devastated island of sanibel as being completely cut off. but now the temporary repels to the sanibel causeway are complete. a convoy of trucks are able to get the storm battered island and begin restoring power and wrist spare the infrastructure. before the only access was by boat or air. officials say it'll be at least another week before the bridge is open to all traffic, and new video shows just how much work needs to get down. this footage from sanibel island comes a little leads county sheriff's island. the drone serves as the eye in the sky for deputies patrolling on the ground. in a tweet, sheriff carmen marciano assured rests residents, together we will rebuild our paradise. and we will continue to update you on the hill rebuilding of southwest florida. and on all of those workers who were there away from their states, away from the families, away from their homes trying to help floridians get back to their. we are thinking about all of

those who are impacted by that hurricane as we get through this. and on that note, i wish all of you a very good and safe tonight. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thanks for staying up late. i will see you at the end of tomorrow. end of tomorrow we have a lot to get to. today, right thing -- alex jones was ordered to pay nearly a billion dollars in damages for the extraordinary vicious lies that he spread about the sandy hook massacre. in just a few minutes, we will be joined by the lawyer who won that case for the sandy hook families. we will also be talking to the democratic nominee for u.s. senate from north carolina. her races super close, and it's one of a handful of contests that could determine senate control. national democrats understand that, and are making a huge last-minute investment in their candidacy. she will join us live a little bit later on in the show. first, we have breaking news

tonight of donald trump's mar-a-lago document scandal. in august, when the fbi executed a search warrant a trump's beach club, they found over 100 classified documents, and 11,000 other government documents dashed all over the place in various parts of the property. when justice department officials had visited mar-a-lago a couple of months before trump had told them all of the documents, they were kept in a basement storage room. that was bad enough, given that the storm was beneath a public area of mar-a-lago, and the sensitive documents were protected by nothing but a locked closet door. when the fbi searched the club later in the summer, they found several batches of documents in trump's personal office, including three personal documents stuffed in trump's desk. when that news broke, outside legal analysts thought that was meaningful that documents have been found in trump's private quarters, because it suggested that he, donald trump, might have somehow been involved in the placement. the squirreling away of those documents.

around mar-a-lago. or, that trump had at the very least known that those documents were not where they were supposed to be. that was, of, course in the hands of the national archives. to that, and it's soon emerged in the justice department of court filings that the reason that the department had felt the need to take the unprecedented step of searching a probe former president's home, was because the doj believed it did documents were being hidden and moved after they had subpoenaed trump to hand them over. they believed this, in part, because the department had also subpoenaed surveillance camera footage from mar-a-lago, and on that footage they saw boxes being moved in and out of the storage room where these sensitive documents were ostensively kept. the question always remained, why were they being moved? specifically, who is directing this movement, this swirling away of these documents? after the justice department literally subpoenaed them. tonight, we have brand-new reporting from the washington post.

quote, a trump employee has told federal agents about moving boxes of documents at mar-a-lago at the specific direction of the former president, according to people familiar -- agents have gathered witness accounts indicating that after trump advisers received a subpoena in may, for any classified documents that remained at mar-a-lago, trump told people to move boxes to his residence at the property. that description of events was corroborated by the security camera footage which showed people moving the boxes. the employee who is working at mar-a-lago is cooperating with the justice department, and has been interviewed by multiple times by federal agents. in his for their interview, the witness denied handling sensitive documents or the boxes that might contain them. as they gathered evidence, a

agent decided to re-interview the witness. and he changed dramatically. in the second interview, the witness described moving boxes at trump's request. the witness is now considered a key part of the mar-a-lago investigation, offering details about the former president's alleged actions, and obstructions to support and it's that could've been attempt to thwart federal officials demands for the return of classified in government documents. i can tell you that a source familiar with the matter tells msnbc news tonight that the washington post reporting is accurate. and so the former president of the united states appears to have defied a court ordered subpoena for personal records, including classified information, and ordered his staff to hide those documents from law enforcement officials. boy, when you put it that way, it sure sounds an awful lot like potential obstruction of justice. i'm not a lawyer, and fortunately, my first guest is. joining us now is barry berke, chief impeachment counsel to the house of representatives for the january 6th impeachment trial of january donald trump. thank you for being here,

barry. >> thank, you alex. >> how incriminating is this for trump? is this effectively the smoking gun in terms of obstruction charges? >> this new reported evidence is a game-changer. it is as powerful a case in obstruction of justice as you can imagine. you have a subpoena calling for these classified documents, could not have been more clear, and then you have videotape of those documents being moved to the former presidents personal residence, and now you have a witness seen on the witness tape, saying that he of course, did that at the behest of donald trump. when you add to that the representations made that all of the documents -- what makes this so significant is that they are not only a clear case of obstruction of justice, but it puts donald trump at the center of it. i will tell, you obstruction cases are so strong because they not only support bringing that charge, but buttress and make it easier to bring, in this case, a violation of the espionage act. >> tell me how that is to work in tandem. the espionage act, and the obstruction of justice here.

>> the espionage act involves taking documents they are not entitled, two national defense, classified documents, and keeping them, and hiding, them or take them to others. the fact that he has now hide in the documents, people hide things because there showing consciousness of guilt, but also to the extent that he is hiding classified documents, that in and of itself is a violation of the espionage act in addition to obstruction of justice. if you're the department, and you're thinking, should we bring this case? wait a second, we have him dead to rights on obstruction of justice, if these reports are true. that helps us prove our espionage act -- >> and when you add to, that the public statements, that they are his documents, you have a very powerful case that you can make through videotape, which is very hard to impeach, as well as trump's own words. >> and we have reports of not one witness, but multiple witnesses in all of this. there is going to be something, and i'm not a fortune teller, but i will play one on television for this moment. this witness that they are talking about in the washington post article initially said that no directions were given. that this person initially denied the fact that trump may have directed the movement of

these documents. that person has since changed their story, and affirmed this new timeline, if you will, multiple times to department investigators. is it meaningful that the witness changed his or her story beyond the credibility question? could it imply a crushing pressure campaign on the part of donald trump, at least initially? >> it is meaningful, in the sense that they will be cross-examined. they changed their story. the question is, is the corroboration of what the witness is saying now? if you have the videotapes that we are talking about showing the boxes being moved to the former president's own personal residence. that is powerful evidence corroborating the story. the fact that we know that those documents included classified documents, it shows that the witnesses current testimony bears out what we already know independently. he will be impeached, but the story does not rise or fall just on what he is saying. you have the other evidence that shows what he is saying now is the truth. >> it also raises the question of why. he did these things, but we still don't know the answer as

to why. i do think that this kind of line of argument, or at least defense that trump was an absent minded hoarder, he just took stuff. now we have this accounting, that he directed specific boxes to be taken out of this closet storage, and moved into his private residence. do you think that the justice department is asking, itself or knows potentially why those documents in particular were the ones that trump wanted? >> alex, how much time do you have? i served as counsel for the first impeachment to, and him and donald trump is what he and i called a recidivist. he repeats, commit crimes, because he believes he is above the law. whether he is obstructing a russian investigation, preventing the peaceful transfer of power, or keeping documents because he wants to, he doesn't think that the law applies to him, and most federal crimes have at their base, lies. donald trump has been known to be a proponent of many

falsehoods, especially because of the election. you don't need to prove a motive, motives or helpful for juries to understand the evidence, and believe the entrances that are drawn from them. but in this case, you can see that donald trump has said, these are my documents, i want them. i don't care that it hurts the national security. the overall theme here is donald trump, once again, is putting his own personal interests over the interest of national security. and if these reports are true, he is prone to some of the most sensitive issues critical to the defense of our country he is keeping that because he wants to, and that is enough to have a powerful case for a jury. >> i understand that the case, on its own merits, is strong enough. but politically, a motive would potentially be -- it would ease merrick garland's path, would it not? as you see it, the doj has to move forward on these charges. is that what i'm understanding from your assessment here? >> i like to believe that nobody is above the law. the evidence, if the reports are true as they believed to be. it's as powerful in cases you can ever see. as a criminal counselor, i have clients that are indicted on a

fraction of this evidence. great ambiguity about the charges. the doj will bring those cases, i think this is a case they have to bring. with politics, they're not here to make political decisions. just make decisions about justice. if the evidence is that powerful, including that he did it, then you say motive -- the motive is that he wanted to keep it. you know that because he repeatedly took steps to keep, them to not care that they are required to be turned over, and he has publicly stated the quiet part out loud, that they're mine, and i want them to keep them. i didn't care if it hurt the nation. >> do you think this precludes garland charging trump in january 6th? a lot of people, i mean, we had franklin foer on the show this last night. he interviewed merrick garland, he thought mar-a-lago was probably the case that garland would indict on. could he feasibly indict a former president? by the way, something that has never been done before in american history. could he do that in two cases?

>> it is inconceivable that he could do, it but it is just as inconceivable that a president would commit to committing as many crimes as this former president did. a powerful case to bring was the january 6th case. you don't need to charge him with seditious conspiracy, as many of these extremist groups have been charged with. you only needed to charge him with interfering with an official proceeding. the certification of the vote. the evidence of that is overwhelming. i would argue to you that if the most important issue is deterrence, and i talk about this, i talk to you about it. now you have people with less than a month who are trying to get elected to office on the platform that they are going to do exactly what donald trump did. they're going to interfere with the election. they still claimed the election was stolen, and if donald trump violated the laws that he appears to have done, making false statements, false electors, inciting a mob to attack congress, to prevent that sort of certification. all a part of a conspiracy to interfere with that proceeding. if they don't bring that case, all of these people running on the platform that they're going to do what donald trump did, will feel that they are above the law. and so while it is a lot to

charge a former president with two crimes, if the president evidence is overwhelming, my question is to you, isn't it inconceivable that they don't charge him? >> if politically treacherous, and at the same time inconceivable. what is the timeline for this? given the realities of politics, the reality of the election counter being what it is, i'm actually thinking of the 2024 presidential election, when would you expect, given where we are in the mar-a-lago case. if they are going to issue an indictment. >> there is a general nonbinding principle that the department doesn't bring cases within 60 days of an election they could be affected. clearly, nothing is happening in the next month. i think it's a question of the evidence. there is two years until the next election. but you don't want to interfere with this election of a candidate and like, and i think the department should make the case on the evidence. if they believe that they have the evidence to bring and prove a case that a former president is guilty of these crimes, then they should bring it as soon after the next election as they are able to bring that case.

>> i'm not even going to ask you about the documents that the president department of justice still believes that trump may be holding on to somewhere at bedminster or trump tower. we don't know. this has obviously been an uphill climb to get these important classified documents back. barry berke, who served as chief impeachment counsel for the house of representatives for january 6th impeachment trials. theformer president donald trump. thank you, very, as always, for your time and wisdom. we are going to have even more on trump's troubles this hour, as the january 6th committee prepares for its final public hearing tomorrow. in june, we heard some explosive testimony from an aide to trump's chief of staff, who said that trump knew that members of the crowd gathering on january 6th to hear him speak were armed. and tonight, we had reporting that the january 6th committee with the receipts to corroborate that story. we'll talk the reporter who broke that news, just ahead. stay right here. ht here. shingles. the rash can feel like an intense burning sensation and last for weeks. it can make your workday feel impossible.

the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside of you. 50 years or older? ask your doctor about shingles. tomorrow, the january 6th

we desperately need more affordable housing, but san francisco takes longer than anywhere to issue new housing permits. proposition d

is the only measure that speeds up construction of affordable new homes by removing bureaucratic roadblocks. while prop e makes it nearly impossible to build more housing. and the supervisors who sponsored e know it. join me, habitat for humanity and the carpenters union in rejecting prop e and supporting prop d talk to anyone in san franciscog and they'll tell you now is not the time to make our city even more expensive by raising taxes. san francisco has one of the largest city budgets in america. yet when it comes to homelessness and public safety, we're not getting results. what we really need are better policies, more accountability, and safer neighborhoods. vote no on propositions m and o. the last thing we need are higher taxes, especially right now. now is not the time to raise taxes in san francisco. vote no on m and o.

committee will take a public hearing for the first time in months. it may be their last hearing ever. while some of the hearing is likely to be the committee's closing arguments in what they have learned versus the attack on the capitol, and donald trump's role in it, we also expect them to see new evidence. in particular, the actions of the secret service on january 6th. today, the washington post reports that the hearing is supposed to highlight newly-obtained secret service records showing how president donald trump was repeatedly alerted to brewing violence that day, and that he still sought to stoke the conflict, according to three people briefed on the records. you will recall during previous

jan 6 committee hearing, aide cassidy hutchinson testified that she overheard the president wanted to allow armed members of the crowd into via lips. trump instructed the secret service to take away the magnetometer,'s the mags, that they were using to scream people so far for dangerous weapons. >> i overheard the president say something to the effect of, i don't care that they had weapons. they're not here to hurt me, take the effing mags away. let the people in, take the effing mags away. >> was he told in that conversation that people could not come through the mags because they had weapons? >> correct. >> and that people -- and his response was to say that they can march to the capitol from the ellipse? >> something to the effect of, take the effing mags away, they are not here to hurt me. let them in let my people in. they can march to the capitol after the rallies are over. they can march from the ellipse. take the effing mags away. and then they can march to the capitol. >> the washington post reports that the new video footage, and internal secret service emails

will coroborate that fairly explosive testimony. they also reveal, and this is key, other internal emails likely to reveal that the hearing further buttressed accounts about staff members warning trump about the risk, and then the reality of violence that day, as he continued to press nervous secret service agents to take him to the capitol to join his supporters marching there. the three people said that. those emails will reportedly show that secret service agents trying to frantically secure trump a path to go to the capitol with his supporters, only to be rebuffed by d. c. police. in other words, he knew his supporters were armed, he wanted them to let them keep those weapons, and he wanted them to personally urge to keep marching to the capital. that's not all we are expected to hear about tomorrow. post reports that some of the secret service emails obtained by the committee could throw a sharp spotlight on tony ornato, the secret service leader turned trump political aide. according to testimony from

cassidy hutchinson, ornato related to hutchinson an explosive account about trump's attempt to press on towards the capitol that day. although ornato is expected to dispute the account. with the new correspondence that the committee is obtained by tomorrow, we may all have conclusive evidence about what exactly donald trump was trying to do, and with whom on january 6th. joining us now is jacqueline alemeny, a congressional investigations committee reporter who broke the story. jackie, thank you so much for joining us here tonight to talk us through this. >> thank you for having me, alex. >> first of can you tell us more about how the committee got its hands on the secret service -- the secret service correspondence? it sounds like it's a lot of material, and up until this point, there was a real question about how cooperative the service was being with this investigation. >> yes, alex, that's a really

good place to start. as my colleague caroline and i outlined in our piece, it was an ironic twist of events. the committee really came to believe the lawmakers on the committee investigating the january 6th attack that the secret service ultimately was not being cooperative. they came to this conclusion after they almost stumbled across some of the radio frequencies that they ultimately used in the second to last hearing that showed an anonymous secret service agent raising serious alarms about the violence that he was seeing on the capitol. after that moment, the committee then realized that they were still missing quite a few materials. especially these text messages that had been out of all of the communications, most under the spotlight. although our reporting has also told us that the committee ultimately was not able to obtain these deleted text messages from key players, people like tony ornato, during this time period.

but at the end of the day, dhs finally started taking a more cooperative posture, and delivered 1. 5 million documents. microsoft team chats, emails, text messages from different secret service agents beyond what the committee had originally asked for. the committee has had a plethora of new communications and documents to piece through to create a better, more cohesive and detailed picture of what exactly happened in the lead up to january 6th on that day and in the aftermath. >> i still think it surprises a lot of people that the secret service may not have been initially cooperative with what was one of the greatest security breaches in our nation 's history. i wonder how much you think that events of recent weeks, for example the oath keepers trial, which is ongoing. the notion that stewart rhodes, the head of the oath keepers, may have had a direct line to a secret service agent in the run up to january 6th. how much you think that the

news of that, the evidence, there the mounting scrutiny over the choice to wipe all of these phones carried by secret service agents on the fifth and 6th of january. how much of that external pressure ultimately led to the agency cooperating with the january 6th committee? do you have a sense of what is going on internally about what to do? >> yes, and we also know that secretary by york's was pretty alarmed by the lack of cooperation at the end of the day. at the end of the day though, the secret service is sort of its own siloed entity within the department of homeland security. the former president has regained this reputation for becoming extremely close and developing these kind of unusual, untraditional relationships with secret service agents. for example, tony ornato in particular was an agent who worked for the secret service, who then went back to work, and became a trump administration official, and worked directly

for the president in a political position. this was something that was a completely unprecedented. i think it raised a lot of questions, and alarms about whether or not he was able to do his job of protecting the president while also serving in a political role, and trying to appease the former president. the same with bobby engle, a lot of these relationships had been scrutinized as these new details about the secret service's actions on the day of january 6th. i wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow, we do see some potential communications that go beyond tony ornato and bobby engle, of people in the service who may have been a little bit more sympathetic to the insurrectionists then we would like for people who serve in the federal government to be. >> jacqueline, where do things stand with tony ornato testifying behind closed doors with the committee? there is so much confusion

about what exactly happened on january 6th, between the secret service and donald trump. >> right now, where attorney ornado stands is that he is no longer a government employee. he actually resigned the day that he was supposed to conduct an interview with the department of homeland security inspector general as part of an internal investigation into his actions with regard to january 6th. he has also yet to appear in for another january 6th interview with the congressional committee investigating the insurrection. that being said, he did initially appear for an interview earlier in the spring where he could not recall a lot of answers to questions that other witnesses were able to recall. as one committee source phrased it to me quite eloquently, it's that these guys referring to tony ornato and bobby engle, trump's secret service detail, was that they were not being honest.

and that what we are going to see tomorrow, potentially, is more holes being poked in the responses that they were giving to investigators in the closed-door depositions. new evidence, information, communication, that shows that they wer not being truthful about not being able to recall super certain things. and that their relationships with people like cassidy hutchinson and other witnesses who the committee has heard from were actually much closer and trusted than they have let on. >> i mean, to say nothing about the fate of bobby engle and tony ornato, it could be a real problem for the secret service if that's what we learned tomorrow. jackie alemany, congressional reporter for the washington post, the great to see you, jacqui, thank you for making time. >> thanks, alex.

>> i've, next judgment day. as a jury orders conspiracy theory alex jones to pay nearly a billion dollars for the families who have been harassed for nearly ten years by sandy hook truthers who hung an alex jones every word. the attorney who won that massive judgment, joins us next. ♪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.♪ and it's easier than ever to get your projects done right. with angi, you can connect with and see ratings and reviews. and when you book and pay throug you're covered by our happiness check out angi.com today. angi... and done.

your style is your superpower. yours to create. and own. your best style starts with tresemme. our most advanced formulas. infused with salon-inspired ingredients. like hyaluronic acid and pro style technology. pro-smooth, pro-shine, pro-confidence. science proves quality sleep is vital to your mental, emotional, and physical health. the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing, so you stay cool. like hyaluronic acid and pro style technology. it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to help keep you both comfortable all night. our smart sleepers get 28 minutes more restful sleep per night. so, you're at your best for yourself and those you care about most. and now, the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is only $999. plus, 0% interest for 24 months on all smart beds. only for a limited time. cotton candy.

pink lemonade. bubble gum. when tobacco companies sell candy flavored products, they know exactly what they're doing because four out of five kids who use tobacco start with a flavored product. and once they're hooked, they can be addicted for life. this election: we can stop big tobacco's dirty trick.

voting yes on prop 31 will end the sale of candy flavored tobacco products. saving kids from nicotine addiction. sandy hook, it has got inside vote yes on 31. job written all over it. sandy hook is a synthetic, completely fake, with actors, in my view, manufactured. all i know is, the official

story of sandy hook has more holes in it than swiss cheese. >> for a decade, the far-right conspiracy theorists slash media personality alex jones has been saying that the sandy hook massacre did not actually happen. 26 people died in a connecticut school shooting in 2012. 20 of them were first graders. all of those victims had families. those families, thanks to jones's lies, not only lost a loved one, but have faced a decade of harassment and threats from jones's followers. all while alex jones himself had profited. today, a jury in connecticut unanimously ordered that alex jones and his company pay $965 million in damages to the families of eight victims from that shooting. that comes on top of the $49 million the jones has already been ordered to pay in a similar case in texas.

amazingly, jones was live on his show when today's verdict came out. despite hearing exactly how he had hurt his families, just a staggering amount of pain and anguish that has been described in detail. in detail, over the course of this trial. despite that fact, and the fact that he now faces a billion dollars in damages, alex jones still believes that this is all just one big joke. >> the judge looks pleased, probably $200 million. i don't have any money, it's all a big joke. >> $55 million. >> yeah! >> yeah! >> $28,800,000. >> get those numbers up! >> 87 million, $600,000. >> get those numbers up! >> $73,600,000. >> i want to be the billion dollar man.

i bet they actually believe there own stuff. we're not scared, and we're not going away. we're not going to stop. literally, for hundreds of thousands of dollars, i can keep them in court for years, i can appeal this stuff, we can keep standing up against this travesty against the billions of dollars that they want. it's a joke. and so please, go to infowars store. com and get vitamin fusion, get all of the great products, that keep us on air. >> no remorse, no regret, just straight to plugging the powders and supplements you can buy on his website. alex jones is claiming that he is nearly broke. he will appeal this decision to

keep it tied up in the courts when they -- to his followers, and attempt to make profits of national tragedies. >> they want to scare everybody away from freedom, and scare us away from questioning uvalde, and what really happened there, or parkland, or any other event. guess what? we're not scared, and we're not going away. we're not going to stop. >> joining us now is chris matej, the leading attorney for the sandy hook families who argue the case in court. i'm pleased to say that he joins us now. chris, thank you for joining me. congratulations on finding some measure of closure for our families who have been struggling with this for unfathomable decades of their lives. >> thank you very much for having, the we appreciate it. >> what of alex jones's contention that he can tie this up in court forevermore? and the families are going to see this money in reality? >> i saw your read in, there and i saw alex jones say that he was not afraid, but we know exactly what he was feeling on the inside. he's terrified. although he may see this verdict momentarily, as just another opportunity to make some money. he is going to face a bankruptcy judge, he's going to face litigation in texas, and

he's going to be forced to do this verdict, no matter how long it takes. whether -- throughout this litigation is to conceal what he has profited from his lies about sandy hook. his finances are going to come under a whole new round of scrutiny in the bankruptcy court. and really, whatever assets he has, and we think they're substantial, whatever assets he, has these families are going to chase him to the, ground and enforce every cent of this verdict. >> these are compensatory damages. is that right? the families can still sue for punitive damages. is it possible that this figure could go up? >> it's actually very lightly. in connecticut, the first round of this trial that has been presented to a jersey was for compensatory damages, defamation and emotional distress. there will be a second round over the next month, where the judge will decide punitive damages under connecticut's unfair trade practices act. they brought claims that the

corrupt business practice hurt these families, and he profited from it. she will decide, after having heard all of the evidence in the trial, whether punitive damages are appropriate here on top of the verdict that the jury returns to today. those punitive damages have no cap. it is possible that within a month or more, alex jones will be facing even more than the nearly billion dollar verdict that he faces today. >> i think a lot of people wanted here to foreclose him from the ability to ever do what he did to the families of sandy hook. but you heard him in the clip, talking about uvalde and parkland. how much of a deterrent can this be in the long road for alex jones specifically? obviously, bankrupting the man is one method of trying to stop him, but really how to end his reign of lies, and to some degree terror that he is

has inflicted on those families. >> we thought one of the most compelling that moments in the trial, was when he presented a screenshot of his website, inviting his audience to fill out a survey in which they would predict whether the next false flag staged event would be a mass shooting. it showed in realtime that the man is willing to inflict this type of harassment and for your campaign on the next families to go through the tragedy that all families went through. we thought that the jury would find that especially -- in something that required deterrence. what we know is that alex jones is motivated by profit, he's not motivated by truth, or any of the stuff that he actually said he was trying to do. it's to pray on his audience, the fears to get him to buy products, as you just saw. what i think this verdict of representing is a whole new incentive structure for alex jones and people like him. he's not going to get rich off of this any longer, because

these families are going to make him pay for the harm that he inflicted, and hopefully put him in a position where he is not able to do it again. we think that this is a historic verdict, and we hope that it will reset incentives for alex jones and people like him. >> i wonder, since you spent so much time in the courtroom, so many emotional outbursts. his character was on such full display, did you get a sense of what lies beneath the cruelty and bluster? i think it's hard for a lot of us to imagine being as monstrous and as monstrous lee cruel as alex jones. the families of victims of children, who were in that courtroom, saying that i will inflict more pain, and more cruelty, on your life. i will make sure that another -- >> alex jones is a broken, for

your full little man on the inside. and he is not happy unless other people are as afraid as he is. and that is what really i think his cruelty is. we showed that he and his employees very early on, the impact that their lives were having on families that were grieving. he didn't care, because we were seeing the audience numbers, and their profits go up and, up and up. they were willing to inflict this kind of cruelty, and no matter what, because they were making money off of it. and because they saw that it was working within their audience. they were engaging people that were afraid, who were resentful, who are mistrustful. and i think that that is who alex jones really is inside, of himself. that being said, the man likes his money. and so this type of lawsuit, i

think it's going to have a real impact on him. it's important to remember that this verdict was returned against him personally, and his company. the verdict was for intentional misconduct, the type of conduct that is dischargeable in bankruptcy. he is going to be on the hook for this, for a very long time. we are going to make sure that he feels it. >> chris mackay, attorney for the sandy hook families, and today's historically large settlement against alex jones. a he's much for your time and efforts trying to correct some very serious wrongs. thank you for your time, chris. >> thank you very much. >> we have more to come tonight, including the democrat who is hoping to flip a republican senate seat in north carolina. the candidate in that race, that is watched by everyone. she joins us next. ♪ it's the most wonderful time of the year ♪ claritin provides non-drowsy symptom relief from over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens, day after day.

feel the clarity and make today the most wonderful time of the year. live claritin clear. detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is for some adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment or replacing their current hiv-1 regimen. detect this: no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. research shows people who take hiv treatment as prescribed and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit hiv through sex. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you take dofetilide. taking dovato with dofetilide can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. hepatitis b can become harder to treat while on dovato. don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor, as your hepatitis b may worsen or become life-threatening. serious or life-threatening side effects can occur,

including allergic reactions, lactic acid buildup, and liver problems. if you have a rash or other allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are, may be, or plan to be pregnant. dovato may harm your unborn baby. use effective birth control while on dovato. do not breastfeed while taking dovato. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. --

have from time to time voted with democrats on gun reform, infrastructure, and certifying the 2020 election. but representative ted budd is not that kind of lawmaker. he is one of the most conservative members in the house, with a 98% lifetime score from heritage action and the club for growth. congressman budd voted against the bipartisan infrastructure law, he voted against same-sex marriage protections and against gun safety and those are some of the ville some of his republican goggly colleagues had supported.

instead, ted budd supported a bill that would ban abortions nationwide and voted to overturn results of the 2020 election on january 6th. at this point, the one person congressman budd voted against the bipartisan infrastructure law, he voted against same-sex marriage protections and against gun safety and those are some of the ville some of his republican goggly colleagues had supported. instead, ted budd supported a bill that would ban abortions nationwide and voted to overturn results of the 2020 election on january 6th. at this point, the one person standing in ted's way on his path to the senate is cheri beasley, who would be the first black woman ever to represent north carolina in the upper chamber. beasley is a former state district court judge, a former state court of appeals judge,

and she served as chief justice of the north carolina supreme court. she is currently polling just one point behind ted budd. joining us now, cheri beasley, democratic north carolina senate candidate. miss beasley, thank you for being here. so, i truly do believe that every senate race is the most important senate race in the country, but your race, in the last closing week of the campaign, it has been the thing that democrats are quite focused on. we know that senator schumer's pac has funneled, i think, $4 million into your campaign in recent days. what has your correspondents been with national democrats as you seek to perhaps help them hold on to the upper chamber? >> we have been focused on our in state, people power campaign. we knew this was gonna be a tough race, we have had tough

fights before and i will not back down now. i am thankful that i had two successful contested statewide elections here in north carolina, and we are doing really well. there is a lot of enthusiasm and we've been traveling to a all of our one hundred counties around the state talking about the things people care lot about. they care about lowering costs, and they're feeling everything from the pain at the pump to the cost of prescription drugs and everything in between. we are excited about the support we are seeing here in the state, and we are certainly excited about the support we are seeing nationally. >> what do you think has been the catalyst for this energy and enthusiasm on the ground? north carolina hasn't elected a democrat to the senate or voted for a democratic president since 2008. is it abortion? if you had to focus on one or two issues that are really driving voter's passions right now and that have given you the lift in the polls that we are seeing, what would you say it is? >> i think it's a couple of things.

i think it is us being present. we're working hard and communities all over the state and talking about the critical issues that people care a whole lot about, and they know that congressman budd has been in service for six years and he votes against the interests of folks here in the state and he is far more entwined with corporate special interests than his own interests. you said at the top of the hour that he is aligned with the most extreme faction of his party, he is an election denier, and he called the mob on january 6th. that rioted and storm the capital and injured hundreds of police officers just patriots standing up. and north carolinians are concerned about that. even after all the violence, he still voted to not to certify the election. he is still denying the election and even when asked now if he wants to settle the results of this election, he won't.

he will not commit to accepting the results. he supports an absolute ban on abortion. he is leading this charge without exceptions for rape, incest or risks to a woman's health. they know that women who are sexually assaulted who otherwise would have to carry the baby to term. just imagine the joy of a mom who has an ectopic pregnancy and then has to make the critical life saving decision for herself to have an abortion. ectopic pregnancies and separated uterus is and miscarriages that don't release. we know that the lifesaving treatment for these women is an abortion. and we know that for nearly 50 years women have had the constitutional protective right to make this decision with their physicians, free from government interference. if elected to the senate i will always fight for our freedoms,

and i will fight hard to make sure that roe v. wade is the law of the land. >> i've got to say, we all want to know what is happening in these senate races, from the people that are running them. there is a national narrative about democrats chances. there's a lot of trepidation about saying democrats can actually hold on to these chambers. and you guys are on the frontlines. what happens to cheri beasley will in many ways be charting a course for what happens to the country. the alternative, ted budd, is, well, that's an alternative uterus for some people. cheri beasley, north carolina senate candidate. thank you for joining us tonight. we'll be following the race closely. >> thank you and i hope your viewers will go to cheri beasley. com to hear about my candidacy. >> up next, why every vote counts, including members of the politicians own family. we'll be right back.

for colon cancer? when caught in early stages it's more treatable. i'm cologuard. i'm noninvasive and i detect altered dna in your stool to find 92% of colon cancers, even in early stages. early stages? yep, it's for people 45 plus at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider if cologuard is right for you. consider it done. shingles. some describe it as an intense burning sensation or an unbearable itch. this painful, blistering rash can disrupt your life for weeks. it could make your workday feel impossible. 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. >> this is what you call a

growing problem. in 2014, when republican adam laxalt ran successfully for nevada tierney general, seven of his relatives came out and endorsed his democratic opponent. when laxalt ran again for statewide office in 2018, it is time for governor, a dozen of his relatives came out against him. adam laxalt would go on to lose that race. now in his race to unseat incumbent democratic senator catherine cortez masto, today, 14 of adam laxalt's relatives came out in support of his opponent. leading laxalt by just two points, within the surveys margin of error. another reminder that every vote counts, including blood relatives. that does it for us tonight. tomorrow our special coverage of the january six hearing starts at noon eastern. tomorrow we will have a special recap of the hearing. the gang will be all here. that is tomorrow night at 8 pm.

now it is time for the last word, with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> i'm so glad you had senate candidate cheri beasley because it is so important. to control the senate is so important. we're gonna have senator maggie hassan on. she is running against a very strange republican candidate in new hampshire. katie hobbs will join us. the candidate for governor in arizona, where it's possible, if she doesn't win, arizona might never again have a fair election. the republican candidate for governor, for secretary of state, for attorney general, all say donald trump won the last presidential election. >> i think it's important to underscore that in many cases women are the last frontier between the country and a precipice of election denialism. these are not just republican