jim banks raised some very serious questions that should be answered by the january 6th commission, but they're not. >> this cannot be whistleblower waiting for so and so. we need them there now, whoever you got. >> you also have troops, this is steny hoyer, andrews air force base. other military bases. >> thank you. >> active duty national guard. >> how soon in the future can you have the place evacuate, cleaned out? >> i don't want to speak for the leadership that's going to be responsible, the operation, i'm not going to say that because they are on the ground. >> just pretend for a moment, or the white house or some other entity that was under siege, like i say, you can logistically

get people there as you make the plan. >> the question from house republicans asked and answered. >> but wait a second. i'm so confused. >> yeah. >> you know, i'm just a dumb country lawyer, michael steele, but they asked the question. >> they sure did. >> after steve scalise had known the answer. >> he was there. >> so he said -- >> that's a great question, why won't they answer whether nancy pelosi called the national -- this is so terrible and they won't answer. he was in the room. he was in the room where it happened. the room where it happened. i mean, come on. >> so low. >> willie, just bad faith. outrageous that steve scalise is going, are we going to get out of this alive or not, and

scalise is in there. and then scalise holds a press conference and this committee is -- we can't be on this committee because, you know, they won't even ask the question did nancy ever call the national guard. scalise was there when she was saying, hey, pretend like this was the pentagon. pretend like this is the white house. do something now. >> yeah, i mean, it is staggering to see that clip. that's footage, by the way, we had not scene behind the scenes of not just speaker pelosi but many members of congress, many democrats doing what president trump was not doing in that moment, which was trying to rally the national guard, trying to get people there from the military to stop the attack on the capitol. so what we saw was nancy pelosi on the call pressing for the national guard to get to the capitol. steve scalise, as you said, knew that because he was right there when it happened in the background, watching as democrats pleaded for help.

as you say, there he is on the left, highlighted on our screen in the select committee exhibit there. he's listening to the call. it's on speaker. there's mitch mcconnell, there's john thune, look around the room, republicans and democrats, leadership of the congress trying to rally the national guard from maryland and from virginia, to get to the capitol. as with everything, they knew they were there, and now they've gone out and lied about it. >> steve, just because you're wearing a mask, doesn't mean we can't see you behind there. >> and that you can't see and hear what's happening in front of you. there he is. >> i want to ask you, michael and i'm serious about this, i couldn't imagine in a million years holding a press conference as a member of congress, i was there, being that cynical, lying through my teeth on an issue -- on any issue, but especially an issue of this importance. and even if for some reason i

had fallen off a scooter the day before and i was dizzy, there would have literally been 12 people on my staff grabbing me saying you can't do that, go back into your office, you need to tell them you're not going to do this. i don't understand. all the barriers that were up when you and i were there, all the rules that were in place, just rules of common decency, not going out and lying through your teeth. my god. on issues this important. >> yeah, this important, but, joe, at the end of the day, they just spent the last four years lying, so in this final moment, why are we surprised that you see scalise in the room at the table next to the phone that's open for everybody to hear and then go out there and lie about it. that's what they have been doing. it's the herd mindset, we have

built this wall. we have created this narrative, we're going to stick with it, come hell or high water. i'm not surprised that we now have video and audio evidence of what happened in that moment. i'm not surprised that they would then go out and lie about it, nor should the country be at this point. >> and nancy is the most aggressive. and she's being a leader. >> she's doing everything she can. >> she's being a leader. >> as they are coming in, and you see, we'll show you all of the highlights from the hearing yesterday but they had a split screen where you see this moment. you see her working the phones. chuck schumer working the phones, trying to get help before somebody gets killed. they know that somebody has been shot. they know that they're pouring in, and they cut to the scene of the attack on the capitol where, you know, throngs of people with weapons are pouring into the united states capitol. there is no question here that

these leaders were trying to get help in many reasons because they might get hurt, including steve scalise. >> and by the way, it bears noting, willie, to people who came out well on january 6th in these recordings, one, mike pence, who was working hard to help clear the building, and the other, mitch mcconnell, who i've heard from a lot of different sources have said that mitch was absolutely insistent that they were not going to let the rioters have their day. and when everybody else was saying we can't go back and vote today, we're going to have to vote somewhere else, it was mitch mcconnell who said, no, we're going to vote here. we're going to vote today. they will not win. so there were republicans and democrats who put country first on january the 6th. it doesn't look like steve scalise was one of them after.

>> yeah, and with mike pence, you know, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer had almost resigned themselves to saying, we'll come back tomorrow, we'll come back in a couple of days. look what's happening, they get the phone call, vice president pence, i've spoken to the sergeant at arms, we're going back tonight, we're going to get this done, and we're going to vote. we knew that mike pence wanted that, mitch mcconnell wanted that. to see republicans, democrats, rallying effectively to save the democracy in that moment, it's extraordinary footage that we hadn't seen before. >> we're following the new legal pressure on donald trump, the supreme court rejecting his call to intervene in the mar-a-lago documents case while the january 6th committee votes to serve him with a subpoena. >> at least -- no, he wasn't, actually. >> that's right. >> as you can see, we have michael steele with us, former

chair of the republican national committee with us, congressional investigations reporter for "the washington post," jackie alemany is back. i told you, not letting you go. nbc news justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian. >> he's going to sort through exactly where the case is and what yesterday's supreme court ruling meant. there's a lot to sort out. >> and for some big time context, author and nbc news presidential historian, michael beschloss joins us as well. >> we brought michael along for the deep thought. >> let's get to the new evidence and video laid out by the house investigative committee investigating january 6th. we learned details about trump's premeditated plan to declare victory and got a look at never before seen footage of top lawmakers taking shelter during the attack on the capitol, and there was the dramatic vote to subpoena the former president

himself. >> this afternoon, i am offering this resolution that the committee direct the chairman to issue a subpoena for relevant documents and testimony under oath from donald john trump in connection with the january 6th attack on the united states capitol. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> gentle lady yields back. if there's no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the resolution. those in favor will say i. >> i. >> those opposed no, in the opinion of the chair, the aye's have it. >> mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. >> a recorded vote is requested. the clerk will call the roll. >> ms. cheney. >> aye. >> mr. lofgren. >> aye. >> mr. schiff. >> aye. >> mr. schiff, aye. >> all right, even as trump continued to push the big lie in

public, white house insiders told the committee that he would openly admit he lost behind closed doors. >> at times, president trump acknowledged the reality of this loss, although he publicly claimed he had won the election, privately he admitted that joe biden would take over as president. here's a few examples of that. >> so we're in the oval, and there's a discussion going on, and the president says words to the effect of, yeah, we lost. we need to let that issue go to the next guy, meaning president biden. >> i remember maybe a week after the election was called, i popped into the oval just to like give the president the headlines and see how he was doing, and he was looking at the tv and he said, can you believe i lost to this effing guy. >> so following that conversation with the motorcade

ride, and i said, does the president really think he lost, he said, a lot of times he'll tell me he lost, but he wants to keep fighting it. he thinks there might be enough to overturn the election, but he pretty much has acknowledged that he's lost. >> donald trump knew he lost, so he had to come up with another strategy to somehow make it look like he won. the committee showed even before the election took place, donald trump planned to declare victory no matter what. >> we also interviewed brad parscale, president trump's former campaign manager. he told us he understood that president trump planned as early as july that he would say he won the election even if he lost. and just a few days before the election, steve bannon, a former trump chief white house strategist and outside adviser to president trump spoke to a group of his associates from china and said this.

>> and what trump's going to do is declare victory, right, he's going to declare victory. but that doesn't mean he's a winner. he's just going to say he's a winner. when you wake up wednesday morning, it's going to be a fire storm. also, if trump -- if trump is losing by 10:00, 11:00 at night, it's going to be even crazier because he's going to sit right there and say they stole it. i'm directing the attorney general to shut down all ballot places in all 50 states. he's not going out easy. if biden is winning trump is going to do some crazy [ bleep ] >> just saying it out loud, steve bannon on halloween, october 31st, 2020. we heard that from roger stone in that documentary a few weeks ago that came out where he said the key is to claim victory no matter what happens. once you've laid down that marker, you work from there. >> ken, how is that for

intelligent. >> they don't have it in donald trump's mouth yet, but that's pretty strong. >> it really is, and michael i remember we made a big point before the election about how the wisconsin, michigan, and pennsylvania legislatures needed to pass laws that others were asking them to pass to make their voting system, no, not like denmark, like ron desantis's florida. let me tell you, the thing i love about florida, and i have always loved about florida elections, you know who won by like 8:30 at night. you look at miami-dade, you look at broward. you look at palm beach county, which republicans call the killing field, and if republicans are down by 300,000, they have won. they literally knew at 7:30 on the night of bush's reelect that he won. and that he won so much in florida, held down the losses that he was going to win for the

night. we said with all of this talk of stolen elections, they needed to do what florida did, democratic governors wanted them to do it, and if they had passed legislation, if they had counted the early votes like florida when the early votes came in and most other states, we would have known by 10:00 at night that trump had won wisconsin. >> yeah. >> that trump had won michigan, that trump had won pennsylvania. we also said, just to let everybody know, how planned out this was, we said what bannon said, the early votes, the day of votes were going to break trump's way. the votes that broke biden's way would take a week to count, so trump could take advantage of the ambiguity. >> yep. and that's exactly what happened.

and that's what bannon is saying there. that's what the narrative was in large measure as part of a plan or strategy to create the different layers of chaos. it starts with the attack on the system, oh, early voting or vote by mail, all the things that traditionally republicans have done, certainly i did when i was national chair, i mean, how do you think we rack up those votes in 2010. it was getting those ballots in the hands of our senior citizens early. it was allowing them to take advantage of vote by mail and other avenues. but when you chip away at that, the backside narrative is, oh, if there's any ambiguity or any discrepancies or if it takes too much time, it's because of fraud. and so this was a set up narrative going back to june, july, of 2020. trump had already come out and said this, now we just have the hard evidence that that was an

inside discussion. we planned this out. on page 3, this is what we're going to do. >> and by the way, chris christie said that donald trump had told him if may or june that he's going to basically lose the election. he started talking about it being rigged. >> the political environment at the time, at that point in 2020, going into that summer, the election had started losing steam for trump because of the way the administration handled covid and the way the country was responding to that. he knew, they knew. so their back up has always been how do you reassert a different narrative. well, it's clearly cheating. it's clearly fraud, these other problems, and he's going to come out and say it, regardless of what the results are. so at this stage, we've now got

enough evidence that's out here that, you know, smart reporters like our two friends here have been tracking here and trying to get everything. you just read the narrative because they're telling you the narrative, joe, it's not like they're hiding the ball from you. now the question becomes after all of this evidence, what is the country prepared to do? i mean, when a political party tells you that we're going to steal the election from you, that we're going to take it from you, and then they're saying, in the upcoming election, give us the power back so we can do it again, what are you taking away from all of this evidence that's being presented? sitting back, you're waiting for the justice department, sitting back you're waiting to see what the state of georgia is going to do, but the american people have the first crack at this, it's called november 8th. it's called when you go to the ballot box this november, you've got the evidence. i don't know what the hell more you need. >> right. >> when you've got the

leadership of the party telling you, give us the power back, and we'll tell you what we're going to do with it. they already have. you have just seen the evidence of it. >> and republicans running for office now say they are happy to fulfill donald trump's wish and tamper with the elections and to not honor the results and outcomes of what happens at the ballot box. michael beschloss, as we watch the footage, it was punctuated by the unanimous vote of the committee to subpoena, finally, donald trump himself to get testimony and documents from the man who of course is at the center of the story. unprecedented. how rare is it to see a former president called in front of congress this way and to have him be subpoenaed. he says he's going to respond to it at 8:00 this morning i guess on his social media channel but he's already attacked the committee for subpoenaing him. >> right. willie, i can't wait, and good morning mika and joe and

everyone else. this was a plot against american democracy and hearing by hearing, the january 6th committee has shown that donald trump was the architect. it goes further. not only did this start last summer, we know convincingly. what was he after on the 6th of january, we saw it in film, heard it in testimony. it leads you to assume that what donald trump wanted on the 6th of january was violence. that's why the national guard didn't come. that's why schumer and pelosi were forced to get on the telephone and plead with the governors of virginia and maryland for god sake to send their national guard from other jurisdictions, and what was trump after? he was not only after trying to win the election. i think he wanted violence so he would have the pretext to declare martial law. you know, the number of times we have all heard him at these large rallies saying i've got

these powers under article 2 of the constitution that are so big that i'm not even allowed to talk about them. he has been itching to do this for a long time. there could have been violence. well, there was violence, could have been assassinations on capitol hill that day. could have been a hostage crisis with members of congress and leaders taken hostage, including the vice president who of course is the president of the senate. and the electoral college ballots in the wooden box. every indication that someone in the crowd wanted to grab those, destroy them or take them somewhere else so they could say there's no president. donald trump has to stay in office. he has to hang on. then there's chaos. this was not just trying to grab an election. this is trying to destroy our democracy. >> jackie alemany, you have been covering the riots at the capitol for months.

there are many people who have served time or are serving time because of this. what stood out yesterday during the hearing. >> i think what stood out to me the most was this compilation of new e-mails that they showed from people like tom fitten. people who were giving trump's closest associates at the white house advice about how to handle election day. a conservative blogger, highly influential in right wing circles who has been advising the president on how to handle the mar-a-lago boxes cases, writing to molly, who is trump's assistant at mar-a-lago that they should declare victory and stop counting the votes at midnight, so michael, i can't echo enough what you said. they wanted to kill the biden presidency in the crib and this was a plan to -- that was going to be implemented regardless of whether or not joe biden won. but i think, you know, this investigation is not close to

being over now that they have subpoenaed the former president. something that i think that the committee could potentially do here is actually now finally subpoena trump's phone records, and see if he was -- who he was talking to. this is someone who did a lot of business on his personal cell phone, so yes, they have the white house call records already, but they haven't necessarily shown any direct lines between roger stone and trump on january 6th, january 5th, january 7th, although we do know he was in touch with steve bannon, but was he in touch with extremist, people on the ground. enrique tarrio, any of the proud boys, was he talking to tom fitten about trying to declare martial law. these conversations would potentially come to light now that they have subpoenaed him. at the end of the day, i mean, obviously it's unprecedented to subpoena a former president for his phone records but whoever the phone carrier is, we have

countless anecdotes of aides trying to confiscate trump's personal cell phones and him sending another aide to go out and buy a new one. will that phone carrier hand over these documents. that's a big question. it's something i'm going to be looking for. the last thing that i think i was wanting more of was has the committee come to understand how to address people who have fallen for this grift, people who have been brain washed, fed the big lies, fed lies by trump, and how they can address this going forward, this rod and this problem of domestic violent political terrorism. and that's something i'm really going to be looking for in the final report, what have they come to understand about the insurrectionists, and how can they prevent this from going forward other than giving people prison time. >> ken with the usual presidential dignity, president trump said last night, the unselect committee of political hacks and thugs will hear from

me tomorrow morning at 8:00 in the morning. losing his touch with the insult nicknames, by the way, but we'll put that to the side. >> he's losing his game. >> yeah, not his best work on that. so ken, but he's been subpoenaed for testimony under oath. his records, his phone calls, all those documents have now been subpoenaed. it felt like it had to come to this, after all, he is the man at the center of all of this. is there any chance this committee, any chance the american public hears from donald trump under oath or at least sees him plead the fifth a whole bunch of times. >> i guess it will depend on whether donald trump can roll the dice and think he has a story to tell and wants to actually do this. if he resists, i don't see how it happens. there just isn't enough time. this committee is going to be going away in fairly short order, and so i don't see how they compel unless he agrees to do it.

i was struck yesterday, what stood out to me, as somebody following the security situation and the role of the intelligence agencies and what was known is the new information about really disturbing tips that came in to the secret service, but they came from the fbi about proud boys and oath keepers, potentially bringing guns to washington to kill people. >> and ken, there was one where you actually had an fbi agent begging the secret service, please, please take this seriously. >> take this seriously, and investigate further and that was not done. i think that's a complicated story. you know, there's a whole group of staffers who work for this committee that has been looking into the security failures. they didn't get a hearing. there's been no hearing about this. there's going to be a chapter about what happened with the national guard, a chapter on all the warnings. it's a complicated story. in some part, these agencies were cowed by donald trump. chris wray was waking up every day wondering if today was the day he was going to be fired at

the end of the trump administration. why didn't they write an intelligence bulletin sharing the information and raising an alarm. while this was happening, i can remember thinking how can this be happening. how is this group entering and invading the capitol. where the security agencies. >> what is going on. >> and it's -- >> you know what i was thinking while it was happening, i was thinking about the letter that cheney and the former dod, the secretaries of defense had written. >> right. >> and published in the paper. saying don't get involved in this political fight. and so while the national guard was sitting tight, and they weren't doing anything, i just kept thinking, oh, my god, cheney, and all the secretaries of defense were right. they're not sending in the national guard. >> that's right. and there was a worry that trump was going to, you know, invoke the insurrection act and so if you remember the mayor of washington didn't want federal troops around the city. that cut both ways. there's a story of the fbi

getting a lot of signals about potential violence and saying, well, this isn't credible and specific enough. we couldn't act on it. there was a giant miss here. they had a lot of evidence here. >> i remember that day, the later hour of the day as more and more questions were being raised about how does this -- how does this happen. i mean, i grew up here in washington, d.c. i've seen virtually every national event on the mall and capitol steps. you just don't get to breach the capitol. you just done do that, and so for a lot of us, it was like, this seems a little bit too easy. >> yes. >> and now we're just getting these narratives, these stories that are evolving or emerging that says, well, you know, within the fbi, there are reports of concern about the number of fbi agents who actually aligned themselves with

this maga crowd or with the proud boys and -- >> even after the attack. >> even after the attack. so i think there's -- to ken's point, there's a lot more. you guys are going to get on this i'm sure. there's a lot more narrative to tell about what was going on leading up to inside of these particular agencies, and what was the background chatter about this and narratively, what were they hearing and saying that allowed this to happen, to allow militarily allowed individuals, who aren't secret service or fbi agents, so there's a lot here, folks, i'm sorry. >> there's still a lot to unpack. michael beschloss, we don't know if the committee has found anything that the department of justice can use to indict the president of the united states or a jury could use to convict the president of the united states, but i think it's safe to

say when you read the "way too early" editorial page this morning, a page, let me say, that still likes to throw around the term russian hoax despite the fact that, you know, saved for qanon but the "wall street journal" has consistently attacked. what the committee has accomplished, is to cement the facts surrounding mr. trump's recklessness after november 3rd and az dereliction of duty on january 6th, the justice department and whether it was willful blindness or intentional valley, he kept repeating them. the january 6th committee probably won't get mr. trump under oath, the editorial ends,

but the evidence of bad behavior is so convincing that political accountability hardly requires it and of course historical accountability, michael, the same. >> right, and they're sort of the same thing because, you know, we're establishing for history what was done and we're doing it for two reasons. number one, to bring the guilty to justice, and that may well include donald trump, and the other thing is to strengthen our system to make sure that this never happens ever again in the future of our democracy. but, you know, the thing that strikes me is that so much was happening in public, too. go back to the 12th of december, almost a month earlier, before january 6th. enrique tarrio was at the white house on parlor, putting out pictures of himself standing in front of the white house. i remember thinking at the time, what is he doing there, and bill barr quits and esper is gone,

and i'm thinking, why are these people leaving after donald trump has lost, you know, what is so terrible ahead of us that even lackeys like esper and barr who proved themselves happy to do somersaults for donald trump for years think that this is so terrible, they've got to get out of here, and there were reports that donald trump was making small changes in obscure offices, obscure appointments and the justice department and the pentagon and elsewhere. and for this guy who's so notoriously indifferent to detail, why was he doing that. so the point is that this was all happening in front of our eyes. we've discovered thanks to the committee, a lot of things that we did not know before, but on the 6th of january, had those rioters been a little bit faster and had the security been a little bit less, we could have seen assassinations on capitol hill, and there would have been a lot of support from a lot of people for donald trump saying

i've got to restore order, martial law and things that are even more authoritarian than that. it was that close. >> by the way, mika, there are of course still trumpers and we've heard some of them say, oh, nobody was going to try to kill hike pence. you have no evidence of anybody was going to try to kill, you have no evidence people wanted to kill nancy pelosi. we saw yesterday, again, more video of people screaming at the top of their lungs, bring her out, bring her out. yelling over cops to bring nancy pelosi out so they could kill her. it's, again, you really, you really have to take leave of your senses to not suggest that these people wants to kill, hang mike pence, and kill nancy pelosi. >> and it makes the sound bites that we started the show with even more despicable because we are dealing with how close we came.

>> yeah. >> not just to our democracy being interrupted but as michael points out, assassinations in the capitol. michael beschloss, thank you very much. and still ahead on "morning joe," we'll be joined by a member of the january 6th committee, congressman jamie raskin on the heels of yesterday's hearing and vote to subpoena former president donald trump. plus, the supreme court deals a blow to former president trump rejecting his request to intervene in the mar-a-lago documents case. ken dilanian will explain for us that development. >> he's a smart country lawyer. >> things got heated, real heated during a debate between wisconsin senate nominee, ron johnson, and mandela barnes. what ron johnson said that had the audience alternating between laughing at him and booing. yikes. and there was another debate last night between michigan's gubernatorial candidates, we'll take a look at what they had to say about the second amendment

and school safety. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. ♪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.♪

moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 2 days. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach

or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your doctor about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. president biden has now signed the inflation reduction act into law. ok, so what exactly does it mean for you? out of pocket costs for drugs will be capped. for seniors, insulin will be just $35.

families will save $2,400 on health care premiums. energy costs, down an average of $1,800 a year for families. and it's paid for by making the biggest corporations pay what they owe. president biden's bill doesn't fix everything, but it will save your family money. there's a different way to treat hiv. it's every-other-month, injectable cabenuva. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete, long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month. cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two injections, given by my healthcare provider, every other month. it's one less thing to think about while traveling. hiv pills aren't on my mind. a quick change in my plans is no big deal. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away.

tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. every other month, and i'm good to go. ask your doctor about every-other-month cabenuva. 37 past the hour. a live look at washington, d.c. >> the spinners. it's friday morning. it's the spinners. >> and it's still dark out, but it's time to get up and go to work or turn that computer on. >> go to sleep. call in. you know what. >> i was like, go to work. >> quiet quitting. just quiet quit. you'll quietly be fired a couple of months from now, but it's friday. >> all right. here we go, the supreme court has handed former president

donald trump a loss. >> a big loss. >> the dispute with the justice department for the documents, over those documents seized from his mar-a-lago home and club in florida, in a brief unsigned order with no dissents noted the high court rejected the former president's request that the special master be allowed to review the more than 100 documents marked as classified. the batch is a small part of the 11,000 records that federal agents seized in august and concerns that trump unlawfully kept official white house records after he left office. the decision does not affect the justice department's access to the same documents as part of its criminal investigation. >> so, ken, help us out here with the procedure. this actually reminds me, if i were a law student, like they would, you know, this would be a great test. >> right. >> so what does this ruling leave in place.

what does this ruling push aside. what's the status of the case right now? you have three hours. >> oh, my goodness. >> i'm not a lawyer, so, look, it leaves in place the 11th circuit ruling, a three judge panel, two appointed by president trump, which stayed part of justice aileen cannon's order, that put these documents in front of them. the 100 classified documents those have no business being reviewed by a special master and the fbi should immediately get access to them for their criminal investigation. >> right. >> so the trump lawyers took far of that to the supreme court. they said we think the classified documents should be reviewed by the special maers, and -- special master, and by the way, if that had happened, you know who else would have gotten the classified documents, trump and his lawyers. this is about as strong a rebuke as you can imagine. a one sentence order, not a single justice, not even

clarence thomas finding any reason to put any stock, and the arguments made by trump's lawyers, and remember, that was an 80-page brief, full of extraneous arguments, none of which persuaded any supreme court justice. >> i know somebody associated with the 11th circuit. very conservative circuit, and this person said to me, the 11th circuit is going to knock him down. because they're conservative, but they don't put up with -- they're going to be really offended by this bs. just like somebody who was connected to conservative federalist society judge, in february of 2017, when trump attacked the bush appointee for one of the rulings. and just said, he doesn't know what he's just done.

if you attack the independence of one federal judge, you attack the independence of all. and i'm sorry, i understand people are offended by the roe decision and the overturning. these people have believed this legally since law school. >> right. >> for the most part. but in these cases, the supreme court, 65-0, let stand in place, federal judges, trump judges, not going along with the nonsense, and yesterday, again, a matter of great import, so something that roosevelt politics, the court again said don't bother us with this. we're offended. one sentence gone. >> what it says, and i think very much to ken's point and yours, is the aileen cannons, they're the aberration, they're still outside of the mainstream of judicial prudence that you -- that you hope and expect from your judges, in other words, they're going to look at the

arguments that are presented to them. they're going to weigh those against the facts and the law, as they say, and they're going to rule accordingly. the 11th circuit, not the 9th. it's a conservative circuit. a lot of folks initially were like, oh my god, this is going to be trump's lawyer handing him what he wants, and what they did is they stood up the constitution. they stood up the rule of u la. -- rule of law. they applied the law to the facts to the arguments being made, and to ken's point, they came back with one sentence, that basically said, hell no, go back home, this isn't going to work, and that's good. that's refreshing. i don't know how much more restrained the judicial system is going to withstand in the coming months and years, and at least right now, they're holding to the constitutional lines.

>> can i say that the whole debate about the special master has been a little bit of a side show. while this has been going on, the fbi has been diligently interviewing witnesses about what happened to the classified documents. this week we learned they talked to a trump employee who says he was ordered by trump to move the documents after the grand jury subpoena came in. this investigation is very active, very serious, and it goes to questions of obstruction, as well as mishandling. >> by the way, i have said, time and again, and people african -- after cannon's ruling, the supreme court for the most part, if it doesn't have to do with ideology, if it has to do with things donald trump knew, when he was trying to push the rule of law, they've held firm and of the 65 justices or judges, federal judges, i have read some of the rulings to see how conservative they are. they're really conservative. like things that were just, but again, i think what michael said

bears repeating. there are outliars, there are always outliers, and judge cannon, there seems to be about -- aberrations here. >> trump also lost in the supreme court on his taxes and on the election appeal so it's a pretty consistent record. >> jackie alemany, to sum up, first of all on the point you made about phone records, often saw and heard that donald trump used other people's phones, so i wonder what you think of that. and then is this the last hearing, do we expect more? what are next steps, especially in terms of the trump subpoena and time running out? >> next steps are, they've got to put the paperwork together to get that subpoena to the former president. then there's going to be a deadline for him to respond to them, it's a very good question about whether or not he was using other people's cell

phones. we know that the committee has subpoenaed other people for their phone records, bank accounts. they have really done an extensive job. this may or may not be the last hearing. another one potentially will reveal the highlights of the final report, but that probably won't come until after midterms. but look, the committee right now, they're losing staff. lawyers are transitioning to new jobs. they are slowly winding down. that is the reality. but they do have a big task ahead of them. they've got to write this thing. they have a few assigned writers on the committee in charge of that, and different lawmakers in charge of various sections but trump could completely change the script if he decides to cooperate in some way, which is highly unlikely, but there are new documents that could be coming in, the national archives could happen to stumble upon something new, deliver it to the committee, maybe secret service, hands over more, maybe they reinterview tony, bob engel.

they do a good job of keeping surprises. >> jackie alemany, and ken dilanian, thank you very much for your reporting and analysis, we appreciate it. ahead of the midterms, president biden has been skipping the big rallies and focusing on fundraising. mike allen of "axios" joins us ahead. plus the debate stage last night, republican senator ron johnson claimed the fbi set him up. well, that's exactly what the audience did. >> this is amazing. ron johnson goes full marion barry. >> i was just going there. i was just going there. >> the audience was with you because there was a lot of laughing at him, not with him. we'll have more when "morning joe" comes right back. we'll have more when "morning joe" comes right back.

quality healthcare goes beyond prescriptions and procedures. it's about making people feel ca no one knows that better than physician associates because we don't just see patien we see you. a one-of-a-kind person with one-of-a-kind needs. and we'll never stop going beyon to deliver the care you deserve. see how pas bring human connecti to healthcare. visit pas go beyond dot com. super emma just about sleeps in her cape. but when we realized she was battling sensitive skin, we switched to tide hygenic clean free.

it's gentle on her skin and out-cleans our old free detergent. tide hygenic clean free. hypoallergenic and safe for sensitive skin. i'm javi, i'm 31, and i'm a fitness instructor. i saw myself in a photograph. and we were all smiling, and i looked closer, and i was like that- that's what everybody sees? i'm back, and i got botox® cosmetic. the lines were so prominent it's all i saw in the photograph, so now when i take photos, and i see myself in photos, its- it's me, i just have fewer lines. botox® cosmetic is fda-approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet, and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history. muscle or nerve conditions,

and medications including botulinum toxins. as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. see for yourself at botoxcosmetic.com my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪ ♪ it was time for a nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once-monthly add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma that can mean less oral steroids. not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. ask your asthma specialist about a nunormal with nucala. i brought in ensure max protein ask your asthma specialist with 30 grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. uhh - here, i'll take that woo hoo ensure max protein, with 30 grams of protein, 1 gram of sugar and now in two new flavors (♪ ♪)

the fbi set me up with a corrupt, with a corrupt briefing and then leaked that to smear me. he is referring to corruption with the fbi which i have been trying to uncover and expose. >> all right. so do we have time for -- please, audience, please, we're trying to get through these. >> please, stop laughing. >> don't laugh at a sitting united states senator who is making a fool of himself. >> this is bad. >> ed luce just helpfully sent me a text and he said we've gone from the full monte to the full barry. ron johnson goes full marion barry. the fbi set me up. >> i don't know, no shame, there's no anything. they just throw this crap out there, and they just say the

wildest stuff. and you go, when did they have time to do that. what purpose would they have to do that, are you really that valuable? >> he's trying to cover up -- >> i don't know if you remember that scandal, but during abscam, you had a member of congress who was shoving so much money in his pockets. >> me couldn't close his jacket. >> he had too much cash. >> mike allen is here. and when they asked him what he was doing, he was conducting his own investigation on corruption. >> he was going to go and check the serial numbers on all of those bills. >> and what about all the money in the freezer, you were here for that. >> the freezer. >> exactly. all right. willie, take us through the debate! all right. so yeah, this is a race in wisconsin between ron johnson and mandela barnes, where johnson has opened up a little bit of a lead in recent polling, up 6 points in the most recent

poll. they went back and forth, johnson, of course the republican incumbent, mandela barnes is the wisconsin governor. here are some of the highlights from the debate. >> we know he got a degree in communications, specializing in performance, so he's a performer, an actor, i don't know if she's just delivering lines somebody wrote for him or making this stuff up on his own. >> look, the biggest achievement in business was ron johnson saying i do. he married into his business. he didn't start that from the ground up. >> what do you find admirable about your opponent? >> no, seriously, i do think the senator has proven to be a family man, and i think that's admirable. >> i appreciate the fact that lieutenant governor barnes had loving parents, a schoolteacher, father who worked third shift, he had a good upbringing. i guess what puzzles me about that, is with that upbringing, why has he turned against america. why does he find america awful.

>> guys, that is the case, you heard laughter, boos from the sitting united states senator, that is, if you boil it down, the case that ron johnson made last night, which is that mandela barnes is not representative of most of the state of wisconsin, that his views and things he said in the past about police and about the country suggest he doesn't love the country enough. that's ron johnson's position. >> you know, it's so despicable, it really is. when somebody asks you to say something nice about the other person, what they don't understand is you get points from voters for saying something nice about your opponent. this is one thing that bill clinton understood, that so many people don't understand is it would be so often, someone would say, the republicans say, you know what, they're right. they're right. that's exactly what we need to do. >> that's right. >> you know, give your opponent

something every once in a while. it shows a little bit of grace. that answer, no grace. >> when you're graceless, that is what it sounds like, and the reality of it is ron johnson knows he's in the battle of his political life. he's up against an individual who has been elected statewide so he's not a stranger to voters. he's got a record as well. and this race in wisconsin is competitive. six points down, but competitive, and i think what ron johnson showed last night was his vulnerabilities. in that moment, he could not just leave it at, yeah, he's a good family man, great parents, and that's something that's good for the state. >> just stopped, and if you say something graceful, then just stop. >> just stop. it's okay. >> that's the only way you're going to reach those voters who want to be reached. something we talk a lot about on "axios" is normal america, the

america that is not obsessed with twitter. the america that is not entrenched and shouting at each other. you're going to reach them in a debate. >> i think people are over learning the lesson from donald trump. so many people think, they're like, republican thought reagan's talents were transferable, they weren't. democrats thought obama's talents were transferable, they weren't. here you have trump who is graceless, angry as a public figure. can never stop, can never be nice. i think republicans are going to be taught a very difficult lesson over the next four to six years, that for whatever reason, people were fine with donald trump being a jerk. but just as we're seeing in the law, gravity, a sense of gravity is returning, and i think political gravity will return too. we will get back to a day where politicians are not going to be -- not soon enough. but politicians will not be

rewarded for being jerks. >> i go with mika on this. i think it's a little bit more broken. >> it is broken right now. >> midterm to long-term optimism, and here's why, look at any poll, people want washington to work. people want their politicians to be graceful, safe. >> i'm sure they do. >> they do. don't get caught inside the bubble. >> i agree, it's going to be a ways. >> there's a lot to wash out. >> here's the deal, to both your points, and this is why i'm siding more with my friend mika over here. >> thank you. >> is that at the end of the day -- >> talk about working the ref. >> dude, i'm not crazy. i know the power center at this table. >> but here's the deal, how long does that take. how much time do we have. >> what happens in the meantime. >> where the cancer spreads. >> what else grows out of that,

while we're waiting for everyone to find their grace. >> look at arizona, look down ballot. >> if you just dress it up and it sounds better and looks better, but it's still graceless, and it's still going down that road that you're talking about and makes it hard to recover. >> i looked at an arizona poll yesterday, something like 77% of arizonians in a recent poll want to elect leaders who want a compromise, and an overwhelming majority trust the election, the election that was had. >> so why is kari lake in the lead. >> what are they going to compromise on, disinformation. >> can i answer, i would like to finish the thought. kari lake will win in a void. if you're running against somebody that won't debate you, if you're running against somebody who won't go out there. if you're running against somebody who is scared of their own shadow politically, the one

thing i found out, and i said it yesterday, kari lake from what i understand is everywhere. she's knocking on doors, going to events, talking to people all over the state of arizona and i can't tell you how many times when i meet people, share their hands, talk to them, talk to the room, they'll come up to me and say, you know, everybody says you're crazy, everybody says you're too conservative, everybody says you're a right wing freak, you're normal, i'll vote for you. it's that meeting. it's what kari lake is doing that her opponent is not doing. >> we vote for humans, and you have to make that connection. one other take away from the debates that we have been watching and we have the her shell walker, senator warnock debate coming up. it's harder and harder to imagine mitch mcconnell as a majority leader with these senators, and -- >> mitch mcconnell can't imagine him being majority leader with these senators, you're right.

>> and herschel walker who is a great football player, but can you imagine him in a debate. >> that's tonight, willie. >> that's something we're going to be watching. >> yeah, we got a one hour debate in savannah tonight. >> raphael warnock, the senior pastor at ebenezer baptist church, and herschel walker, we'll see if he tells the story about the pregnant cows. talk about managing expectations with s.e.c. football coaches where bear bryant would say we have no chance against little sisters of the poor this week, herschel walker managing expectations saying quote, i'm not that smart, and raphael warnock is going to embarrass me at this debate. those are the words of herschel walker, expectations, management. >> jonathan lemire pointed out, he has these professional debate coaches, including presidential level debate coaches. >> you know, there's another expectations game that we have seen unfold, willie, over the past couple of days, and i think you're right, i think it's smart

for herschel walker to do that, smart for his advisers to tell him to do that. we saw dasha burns great report on fetterman. we saw him reading the closed captions. he's constantly being made fun of by dr. oz because of a physical ailment, and i think the expectations game there going into a debate that fetterman's own people, as i understand are very concerned about. i think the expectations game is going to break the other way in fetterman's favor because i suspect he'll perform much better than people expect. >> you're right. we got past this moment, the campaign got past this moment where the public has now seen how he operates, and how he processes those questions, so it won't be as shocking and surprising when it happens during the debate. da dasha is going to be on in a few moments, she also interviewed dr. oz, we'll hear

her interview in just a few minutes here. and mike allen, as we head to the midterms, give us a sense of the strategy from the white house. biden not necessarily going out on the trail, and focusing on other things. what is it? >> yes, so quick stat for you. in his first midterm october, president obama 12 rallies, first midterm october, donald trump, 15 big rallies in october, joe biden so far zero. the biden flex is executive action. we're going to see him in irvine, california, orange county, my native land. he's going to sign an executive order, making it easier for hhs and prescription drugs. earlier the pot pardons, and student loans. projecting power to certain constituencies, but not the big

closing argument rally that you expect in october of a midterm. >> cofounder of "axios," mike allen, thank you very much. >> thank you, mike. >> happy friday! and by the way, the event tonight for your book. >> yes. >> thank you, we'll see you tonight at the lion hotel for "smart brevity" on the "wall street journal" best seller list. >> it will be five minutes, come in, high fives and go. >> one fun thing. >> it is just past the top of the second hour of "morning joe," and we're going to get new evidence and video laid out by the house select committee investigating january 6th. among the highlights of yesterday's hearing which will be the last for the panel before the midterm elections was the vote to subpoena the former president himself. we also learned new details about trump's premeditated plan to declare victory and got a look at never before seen video of congressional leaders

sheltered in a secure location during the insurrection begging the administration for help. >> we have got to get to proceedings. >> usa u.s. >> senator schumer is at a secure location, and they're locked down in the senate. >> there has to be some way to maintain the sense that people have that there is some security, some confidence that government can function and that you can elect the president of the united states. did we go back into session? >> we did go back into the session, but now apparently everybody on the floor is putting on gas masks to prepare for a breach, so i'm trying to get more information. >> they're putting on their tear gas masks. do you believe this?

do you believe this? >> i can't. >> the house members, walking through the tunnels. >> we're coming in if you don't bring her up. >> i'm going to call the secretary of dod. we have some senators who are still in their hide aways, they need massive personnel now. can you get the maryland national guard to come too. >> i have something to say, mr. secretary, i'm going to call the mayor of washington, d.c. right now and see what other outreach she has, other police departments, leader hoyer has mentioned. >> get him up. get him up. get him up. >> hi, governor, this is nancy. governor, i don't know if you have been approached about the virginia national guard.

mr. hoyer was speaking to governor hogan. but i still think you probably need the okay of the federal government in order to come into another jurisdiction. oh, my gosh, they're just breaking windows, they're doing all kinds -- it's really -- they said somebody was shot. it's just horrendous, and all at the instigation of the president of the united states. okay. thank you, governor, i appreciate what you're doing, and if you don't mind, i would like to stay in touch. thank you. thank you. bye bye. >> virginia guard has been called in. >> i just called the governor of northam, they said 200 of state police and a unit of the national guard. >> they're breaking windows and going in, obviously ransacking our offices and all the rest of

that. that's nothing. the concern we have about personal -- >> safety. >> personal safety just transcends everything, but the fact is on any given day, they're breaking the law in many different ways, and quite frankly, much of it at the instigation of the president of the united states. and now if he could at least, somebody -- >> why don't you get the president to tell them to leave the capitol, mr. attorney general, your law enforcement responsibility, a public statement they should all leave. >>. [ chanting usa ] >> we're waiting for so and so, we need them there now, whoever you got. >> you also have troops, this is steny hoyer, troops andrews air force base, other military bases.

we need active duty, national guard. >> we have to evacuate. we need out. >> i don't want to speak for the leadership for execution of the operation, so i'm not going to say that because they are on the ground. >> just pretend for a moment that it's the pentagon or the white house or some other entity that was under siege, and let me say, you can logistically get people there. >> how we can get this job done today, we talked to mitch about it earlier, he's not in the room right now, but he was with us earlier, and said we want to expedite this, and hopefully

they can confine it to just one complaint, arizona, and then we could vote and that would be, you know, then just move forward the rest of the state. the overriding wish is to do it at the capitol. what we are being told very directly is going to take days for the capitol to be okay again. we've gotten a very bad report that the condition of the house floor, defecation and all that kind of thing as well. i don't think that that's hard to clean up. but i do think it was more from a security standpoint of making sure that everybody is out of the building and how long will that take. >> i just got off with the vice president. >> and i got off with the vice president elect. >> okay. what we left the conversation with, because he said he had the impression from mitch that mitch wants to get everybody back to do it there. i said, well, we're getting a counter point that could take

time to clean up the poopoo that they're making all over, literally and figuratively in the capitol, and it may take days to get back. >> i'm at the capitol building, literally standing with the u.s. capitol police. he just informed me what you will hear from official channels, paul irving, sergeant at arms, will inform you that their best information is that they believe the house and the senate will be able to meet in roughly an hour. >> good news. >> about the process for getting back into the building. >> thank you very much, mr. vice president. good news. >> so that was part of the exhibit from the select committee shown yesterday. first, we should tell our viewers, how do we have that footage, how did the select committee get that footage.

that's alexandra's pelosi, nancy pelosi's daughter who happened to be following her mother with a film crew. that's how you got that extraordinary footage. what you saw is incredible poise from leadership, from nancy pelosi, from chuck schumer, from others while the walls were closing in around them, people were breaking in, and also as we said earlier, republicans standing there at the side of nancy pelosi, watching what was going on and stepping out later, and more recently and saying, we didn't know how bad it was. or we don't know why nancy pelosi didn't do more to call in the national guard. steve scalise's case, he was standing in arm's length of her while she was doing that. just as an american to watch that, i think this is why those hearings have broken through so much, it makes your blood boil that it got to that point, that it got to the point where the leadership of the country, democrats and republicans, the vice president of the united states has their lives under

threat because of a lie and because of a man who sent all of those people there. >> and you know, we've talked about some of this before. and i say this as a conservative and a former republican, what we have seen over the past few years is not about being a republican or democrat, a conservative or liberal, it's about whether you're willing to stand up for american democracy, and let's just call them out. steve scalise. he heard nancy pelosi telling the pentagon, get people over here. if it were the pentagon or the white house, we know what you would do. you need to do it for us. scalise heard that and went out later on press conference and lied about it. and then you've got the guy who wants to be the next speaker of the house. screaming at donald trump, the top of his lungs, saying they needed help, and yelling at him

and swearing at him, saying these are your people, and then going on the house floor saying donald trump needed to be held accountable. and then going down to mar-a-lago, if your kids are eating cereal cover their ears, kissing donald trump's ass. you wonder how somebody, their heart could be so hardened and their love for america could be negotiable to see what steve scalise is doing, hearing nancy pelosi, shouting that they needed the national guard there. and then steve scalise going out and lying to the american people. saying, well, the committee won't answer this question, why didn't nancy pelosi do more to get the national guard there. he's right there. i see john thune right there.

when these questions are raised, why don't they speak out about it. a lot of people hate mitch mcconnell that watch this show. on that day, mitch mcconnell and mike pence stood up for america and they said this mob is not going to win the day. we're going to go back on the floor and we are going to vote. and i've heard that, by the way, from the most progressive members of the democratic caucus, and said on that day, mitch stood with pence, stood with nancy. stood with chuck. >> stood with america. >> thank you. why is it so hard, why is it so hard for the guy who wants to be the next speaker of the house. steve scalise, you know better. you have been through hell, a living hell because of political violence from the other side. you know better. why would you do this?

why would you do this on the most important -- i've got to say, the most important time. and i'm sorry -- >> it's your moment to stand for the country. >> other republicans who were helping the secret service shove a piece of furniture in front of doors so the mob would not kill them, going out and telling his constituents later that they were just tourists. that they weren't an angry mob, when he feared for his life. when guns were drawn. again, who are these people. who are these people because they are not the people i served with who loved, loved american democracy, and would walk on to the house floor every day, and we would look at each other, and sometimes we would just stop and say, my god, this is the center of democracy, not only in

america but across the world, how blessed are we by god to be able to stand in this house and here we are in 2022, and they're selling american democracy out for a failed reality tv host who lost them the white house, who lost them the senate, who lost them the house and who lost them their political soul. >> and is under investigation on a number of levels. so well put. this was the moment. this was a moment in history where people had a choice. the choice was easy, and those guys made the wrong choice. former chair of the rnc, michael steele is with us. and joining the discussion, senior national political correspondent for "the washington post," ashley parker with us in studio, and former white house press secretary, jen psaki, now an msnbc host, but has some incredible memories of those days from her perspective.

white house bureau chief at "politico," jonathan lemire, he's the host of "way too early," author of "the big lie." >> i've heard he wrote a book on this. i heard you needed promoted. >> also with us, former u.s. attorney and senior fbi official chuck rosenberg, good to have you all. >> let's talk about the person that i think most americans, people who love america at least had to be impressed by yesterday, and that was nancy pelosi, grace under fire. you brought up something i think that's so important to understand. we don't get a lot of huge profiles. and there's a reason why. >> after i watched the video, i was thinking about that last night. there have been some books about her, but the reason we don't hear about her that much is because the house that she runs is not a hot mess, they're

hearing about the senate. what is going on with sinema. but pelosi just has singular control of her caucus, and you sort of got a glimpse of that, watching the way the capitol is under assault, you know, with people with weapons who want to do her calm. and she gets democrats, moderates to progressives to do just about exactly what she wants. >> and jen, again, she runs it with an iron fist, but also could be quite diplomatic. i know that joe manchin, when he was trying to figure out how to get to a deal, he had trouble getting to a deal with democrats in the senate but he would talk to nancy pelosi every day because she was the operator he knew would get them to a deal. >> she's a deal maker. she's also, we saw there, and what the country saw there, at the hearing with that video.

which is so remarkable, is how calm and collected she is, how together she is, what stuck with me from that video is her on the phone with a republican and a democratic governor separately saying can you help, can you send troops. wait, do you need federal approval. she was trying to solve the challenge in the moment filling this vacuum of leadership. that's exactly who she is, and why she's been able to keep the democratic caucus together for so many years. >> you wrote the book literally on the big lie and january 6th, what did you learn yesterday? >> yes, watching these video, the book details the election lie in 2016, specifically in 2020, we heard from steve bannon, former strategist, close ally, printing weeks before the

election exactly what would occur, trump would go out on election night, declare that he won, if he was losing at the time, things would get crazy in bannon's words, and january 6th, he predicted things would happen that people would never forget. that he was certainly proven to be true. we know that others, roger stone, others in the trump orbit saying similarly that he was going to declare victory no matter what. it was a methodical effort. it wasn't about madness. it was an effort to plant seeds to say i won, even though he didn't and have his supporters respond and the capstone is that violence. it's remarkable, every time we see the footage, it gets you. as bad as it was, it was almost that much worse, and i have talked to people around the capitol that day, federal law enforcement who said a few wrong turns, protesters get a little luckier, we could have had members of congress, speaker pelosi come in real danger. they were fearful of deadly assaults on members. we're lucky that didn't happen. >> and ashley, you wrote an important story for americans to

read and understand. we talk about donald trump being a madman. you wrote a great story about how not mad, calculating. this was all planned, all laid out. >> one of the lesser take aways, someone who covered him since 2016, it was premeditated but they laid out how president trump at the time was told repeatedly by aides, by his own justice department, top advisers, his only family that he lost, not only was he told this, he seemed to understand this. he told mark meadows several times, look, i lost, but it's embarrassing so i want to fight it anyhow. he took steps that you only do when you know your term is up, and he signed this executive order to immediately withdraw

troops from afghanistan and somalia. he fully privately understand that he had lost. this wasn't a reckless madman or angry king caught up in the emotion of january 6th a hapless bystander watching the fervor that he wrought. he knew he lost, understood he lost, and went ahead with the plan anyway. >> and that of course makes it worse that he knew he lost and came up with this plan for a coup with the help of steve bannon and roger stone and complicit republicans. chuck rosenberg, this committee now over the last four months has told a compelling story and punctuated it yesterday with the unanimous vote to subpoena president trump himself to get phone records and testimony under oath. the question is what happens next. is there any chance we'll hear from donald trump, and then, what does the justice department do with all that we've seen from the select committee. >> right, willie, so i think there's a relatively small

chance that we actually hear from mr. trump under oath. i mean, it's possible he could agree to it. that seems unlikely. even if he did agree, the odds of him telling the truth, something he's not well acquainted with, seems incredibly small. more likely he fights the subpoena and this congress doesn't have enough time to litigate. by the way, even if they win this thing, the congress is able to compel his attendance, and ask questions under oath. there's a good chance that mr. trump takes the fifth amendment. truthful answers to any questions would require him, again, if he were being truthful, which is a stretch, but would require him to incriminate himself. the odds of hearing him, and certainly of hearing him truthfully are exceedingly small. your second question, what does the justice department do with this. both ashley and jonathan used the right word.

this was premeditated. you think of it as an arson, light ago fire. mr. trump surrounded himself with arson, gathered gasoline and matches and the best thing you can say for mr. trump is he turned his back on the fire, and then refused to put it out when people asked him to do it. i think there's a criminal case here. i've often said that criminal cases are really really hard. and that's true. they are really hard. and i think the most difficult question for the department of justice is not could they charge mr. trump, because i think the answer is yes. i think the question that merrick garland has to consider for today and tomorrow and years to come is whether the department of justice should charge mr. trump. he certainly earned it. it's a disgrace. what a vile, vulgar man he is. but it's still a very difficult decision for the department of justice. >> you have these parallel cases, too, where you've got the mar-a-lago documents that the

justice department is grappling with and the focus swinging back to january 6th. what would be the specific charge in the case of january 6th against the former president. what could they bring on him? >> there's several ways to think about it. he could have been falsely raising money off this notion of a stolen election. of course the election was not stolen so raising money on that basis would be a fraud. i think more importantly this notion of creating an insurrection, lighting the fire, if you permit me to extend my metaphor, interfering with counting the electoral votes. all of those are crimes. think of it on two axis, what you need is compelling evidence. if you go to trial against mr. trump, if you charge him you want to convict him, and you need a very serious crime. while mishandling national security documents is certainly serious and something i have prosecuted when i was an assistant u.s. attorney, the

insurrection, the sedition, the undermining of the electoral vote count are the most serious things that happened here. so really compelling evidence of a crime, and the department of justice no doubt has more information than the congress because they have more tools to get information than the congress does. and axis number two, a really compelling statute. a really serious crime. compelling evidence coupled with a serious crime, and again, you know, back to what i said earlier, the difficult decision i think for mr. garland, the really difficult decision is not the could but the should. >> chuck, thank you so much. and a question that obviously historians will be looking at for years to come, and second guessing whatever decision he makes. >> there's so much. you think with the january 6th committee process that, okay, what new evidence, what new information can there possibly

be, and i think to the points that have already been made, there's a hell of a lot more stuff out there. >> still. >> and unfortunately the committee is kind of winding down, and it sort of begs the question, particularly the reflations yesterday, jen, i come to you with this one, the secret service and joe and mika and i were talking about this in the last hour, the fbi, secret service, now we're beginning to see another layer, wait a minute, you mean this may have been a little bit more of an inside game than we thought the responses were. >> by the way, the fbi memo we talked about where somebody very concerned at the fbi that there were way too many agents that were sympathetic to january 6th, the riot. >> which begs the question, how did you guys, as the incoming administration watching this unfold on january 6th, sitting there going okay, what the hell

do we do with this, how did you guys process that, and what was the thinking in terms of the secret service and the fbi and these other agencies either being helpful or in the way or what were your concerns at the time? >> well, i mean, michael what should be jarring to everyone is we didn't have that information either. you have the incoming president of the united states about to be inaugurated in two weeks. we weren't briefed to my knowledge. i talked to a bunch of people yesterday and asked them the same question, on those specific details, jarring texts and e-mails we saw during the hearing yesterday. so on the fifth, we had a bunch of conference calls internally, and what we were preparing for was for the vice president to delay the process. we were ready to drink coffee, to be up all night for there to be procedural steps that were taken to delay the certification of the vote. we were not given information, to my knowledge, about the security threats, and this is

why i think it is so hard to imagine that that is the last hearing they do. they're still reviewing all of this information from the secret service. there's a lot clearly they don't have, and they're tasked with writing recommendations on what legislation should be put in place. there wasn't an intelligence failure. the intelligence was ignored or not used and that seems like a big jarring problem to solve. >> let me ask you, how did you all process after this, the fact, what we saw, what made us all angry on january 7th. the fact that there were capitol hill cops sympathetic to the rioters. we know there are fbi officials, quite a few, who were sympathetic to the rioters, that were secret service members sympathetic to the rioters. how concerning was that to an administration coming in looking around at the people who were supposed to be protecting him, understanding that many were

sympathetic to those who were trying to kill mike pence, and trying to kill nancy pelosi, and people who had -- who proved in time where their simp -- sympathies lied. >> i think some of the questions are how are they feeling now in the white house about what we're learning, and frankly about what we still need to know more about, what the secret service did or didn't know. >> does the president trust the secret service to keep him safe. >> i think there have been some changes. some of the most problematic players that we have been talking about for the past couple of days are no longer there. he does trust the secret service around him, but there clearly is a huge problem within law enforcement, within the people protecting the president. when you're talking about what could happen in the future, there needs to be better checks in the system so that presidents don't have to worry about that. what's jarring to me is i think there's a lot we still don't

know about where that information is, why they didn't use it. who may be in government who was involved. we don't know yet. >> ashley, have you had any reporting or heard anything about concerns about the secret service, about agents sympathetic to the rioters around president biden? >> not specifically, but i think if you look at my -- i know you know her carol leonnig, my colleague, i grew up like all of us thinking of the secret service as this just storied beyond reproach agency, and you know, in her book and an article she writes almost, you know, weekly, monthly, for "the washington post," she documents a number of institutional failures that are not all about agents having sympathetic views with the proud boys, it can be

behaving badly on a trip to south america. the secret service would be among those that like our democracy probably need a bit of shoring up. >> and let me ask you, because you wrote a book about january 6th, i don't know if people know that or not, called "the big lie," what have you heard around the white house and your reporting. you have been there for five, six years, been around the white house regarding the secret service, regarding concerns about people around the president. can they be trusted? >> to jen's point, they were certainly until the after math of january 6th reviews being done about agents and about how they would behave themselves, not just january 6th, but other times, the president has said public he he trusts the agents that protect him every day and his family. to this day, there are people in the white house who now there are some agents who have been holdovers for a while who were sympathetic to donald trump. >> they destroyed documents. >> there were text messages on

january 5th and 6th. >> they destroyed documents to protect donald trump. people in the secret service right now destroyed documents, possibly illegally, to protect donald trump. what does a president do with that? >> it's a source of concern. because some of those agents are gone, but not all of them. some of them are still very much in the service right now, whether they're in protective duty or not, i do not know. they are involved in important positions in that agency. that obviously does a lot more than protect president joe biden. it is a concern. one of the many issues the white house continues to grapple with to this day. we should evaluate how the secret service does its business. >> i thought growing up, story as you said, this group of individuals who have this kind of service to the country, and i often wondered when i looked around the globe and saw

authoritarians, how they have the sort of secret guard and the military presence and these guys who are there, and then donald trump takes his secret service protection and makes them deputy chief of staff and a big lightbulb wen on. that's how it happens. >> that's why there's so many questions. the secret service is part of the white house. they protect the president. in my appearance, the chief of staff. the deputy chief of staff, national security officials at the highest level all of whom who have sort of participated, knew, they had to have known about the threats. they're constantly briefed on the threats to the president or high level events in washington. >> at this point if they didn't know, it would be malpractice. can't miss it. >> the secret service got frenzied texts from the fbi, begging them to take this threat seriously. they did. >> we have a lot more ahead on

the new evidence from the video and testimony from the hearing. committee member jamie raskin will join us at the top of the next hour of "morning joe," and ahead this hour, another exclusive interview from nbc's dasha burns days after her important interview with pennsylvania's democratic nominee for senate, john fetterman. she speaks with dr. mehmet oz. she joins us next with that right here on "morning joe." she joins us next with that right here on "morning joe." there's a different way to treat hiv. it's every-other-month, injectable cabenuva. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete, long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month. cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two injections, given by my healthcare provider, every other month. it's one less thing to think about while traveling. hiv pills aren't on my mind. a quick change in my plans is no big deal. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking certain medicines,

which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. every other month, and i'm good to go. ask your doctor about every-other-month cabenuva.

before we begin, i'd like to thank our sponsor, liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. and by switching, you could even save $652. thank you, liberty mutual. now, contestants ready? go! why? why? only pay for what you need.

♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ your mission: stand up to moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or active psoriatic arthritis and... take. it. on. with rinvoq. rinvoq is a once-daily pill that tackles pain, stiffness, swelling. for some, rinvoq significantly reduces ra and psa fatigue. it can stop irreversible joint damage. and rinvoq can leave skin clear or almost clear in psa. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. ask your rheumatologist about rinvoq relief. rinvoq. make it your mission.

learn how abbvie could help you save on rinvoq. 20 minutes before the top of the hour, a live look at philadelphia. >> yeah, the city of brotherly love. >> yes, it is. >> and michael, also you know what else comes out of there. >> what? >> a lot of crime. >> and the reason i bring that

up. every time you bring that up, progressives are like, it's just as dangerous as manhattan, kansas, no, it's not! it no, it's not. and if you're a democrat, you need to be concerned, all of the murders, the chaos in the city, you know, our cia buddy, mark guy with a long last name. he's been in the most dangerous parts of the world in the cia, he drives around with philly cops. they're demoralized, he fears for his life more in philadelphia than he ever did in the most dangerous parts of afghanistan, and why does this matter? not because of downtown philadelphia. downtown philadelphia will go democratic, it always does, but the philly suburbs that have been breaking democratic, right now, they're starting to feel like -- >> they're clinching up.

>> new yorkers felt in '88, '89. it is chaos there. doesn't matter what the d.a. says. let him go out to bucks county and explain how everything is safe and wonderful in philly. it's going to impact this race. i don't know if oz wins, but it's going to keep it a lot closer than it should be. >> well, put it this way, what the effect of it is that in the suburbs surrounding philly, as they say, sphincters are getting tight, i'm just telling you straight up. it's 7:41 a.m. >> it's the way you wake up, baby. it's the way you wake up. >> mom and dad, sorry you had to hear that. >> it's important. you're putting your finger on an important piece. this entire cycle, with all due respect to my democratic friends, you have had your head in places it should not be, and you missed.

>> >> just missed the mark here. >> you were just there. >> i was just in philadelphia and in crowds with a lot of punches he needs to land on crime. it's effective. working to joe's point in suburban areas. everybody thinks, you know, bucks county, and, no, it's this fight is inside as we like to say. inside the room, suburban families around philly, and they right now are getting tight. they're tightening up. >> here we go again. >> what is it? willie. i can't -- >> oh, my god. >> not so much on that point,

but my point is that they're getting anxious. >> a great word from the very beginning. >> willie, the polls that are breaking ron johnson's way, despite the fact that he has rocks in his head, it has to do with crime. it has to do with concerns about crime, whether you're talking about the democrat in wisconsin who's running or the democrat in pennsylvania that's running, they said some things a few years ago regarding crime catching up to them right now with crime on the rise. murders on the rise, and we do have -- we do have people going back to what i used to hear when i lived in washington in the '90s, which is, you know, the crime rate is going down except for murders. murders are spiking, but other crime, you know, people aren't loitering as much as they were a couple of years ago. so go d.c. >> yeah, that was a theme in the debate last night, by the way, you hear it all over the place, you hear it in the new york

governor's race where lee zeldin is unlikely to win against kathy hochul, but it's closer than it's been in the past, and the theme has been about crime, the focus on that in new york city and elsewhere. that's definitely at the center of a lot of these races. speaking of philadelphia, nbc news correspondent dasha burns is there. dasha, good to see you this morning, so just a couple of days after your interview that made a lot of news, a really important interview with pennsylvania's democratic nominee for senate, john fetterman, you sat down with his republican opponent, dr. mehmet oz, tell us about that new exclusive interview. >> reporter: hey, willie, good morning, hearing from his rival, dr. mehmet oz, celebrity tv doctor turned politician, endorsed by donald trump. we talked about his reaction to our interview with his opponent. we talked about crime. we talked about the president's announcement on marijuana, and much more. watch. >> when people ask me questions

about his health condition, you know what i say, i have no idea. >> reporter: republican pennsylvania senate candidate and celebrity doctor mehmet oz has been cutting into his democratic rival's lead looking to capitalize on john fetterman sidelined by a stroke that almost killed him. oz's team at times mocking him. >> john fetterman wouldn't have had a stroke if he had ever eaten a vegetable. you're a heart doctor. you understand what john fetterman is going through better than most, why would you allow your campaign to mock him like that? >> i have tremendous compassion for what john fetterman is going through, not only as a doctor do i appreciate the challenges but i know his specific ailment because it's a specialty ailment of mine. >> i truly, truly hope that you do not have a doctor in your life laughing at you. >> in an effort to pressure

fetterman to commit to a debate, the oz campaign, promising not to hurt john's feelings and offering to pay for medical personnel. >> doesn't the buck stop with you, isn't that what a leader accepts. >> i accepted responsibility, and you know, i deal with issues that come up. he has his own set of issues and we should have had a debate already. >> would you ever talk to your patients like this? >> no. >> the two candidates have been locked in a battle over crime. >> john fetterman supports decriminalizing dangerous drugs. >> dr. oz doesn't know a thing about crime. >> oz revealing there may be a point of agreement, on president biden's. >> i think the move was a rational move. >> pennsylvania, we're going to have a lot of fun. >> oz secured the republican nomination thanks in part to an endorsement from former president trump, and though he's happy to share the campaign stage, dr. oz has tried to distance himself from some of many trump's extreme positions, including the election denial

claims at the heart of the january 6th capitol riot. >> by the time the delegates and those reports were sent to the u.s. senate, our job was to approve it, which is what i would have done. >> he's also distancing himself from the abortion battle, repeatedly refusing to say whether he would support lindsey graham's proposed national abortion ban. can you tell us yes or no on that bill. >> i'm giving you a bigger answer than yes or no. i'm telling you, i don't mean to any federal rules limiting what states do with abortion. it should be up to the states. >> reporter: willie, to your point earlier, the conversation about crime, i hope you and our viewers look at the full interview posted online, and the nightly news piece tonight. crime was a big part of the conversation with dr. oz, he has made it a center piece of his campaign, and he spent a lot of time in and around the philly talking about public safety, talking about drug addiction, talking about crime, especially

trying to win over some of the black voters here who are facing these issues day in and day out. it will be interesting to see if he ends up cutting through there. when i'm talking to voters here, democrats or republicans, they are bringing that up as a top issue, especially suburban moms, folks worried about their kids, not being able to let their kids go outside because it has been tough for people. so it's definitely going to be a big issue here, guys. >> dr. oz and john fetterman going at it from a distance. will be fascinating seeing them on a stage debating together. nbc news correspondent dasha burns from philadelphia. thank you so much again. so guys, you know, we heard dr. oz there trying to take the high road, but his campaign, again and again, as dasha pointed out so well this that interview has mocked john fetterman for having had a stroke, around the crudites thing, their spinoff, well, if

he ever had a vegetable, he might not have had that stroke. he can try to take the high road but the campaign continues to go at that issue. >> it does, just sitting around the table talking here, you know, i don't think this campaign, this election is actually going to be about his health. i don't think it's going to be about january 6th. i think it's going to be what we were talking about, what dasha was talking about, what she said suburban moms are talking about, what we're all talking about as parents and that's crime. crime has exploded and when i see progressives getting out there talking about how it's just not an issue, they really are hurting themselves. they've got to come face to face with it, and my god, we could t even washington, d.c. has been transformed, it's become so much more violent, so much more dangerous. i've lived here off and on for years, felt free to move freely around here, new york. there's some places you just

don't go anymore and there are also places you go where you have to go and people are getting -- union station, people getting shot waiting for a cab. >> yeah, exactly. and people are experiencing that in their communities, so it feels real to them. it's just like going to the grocery store and eggs are more expensive. people are living it. what's interesting about pennsylvania to me is that republicans have been spending money on crime and crime ads. oz has been going after the health and questioning the health of fetterman, but the republicans have been spending millions and millions of dollars against fetterman on crime for six weeks now. >> just like wisconsin where it's really having a big impact. >> yeah, and i would put them in two different categories. crime is definitely coming up as an issue in a lot of states across the country, but in wisconsin mandela barnes is an activist, a very well liked activist on the left, but he's said a lot about crime and the police, they're using his own words in these ads. that is much harder to fight against than it is, i think, for

fetterman who is like, i kind of look like i'm in law enforcement and you've been pummelling me with ads for six weeks and it's not working. but we're seeing it in states across the country, especially with cities with rising crime. >> when you use somebody's words against them, their own words, in my race somebody took out an ad against my opponent, full page, three quotes. it was the most devastating ad i've ever seen. and that's happening to barnes and the support, really bleeding support. >> thank you so much for coming in. good to see you. coming up, quote, the january 6th committee subpoenaed trump. now what? that's the question amanda carpenter asks in a new column. we'll read from that and see if there's an answer straight ahead on "morning joe."

i was always the competitive one in our family... 'til my sister signed up for united healthcare medicare advantage. ♪wow, uh-huh♪ now she's got a whole team to help her get the most out of her plan. ♪wow, uh-huh♪ with coverage that's better than ever for dental... ...vision... ...prescription drugs and more. advantage: me! can't wait 'til i turn 65! aarp medicare advantage plans, only from unitedhealthcare. take advantage now at uhc.com/medicare time. it's life's most precious commodity, especially when you have metastatic breast cancer. when your time is threatened, it's hard to invest in your future. until now. kisqali is helping women live longer than ever before

when taken with an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant... in hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer. kisqali is a pill that's proven to delay disease progression. kisqali can cause lung problems, or an abnormal heartbeat, which can lead to death. it can cause serious skin reactions, liver problems, and low white blood cell counts that may result in severe infections. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including breathing problems, cough, chest pain... a change in your heartbeat, dizziness, yellowing of the skin or eyes, dark urine, tiredness, loss of appetite, abdomen pain, bleeding, bruising, fever, chills, or other symptoms of an infection, a severe or worsening rash, are or plan to become pregnant, or breastfeeding. avoid grapefruit during treatment. your future is ahead of you, so it's time to make the most of it with kisqali. because when you invest in yourself, everyone gets the best of you. 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. president biden has now signed the inflation reduction act into law. ok, so what exactly does it mean for you? out of pocket costs for drugs will be capped. for seniors, insulin will be just $35. families will save $2,400 on health care premiums. energy costs, down an average of $1,800 a year for families. and it's paid for by making the biggest corporations pay what they owe. president biden's bill doesn't fix everything, but it will save your family money. it's the subway series menu. 12 irresistible subs. the most epic sandwich roster ever created. ♪♪

it's subway's biggest refresh yet!

it's a few minutes before the top of the third hour of "morning joe." a live look at washington. the sun has come up. a shot of the white house as we talk about the state of our democracy. joining us now, senior fellow at the brookings institution and contributing writer for "the atlantic," the author of the new book entitled "the problem of democracy: america, the middle east and the rise and fall of an idea". i have a feeling this is a very

sad book. i want to start by asking about the problems within our democracy that we face today, why it matters so much around the world. >> this is the fundamental issue of our time, what do we do when democracy produces bad outcomes. when i was living in the middle east about ten years ago, so much was at stake and right wing religious parties came to power and then a lot of people freaked out, you had military coups, that sort of thing. i thought that was a foreign thing, middle eastern thing. i come back to d.c. for trump's election in 2016, 2017, and we're no longer talking about health care or marginal tax rates, we're talking about the foundational questions of what it means to be a nation, what it means to be american. and those are scary topics because how do you compromise on them, right? and that's sort of where we're at now, where a lot of

republicans are not willing to accept democratic outcomes they don't like. and i assume if trump wins in 2024, a lot of democrats won't be willing to accept that result. so that, to me, is really what we're contending with, is how do we come to terms with this reality. >> jonathan, we've always grappled with getting people to participate in our democracy, to vote. it seems different now. it's not just participate, but please defend our democracy. and i'm not sure we've seen a situation like this where it's at stake. >> turnout has gone up in recent years, probably the trump effect, people who love or hate him. so let's get your assessment here. you laid out the case as to these worrying signs. do you believe that the pillars of our democracy, the foundation of our democracy is strong enough to withstand this? >> i think so. i think that we as americans have a tendency to muddle through things but when our backs are against the wall, we find a way to make it work.

i think the reaction to trump trying to overturn the election, america was resilient. there are serious issues, but our democracy survived. but i think 2024 will be the test where a lot of this will come into play. if i had one message for americans, it would be i would like each and every person to commit to respecting democratic outcomes, even if the other side wins, even if they see the other side is being threatening to their lives, their communities. they have to make that private and hopefully public commitment if they're in positions of influence, and that's something that each of us can do. but we have to be serious about it. >> right. >> as we look to 2024, because my former boss also talked about how one trump term is one thing, two trump terms is another thing. >> totally different. >> what lessons should americans take from what has happened around the world, if there are extended years of a government in place who is fighting against democracy and fighting against

fundamental rights of people? what could happen with more years? >> you're right that it's a universal thing and we can talk about europe has its own cases where in italy we might have the first far right prime minister since mousilii, or the swedish democrats. it's not just america. it's happening all over the place because we're not debating economic issues anymore, we're debating cultural issues, identity issues, issues around religion. so i think we have to accept that people we completely disagree with are sometimes going to win. there's 74 million trump supporters, voters. we can't just wish them away. they're not going to disappear. so then we have to find a way to live with them even if we think they're bad people, even if we think there's a threat to everything we hold dear. what is the other option that's in front of us?

that's the challenge, because a lot of people will say, well, they're deplorable and we can't find a way to live with them. >> isn't it ironic that you reference italy, for example, and sweden and elsewhere where you have this sort of hard right autocratic attitude that then get elected through the democratic process. so democracy is part of elevating this element that is hell bent on deconstructing democracy. how does that work and how should citizens view that? you referenced leaders before, talking about here in america. it matters who we elect. i mean, we have always looked at our leaders as an extension of us. they represent us. so basically are we seeing now that we really are at our core more anti-democratic than we think we are? >> so i think there are a lot of

americans now, but also in europe, you have these parties that are anti-immigrant, they don't respect individual rights as much as we might like. so in that sense they're not liberals, they're not true liberals. and i think then we have to lower our expectations of what democracy can offer. democracy doesn't always lead to these other good things, whether it's equal rights, gender equality, minority rights. there is a tension sometimes when you have these parties that come to power and don't actually believe in these things. so i tend to see democracy more as a mechanism to regulate conflict. it doesn't have to be this big, amazing utopia thing where we get everything that we want. and if we want to protect individual rights, then whoever we think our party then -- democrats or whichever party stands up for those, then vote for them. make your case to the american people. you can't rely on the supreme court or other institutions. you have to persuade voters.

>> the new book is entitled "the problem of democracy: america, the middle east and the rise and fall of an idea". thank you very much for coming on the show. congratulations on the book. three minutes past the top of the hour, willie, let's get back to our top story of the morning. >> that's right, the committee investigating the january 6th attack on the capitol held its final hearing before the midterm elections, presenting new evidence, new testimony, never-before-seen footage and ending by unanimously voting to subpoena former president trump. nbc news chief white house correspondent peter alexander has the key moments. >> reporter: the january 6th committee wrapping up its last hearing before the midterms with an exclamation point. all nine members voting to subpoena former president trump. but the vote largely symbolic. members previously saying it would be unlikely the former president would comply. mr. trump responding on his social media site, writing why didn't the unselect committee

ask me to testify months ago? because it's a total bust that has only served to further divide our country. in the closing argument -- >> they're putting on tear gas masks. >> reporter: -- the committee played dramatic new footage of congressional leaders from both parties huddling in a secure location. >> it's just horrendous and all at because of the president of the united states. >> reporter: they called top officials for help. >> why don't you get the president to tell them to leave the capitol, mr. attorney general. i'm going to call up the effing secretary of dod. >> reporter: cnn airing official footage, including nancy pelosi acting to the news that the president was come to go the capitol himself. >> if he comes, i'm going to punch him out. i've been waiting for this.

i'm going to punch him out and i'm going to go to jail and i'm going to be happy. >> reporter: republican leader mitch mcconnell also shown asking the acting secretary of defense for help. >> one hell of a hurry, understand? >> loud and clear. >> reporter: the committee preparing to issue a final report after the midterms. >> our nation cannot only punish the foot soldiers who stormed our capitol. those who planned to overturn our election and brought us to the point of violence must also be accountable. without accountability, it all becomes normal and it will recur. >> with that, the committee voted to subpoena president trump's documents and testimony under oath. that was nbc's peter alexander reporting. let's bring in a member of the select committee investigating the january 6th attack. democratic congressman jamie raskin of maryland. congressman, thanks for your time this morning. boy, that footage yesterday that we saw in your committee hearing shot by alexander pelosi, the

daughter of speaker pelosi, was pretty breathtaking at times. what did you think as he watched it? >> well, the public and the congress have seen what was taking place outside with the terrible violence visited upon our officers and people, have an image of donald trump just sitting in the white house dining room not doing anything. but until yesterday, people did not have a sense of how our real political leaders on a bipartisan basis were scrambling to get more police and military reinforcements on the scene, scrambling to get the national guard there. and i think that it provided a striking and shocking juxtaposition between people who were acting as real leaders, even in a crisis, doing whatever they could together to resolve it, versus donald trump just watching the violence unfold from the oval office dining

room, when there were so many things he could have done. he could have crossed the hallway in 20 seconds and gotten on tv and told the proud boys and the oath keepers and the them to leave. >> and nancy pelosi and mr. schumer doing what he should have been doing. you did subpoena trump, you asked for his testimony, for his records. do you expect to hear from donald trump, even if he sits before you and pleased the fifth, or do you expect to see those documents? what happens from here? >> well, actually, the committee authorized and directed the chairman to render a subpoena to donald trump. so we didn't actually issue it yesterday. the chairman will issue a subpoena that will have a schedule of documents that we're looking for, stated in broad

terms, everything related to the attempted political coup and violent insurrection against the union. we've proceeded in a very methodical and legalistic way. this is a matter of the utmost gravity, of course. it's hard to imagine a crime more serious for a political leader than attacking his or her own government and trying to topple an election and overthrow the constitutional order. so, you know, we have a team of prosecutors who are lawyers for us, former prosecutors who are lawyers for us, we have a team of staffers and we have the members. and we intend to get this information from the former president and then also to pursue questions the way we have with more than 1,000 other witnesses, and of course we have the authority to issue subpoenas and we would expect that the former president would come the way the vast majority of people have come. >> let's take a step back, a

larger view of the last several months, congressman. just what you think this select committee has accomplished. you certainly told a compelling story using testimony from many of trump's own witnesses, his aides, people to worked inside the building, his own family mexico. the country sat up and listened because of all of that. if that was, indeed, the last hearing yesterday, what will this committee have achieved? >> well, what the committee has learned and what we've shared with the public as we've gone along is a story that begins with one man's refusal to accept no for an answer from the american people. and it was donald trump's and it is donald trump's refusal just to accept the normal workings of democracy that are at the heart of this entire crisis he unleashed on the country. is there anybody anymore who believes that if donald trump had just accepted what more than

60 courts told him, which is that there was no electoral fraud, there was no electoral corruption, does anybody believe if he had just conceded defeat the way that every other president in american history has done, that any of this would have happened. and of course it would not have. it all spun out of his pathological determination to stay in office, even though he lost the election by more than 7 million votes, 306-322 in the electoral college. but there are ancillary parts of the story. we have seen the mobilizing of a domestic movement that was empowered by donald trump. we've seen the way that social media was not able to respond effectively to whistle-blowers from within who said there's going to be a bloodbath, there's going to be violence. so these other things have come out and it's our job to put it altogether in a report to the american people before the end of the year explaining what we

found and then to make legislative recommendations about how to fortify american democracy against coups and insurrections, political violence and electoral sabotage going forward, because we've got a pressure things going here in american democracy and we don't want to surrender it. >> one other thing the committee made very clear, this was a plan. this was not a spontaneous rally that just happened to sprout up on january 6th. that donald trump knew he lost the election and intended to send a bunch of his supporters to do something about it. a member of the january 6th select committee, congressman jamie raskin of maryland, thank you so much for your time this morning. we appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. let's bring in a prize winning columnist, and aide to hillary clinton and biden campaigns, and former u.s. attorney, donald ayer, solicitor

general in the reagan administration and deputy attorney general under george w. bush and jonathan lemire is still at the table as well. >> you were a london bureau chief for the "washington post." we have to talk about a legacy that will last a lunchtime. [ laughter ] >> liz truss has sat her finance chief. >> the chancellor who came up with the whackiest, craziest, worst economic plan that we've seen in a long time from anywhere, and that's saying something. it destabilized the british economy in, like, a day. >> and now they're talking about sacking liz truss. >> well --

>> it's chaos over there. >> she's making u-turns. she seems well in over her head. we'll see what happens. but the tories have got to do something. they're 20, 30 points behind at this point, they get creamed in the next election. they have some time before that election. but if they spend it with liz truss at the helm, i think that gap is just going to grow. she does not seem to be up to this job. >> i'm always apologizing for the british, but the queen goes from winston churchill to liz truss. yikes. >> it's called evolution. >> exactly. >> speaking of, let's turn back to the hearings about the january 6th attack on the capitol and what we learned and what is at stake. donald, you wrote an extensive piece in "the atlantic" over the summer after the seventh january

6th committee hearing entitled "the doj must prosecute trump" and you co-wrote this back then, quote, everyone knew before the hearings began that we were dealing with perhaps the gravest imaginable offense against the nation short of sec session, a serious nation would it effort pursued at multiple levels to overturn the unambiguous outcome of a national lek. we all knew as well that efforts were and are unfolding nationwide to change laws to undermine the electoral processes with the specific objective of succeeding at the same project in 2024 and after. but each hearing has sharpened our understanding that donald trump himself is the one who made it happen. any argument that donald trump lacked provable criminal intent is contradicted by the facts

elicited by the january 6th committee. >> mr. ayer, i want to ask you, did yesterday's hearing further sharpen your conviction? >> i absolutely think so. i guess i would draw an analogy, i was recently in madrid and i saw a painting, the garden of earthly delights, which if you're familiar with it, is an incredible portrayal of mankind misbehaving in every imaginable demonic and obscene way, and one of the things they do there, i spent 20 minutes staring at this painting, they have a video screen that blows up little pieces of this picture, it shows the details. and the details you see are things you wouldn't notice if you were ten feet away, which we were. and that's what happened yesterday. what happened yesterday was an incredible focus on a variety of things. first, the details that show donald trump had a clear plan that he worked out with other people to lie when he lost the

election. his own words show -- it isn't just that bill barr told him that he lost, but his own words show he knew he lost, so the accountability there is clearer yet than it was before. >> and steve bannon saying before the election, hey, this is what trump is going to do if he loses, we're just going to lie about it, say we won, and he's going to do some crazy things. >> absolutely. we all knew that there was -- from the earlier hearings, we knew there were guns in the audience and things were going on. now we know from these communications, thousands of them, i guess, we knew a ton, and somehow or other, gosh, law enforcement, secret service, maybe even fbi, i'm not sure, got compromised in a way that the message didn't quite get through. so that level of detail is put in place. i mean, there's a lot more that's specific that shows donald trump's specific

culpability. you can see from the article, i was totally convinced before that donald trump was the single driving force behind all of this, he's the key actor in every step of these five or six different things. but now we've got local color and detail and specifics and his own statements through cassidy hutchinson and others saying he knew he lost. >> and of course you say this as a republican who served for ronald reagan and george h.w. bush. your piece is so important, because one of the things that's haunted me is the precedent that will be set if a former president is prosecuted. because i don't want parties in the future misusing that to go after another president. but in this case it is a balancing act, and i love what you wrote here. it's clarifying. the tradition of not prosecuting a former president must yield to

the manifest need to protect our constitutional form of government and to ensure that the violent effort to overthrow is never repeated. both precedents are bad. prosecuting a former president, but sadly here it seems that the precedent that would be set by not prosecuting a president who tried to overthrow american democracy leaves, i believe, merrick garland with no choice. >> i'm totally with you. i don't see how you can have someone who -- the evidence is clear beyond any, in my mind, conceivable doubt that donald trump actively pursued a course, planned ahead, a whole series of steps which they went through in the hearing, to overturn our democratic system. that happened. and if the system isn't up to responding to that, if the system isn't able to say, well,

yes, we have this evidence, we know this happened, we know the president of the united states did this, but we're going to take a pass. we can't take a pass. that's about as bad a thing -- i would say it is the worst thing that anyone can do to our system of government. >> the president would be absolutely horrific, and your colleague, ashley barker, was here, she wrote an article saying we like to think of trump as sort of this madman, with no control over his emotions. when, in fact, what we've seen from the january 6th committee is this has all been planned, all been laid out, starting with when his lawyers told him, no, mr. president, you've lost, you can't do anything to challenge this. he goes out, he tweets, come january 6th it's going to be crazy. and from that point on, he and steve bannon and roger stone, and bannon yesterday, i must

say, again, just an out-and-out confession. if trump loses, he said before the election, election night he's going to do some crazy, crazy things. he's not going to concede. they said that before he lost. >> we should believe these people when they tell us what they're going to do. it's what he did. and time and time again trump was told, you know, this allegation is false, there's nothing there, there's nothing here. and he would go out and nonetheless deliberately, knowing it to be untrue, talk about dominion voting systems and switching votes and this and that, minutes after he had been told that this is complete and utter nonsense. when i was bureau chief in south america, i covered democracies that were struggling to get their footing. and the essential problem they had was trying to re-establish the rule of law, which we take

for granted here. but that's a necessary element of a healthy and functioning democracy. and i really think that's where we are in terms of what decision merrick garland makes ultimately. you have to have the rule of law. you don't have a democracy without it. >> merrick garland is now faced with an impossible choice, an incredible dilemma and the facts may compel him to make this charge. put on your political hat. let's assume it would be after the midterms if it happens at all. what does that do to republicans, trump supporters, democrats, if a former president is indicted? >> so i think the fascinating thing about the way these committee hearings have been run is that we're not necessarily looking at a scenario where i think a lot of voters' minds are changed. i think we're laying out the case for a criminal prosecution. if that happens after the

midterms, how does that affect donald trump whether or not he decides to run for president? what it does is it may solidify more his base, maga base. but when it comes to the independent and moderate voters, which are the ones who will ultimately decide who wins in 2024, i don't think it's necessarily a turn-on to him that someone who was the sitting president instigated what happened on january 6th. the evidence is so clearly laid out. i think that's where the rub is. again, 33%, 34% of the electorate, somewhere in the low 30s, is always going to be with donald trump or is always going to be with the mag aside of the party. that is not enough to get elected president of the united states. i look at this through the lens of where do independent voters go, the moderate suburban voters go. i don't think this is something we'll find attractive. >> how about trump apologists who are leaders? >> when their base breaks away.

but you're right, the maga base is being boiled down right now and it's been boiled down mainly because of what donald trump has been doing. he's now embracing qa non conspiracy theories. i've seen several people on, i would say, the hard right, the idealogical hard right, breaking from trump. and it seems their message is very clear to their followers, to their viewers. and i forget exactly who said this, but it really, i think, clarifies it for republicans who want to win elections. every day people are talking about donald trump, republicans are losing. every day people are talking about joe biden, republicans are winning. that's their message. and it seems to be a pretty good

focus for republican candidates right now. so the mar-a-lago raid, republicans get crazy, this is going to help. no, it helped the democrats because everybody was talking about donald trump. if donald trump gets indicted, well, yes, we sit here and worry, well, how is this going to impact democracy. republicans who think this is going to be a win. i think they're wrong. >> there's really tight marginal races that do not want donald trump leading the headlines. that is the bottom line. and every day we're talking about the january 6th hearings, every day that there's another hearing to talk about is another day that donald trump is in the headlines. it's not something that's appealing. and going back to the maga base, we have to remember they are not enough to get a president elected. they just simply aren't. so if he does decide to run in 2024 and he's not doing anything to try to attract independent moderates, any voter who is not part of the maga wing, he's not

going to get re-elected. >> running for president, it's not gerrymandered. can you comment on the supreme court stepping up? >> yeah, i wasn't honestly sure quite what they would do. but i expected in a normal world that it would not be a hard decision and i'm very pleased and gratified to see that they did what they should do, which is a routine denial of a completely frivolous and stupid appeal to the supreme court. and i'm not someone who is terribly happy with the term that the court has taken in, frankly, moving in what are some radical directions to change the way our laws operate. that's a huge topic for another day. but it's gratifying to see that when you've got a fat pitch coming down the middle of the plate and there's nothing to be said on the side of the maga forces, they do the right thing, with no dissent.

>> and gene was talking about the rule of law. i aggravate a lot of people who obviously are concerned with the direction of the court. at the same time, i always remind them, 65 denials in federal court of donald trump's attempt to overthrow. 65-0. >> right. and i think we need to focus on what's positive about our situation and one of the things is the court system, other than judge cannon, has more or less functioned appropriately and that's a tremendous plus, and it absolutely has to continue to, because we've got a lot to deal with. >> we've got a lot to deal with. we would love to have you back to have that other conversation. former u.s. attorney, donald ayer, thank you so much. he was principal deputy, solicitor general in the reagan administration and deputy attorney general under president george h.w. bush. and former chief of staff to the

dccc, adrian, thank you as well. good to have you on. still ahead on "morning joe," we'll play for you the entire never-before-scene footage of lawmakers in the capitol, begging the trump administration for help. and former president trump loses at the supreme court. we'll explain the big development in the mar-a-lago documents case. and later yesterday's inflation report caused a 1500 point swing on wall street, as president biden tries to calm fears of a recession. andrew ross sorkin will be here for the latest fallout. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. esistible s. the most epic sandwich roster ever created. ♪♪ it's subway's biggest refresh yet! i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

now, there's skyrizi. ♪things are getting clearer♪ ♪i feel free to bare my skin♪ ♪yeah, that's all me♪ ♪nothing and me go hand in hand♪ ♪nothing on my skin♪ ♪that's my new plan♪ ♪nothing is everything♪ achieve clearer skin with skyrizi. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. in another study, most people had 90% clearer skin, even at 4 years. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. ♪it's my moment, so i just gotta say♪ ♪nothing is everything♪ serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections, or a lower ability to fight them, may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to. ♪nothing is everything♪ now's the time to ask your doctor about skyrizi, the number one dermatologist prescribed biologic. learn how abbvie could help you save. 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. ♪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.♪

if you're loud, be louder. only pay for what you need. if you stand out, stand strong. and if you got the devil on your shoulder... take him for a ride.

the supreme court has handed former president donald trump a loss. >> a big loss. >> in the dispute with the

justice department over the documents seized from his mar-a-lago home and club in florida. in a brief unsigned order with no dissents noted, the high supreme court rejected the former president's request that the special master be allowed to review the more than 100 documents marked as classified. the batch is just a small part of the 11,000 records that federal agents seized in august and concerns that trump unlawfully kept official white house records after he left office. the decision does not affect the justice department's access to the same documents as part of its criminal investigation. >> so help us out here with the procedure. this actually reminds me, if i were a law student, this would be a great test. >> right. >> so what does this ruling leave in place, what does this ruling push aside? what's the status of the case

right now? you have three hours. go. >> look, it leaves in place the 11th circuit ruling, which remember was the product of a three-judge panel, two of whom were appointed by president trump, which stayed part of justice cannon's order that put all these documents in front of the special master. what the 11th circuit said in terms of the classified documents, the 100 classified documents, those have no business being reviewed by a special master and the fbi should immediately get access to them for their criminal investigation. so the trump lawyers took part of that to the supreme court. they said, we think the classified documents should be reviewed by the special master. by the way, if that happened, do you know who else would have gotten the classified documents? trump and his lawyers. that was, i think, the real intent of that request. so this is about as strong a rebuke as you can imagine. a one-sentence order, not a single justice, not even clarence thomas finding any reason to put any stock in the

arguments made by trump's lawyers. and, remember, that was like an 80-page brief full of extraneous arguments, none of which persuaded any supreme court justice. >> it's so interesting, michael, i know somebody who is associated with the 11th circuit. very conservative, very conservative circuit. and this person said to me, the 11th circuit is just going to knock him down. because they're conservative, they don't put up with -- they're going to be really offended by this bs, just like somebody who was connected to a conservative federalist society judge in february of 2017 when trump attacked the bush-appointee for one of the rulings, and said he doesn't know what he's just done. if you attack one federal judge,

you attack all. and i'm sorry, i understand people are offended by the roe decision and the overturning, but these people have believed this legally since law school, for the most part. but in these cases, the supreme court, 65-0, let stand in place federal judges, trump judges, not going along with the nonsense. and yesterday, again, a matter of great import, something that rose above public, the court again said don't bother us with this, we're offended. >> very much to ken's point and yours, aileen cannon, they're still outside of the maistream of judicial prudence that you hope and expect from your judges. in other words, they're going to look at the arguments that are presented to them, they're going

to weigh those against the facts and the laws, and they're going to rule accordingly. and you're right, the 11th circuit, it's not the 9th, it's a conservative circuit, and so i know a lot of folks initially were like, oh, my gosh, this is all going to be trump lawyers handing him what he wants. and what they did was they stood up the constitution. they stood up the rule of law. they applied the law to the facts and to the arguments that were being made. to ken's point, they just came back with one sentence that basically said, hell, no, go back home, this isn't going to work. and that's good. that's refreshing. i don't know how much more strained the judicial system is going to be able to withstand in the coming months and years, but at least right now they're holding to constitutional lines. coming up, more from yesterday's january 6th hearing from capitol hill. we'll show you the newly

revealed footage of congressional leaders scrambling for security help as the insurrection unfolded. that's next on "morning joe."

president biden has now signed the inflation reduction act into law. ok, so what exactly does it mean for you? out of pocket costs for drugs will be capped. for seniors, insulin will be just $35. families will save $2,400 on health care premiums. energy costs, down an average of $1,800 a year for families. and it's paid for by making the biggest corporations pay what they owe. president biden's bill doesn't fix everything, but it will save your family money. ♪ music (“i swear”) plays ♪

jaycee tried gain flings for the first time the other day... and forgot where she was. [buzz] you can always spot a first timer. gain flings with oxi boost and febreze.

♪♪ we're going to get back to new evidence and video laid out by the house select committee investigating january 6th. among the highlights of yesterday's hearing, which will be the last for the panel before the midterm elections, was the vote to subpoena the former president himself. we also learned new details about trump's premeditated plan to declare victory and got a look at never-before-seen video of leaders sheltered in a secure location during the insurrection, begging the

administration for help. >> we have got to get -- finish the proceedings or else. >> senator schumer is at a secure location and they're locked down in the senate. >> there has to be some way we can maintain the sense that people have that there's some security or some confidence that government can function and that we can elect the president of the united states. do we go back into session? >> we did go back into session, but now apparently everybody on the floor is putting on tear gas masks to prepare for a breach. i'm trying to get more information. >> they're putting on -- >> tear gas masks. >> can you believe that? >> i can't. >> we need area four, house

members. they're all walking through the tunnel. >> bring her out. >> we're coming in if you don't bring her out. >> i'm going to call up the effing secretary of dod. we have some senators who are still in their hideaways. they need massive personnel now. can you get the maryland national guard to come, too? >> i have something to say, mr. secretary. i'm going to call the mayor of washington, d.c. right now and see what other outreach she has, other police departments, as the leader has mentioned. >> get him up. >> officer down. >> get him up. >> governor, this is nancy. governor, i don't know if you have been approached about the virginia national guard. mr. hoyer was speaking to governor hogan, but i still

think you probably need the okay of the federal government in order to come into another jurisdiction. thank you. oh, my gosh. they're just breaking windows, they're doing all kinds -- they said somebody was shot. it's just horrendous. and all at the instigating from the president of the united states. if you don't mind, i would like to stay in touch. thank you. bye-bye. >> virginia guard has been called in. >> i just talked to governor northam and they said 200 state police and a unit of the national guard. they're breaking windows and going in, obviously ransacking our offices and all the rest of that. that's nothing. the concern we have about

personal harm -- >> safety. >> -- safety transcends everything. quite frankly, this is at being instigated by the president of the united states. >> why don't you get the president to tell them to leave the capitol, mr. attorney general, in your law enforcement responsibility. a public statement they should all leave. >> usa, usa! >> we need them there now, whoever you've got. okay? >> you also have troops at other military bases. we need active duty national guard. >> how soon in the future can we

have a place to evacuate? >> i don't want to speak for the leadership that's going to be responsible for executing the operation. they'll be on the ground and they're the experts. >> what would you do for the white house or some other entity that was under siege, and you can logistically get people there as you make the plan. >> we're trying to figure out how to get this job done today. we talked to mitch about it earlier. he's not in the room right now, but he was with us earlier and said, yeah, we want to expedite this, and hopefully they could confine it to just one complaint, arizona, and then we

could vote and then just move forward. the overriding wish is to do it at the capitol. what we are being told very directly is it's going to take days for the capitol to be okay again. we've gotten a bad report about the condition of the white house floor with defacation. i don't think that's hard to clean up. it's more from a security standpoint, making sure everyone is out of the building and how long will that take. >> i just got off with the vice president. >> i got off with the vice president elect. >> what we left the conversation with, because he said he had the impression from mitch that mitch wants everybody back to do it there. >> yes. >> i said we're getting a counter-point that it could take time to clean up the poo-poo

they're making literally and figuratively in the capitol, and that it may take days to get back. >> i'm literally standing with the chief of police, the u.s. capitol police. he just informed me what you've heard through official challenges. we'll inform you that their best information is that they believe that the house and the senate will be able to reconvene in roughly an hour. >> good news. >> we'll be in touch about the process for getting members back into the building. >> thank you very much, mr. vice president. good news. >> we'll talk about that in our next hour, but first senator ron johnson debated last night in milwaukee, and had the audience laughing. >> he was very funny. >> but it was not with him, it was at him.

>> you hate when that happens. you don't really want people to laugh at you during the debate. >> no. >> all right, that's ahead on "morning joe."

introducing the new sleep number climate360 smart bed. the only smart bed in the world that actively cools, warms and

effortlessly responds to both of you. our smart sleepers get 28 minutes more restful sleep per night. proven quality sleep. only from sleep number. your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire ♪♪

whenever heartburn strikes get fast relief with tums. it's time to love food back. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums ♪

the fbi set me up with a corrupt -- with a corrupt briefing and then leaked that to smear me. >> sorry. all right. >> he is referring to corruption with the fbi, which i have been trying to uncover and expose. >> all right. so, do we have time for -- please, audience, we're trying to get through these. >> please, don't laugh. >> disbelief. >> a senator making a fool of himself. michael steele, he said we've gone from a full monty to the full mary.

full marion berry. the fbi set me up. >> you know, i don't know, it's just no shame, no anything. they just throw this crap out there and they just say the wildest stuff. >> yeah. >> and you look at them, okay, so when did they have time to do that? what purpose? are you really that valuable that there's -- >> he's trying to cover up -- >> cover up. >> i don't remember if you remember the abscam, you had a member of congress shoving somebody's money into his pockets. he couldn't -- >> it was a jacket. >> he had too much cash. and when they asked him what he was doing, he said he was conducting his own investigation on corruption. >> got to go and check the serial numbers on all those bills. >> what about all the money in the freezer?

you were here for that. >> oh, yeah. >> exactly. >> all right. willie, take us through the debate. >> all right. so, yeah, this is a race in wisconsin where johnson has opened up a little bit of a lead now in recent polls, six points in the most recent poll. they went back and forth, johnson, the republican incumbent. mandela barnes is the wisconsin lieutenant governor. here are some of the other highlights from that debate last night. >> we do know he got a degree in communications specializing in performance. so he's performing. he's an actor. i don't know whether he's just delivering lines somebody wrote for him or he's making this stuff up on his own. >> look, the biggest achievement in business was ron johnson saying i do. he married into this business. he didn't start that from the ground up. >> what do you find admirable about your opponent? >> well, no, seriously i think the senator has proven to be a family man, and i think that's admirable. >> likewise. i appreciate the fact that lieutenant governor barnes had

loving parents, a schoolteacher, father worked third shift. he had a good upbringing. i guess what puzzles me about that is with that upbring, why has he turned against america? why does he find america awful? >> so, that is the case. you heard some laughter, some boos for the sitting united states senator. but that is, if you boil it down to the case ron johnson made last night, that mandela barnes is not representative of most of the state of wisconsin, that his views and things he said in the past about police and about the country suggests he doesn't love the country enough. that's ron johnson's position. >> coming up, it was a wild day on wall street as the dow swung more than 1,500 points. it closed way up despite a tough reading on ip inflation. andrew ross sorkin joins us to break it down straight ahead on "morning joe."

[coughing] hi, susan. honey. yeah. i respect that. but that cough looks pretty bad. try this robitussin honey. the real honey you love, plus the powerful cough relief you need. mind if i root through your trash? robitussin. the only brand with real honeyand elderberry.

♪ ♪ ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪♪