important work today. >> indeed, we have not quite solve the problem around voter disenfranchisement in this country, and seems to be doing more problems as time goes on. janai nelson, president of the ndp defense, fun thank you for joining us tonight. >> absolutely, thank you. >> one more story before we go, as ukrainian forces take back their lines from russia, and exasperate lattimore patel threatened to use nuclear weapons. how people and keep are reacting and preparing, coming up next. stay with us! ♪ ♪ ♪ next. stay with us ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ x.

unlike most sinus treatments it provides instant relief that lasts up to 12 hours. vicks sinex contains a powerful decongestant that targets congestion at the source. it relieves nasal congestion and soothes sinus pressure by reducing swelling in the sinuses. for instant relief that lasts up to 12 hours try vicks sinex. from vicks trusted relief for over 125 years. [sfx: relief breath] i think i changed my mind about these glasses. yeah, it happens. that's why visionworks gives you 100 days to change your mind. it's simple. anything else i can help you with? like what? visionworks. see the difference. ♪ ♪ ♪i'm so defensive,♪ ♪i got bongos thumping in my chest♪ ♪and something tells me they don't beat me♪ ♪ ♪ ♪he'd better not take the ring from me.♪ this was the same today and a

ukrainian village in this happen recent of kherson. the soldier they're stranded glory to ukraine as he trapped the country's flag over a building in the newly-liberated village. one of the four regions where vladimir putin, the sham referendums, declared is now part of russia. -- key city of limon and the donetsk region -- continued pushing back russian troops and the south and east of the country, cutting off strategic supply routes and infrastructure for russian -- ukraine's recent military winds follow around of harsh warnings from president putin, who on friday declared to -- all available means. that set off alarm bells across the world, and has had some in ukraine preparing for the worst. the ap reported today in the kyiv city council, the providing evacuation centers with potassium iodine pills in

preparation for a potential nuclear attack. those pills can help people block the absorption of radiation in the aftermath of a nuclear strike. the biden administration today announced a new security package for ukraine worth $625 million in military aid. and includes more of the advanced rocket systems that -- helping ukraine's military begin to turn the tide of war. that does it for us tonight. we'll see you again tomorrow. -- lawrence o'donnell. good evening. >> we're gonna be joined tonight by arizona senator mark kelly, who is not been with us in a long time because he's busy doing his job, and this will be his first appearance on this program as a senate candidate for reelection to the united states senate with abortion as the new top issue now in these campaigns since thanks to the supreme court and herschel walker. >> yes. a senate candidate, i would ad