>> it was one of the most memorable visuals from the january 6th attacks, and something you could not forget. the moment -- when rioters chase capitol police officer eugene goodman up a stairwell looking for lawmakers.

the video was a key piece of evidence against the man at the top of that stairwell, the guy who is leading the, pack the guy wearing that qanon t-shirt. his name is doug jensen. two days after the attack, doug jensen told the fbi that he went to the capitol because he believed in a number of qanon conspiracy theories about the election. but he also said he was there because president trump asked him to be there. from his fbi interview, he said, the reason i went was because trump said he had info for us at this rally. and i honestly thought i was going there to be told -- i thought it was showtime. he later added, i made sure i was pretty close to the front of that crowd. the reason i made sure i was at the front was because i wanted that queue to be on tv. i wanted q to get the attention. i basically intended on being the poster boy of qanon. and it really worked out. i am, like, you know -- my job as a digital soldier is to be the news. my job as a digital soldier is

to be the news. another person who considers himself a digital soldier is this man. former national security adviser michael flynn. michael flynn actually trademarked the phrase digital soldier. he sells digital soldier merchandise online. he also took kind of an oath with his family, invoking the qanon slogan, where we got one, we go all, and later posted that video online using the qanon hashtag. flynns family later said it was just a family motto. i mean, hey, to each his own. doug jensen told the fbi that he believed in qanon so much that he thought mike pence was going to be arrested on january 6th and michael flynn was going to become the vice president. doug jensen went to the capitol four people like donald trump and michael flynn. and today doug jensen was sentenced to five years in prison after a jury convicted him of felony offenses, including assaulting a law enforcement officer and obstructing an official proceeding.

and that last change -- that last charge -- it merits special attention. because this is the very same charge liz cheney publicly hinted at one year ago, a charge that could be used against former president trump for trying to prevent or obstruct the certification of joe biden as president, an official proceeding. the same charge that doug jensen himself has been found guilty of today. and tonight, nbc news is reporting that the january 6th committee is coming close to a decision on making criminal referrals against the former president. the committee is considering referring trump on three potential charges. conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, and insurrection -- the committee has yet to make a final decision on those referrals. what it plans to meet this weekend to do so and then announce its decision of the public, televised meeting at one peonies done on monday. but the committee has been forecasting the possibility of referring trump to the justice

department for quite some time now. especially after a judge in california agreed with the committee earlier this year that, based on the, evidence trump more likely than not, attempted to obstruct a joint session of congress that day. other experts also agree -- earlier this year, former u. s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan, barbara mcquade, wrote a model prosecution memo, analyzing the potential charges against trump. she concluded that based on the facts already known, and it appears trump and others could be charged for conspiracy to commit fraud against united states and obstruction of an official proceeding. well potential defenses would need to be assessed, there is evidence sufficient to make it probable that convictions could be obtained substance. joining us now is the expert herself, barbara mcquade. former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan and now a professor at the university of michigan law school. she is also an msnbc legal analyst. barb, it's good to see. thanks for being here tonight. let's just get started with these charges. the first one, obviously, that

stands out, i think, to anybody that is hearing, this insurrection. can you talk a little bit about how you see that possibly being supported with the evidence that the public has seen thus far? >> this is a big charge, alex. in that memo i wrote back in february, i did not include this charge. this is one that is not charged often, if ever. and charging it against the former president would be a real wall upper. if you look at the facts of what happened on january 6th, it makes some sense. it says it's a crime to inciting insurrection, to rile people up and send them to attack our government. and if you look at what donald trump did on his speech on the ellipse and in the months proceeding it by fanning the flames about a stolen election, it seems like that is what he did. i think one of the things that gives most of us pause is the fact that there is this first amendment offense that i think would be played out here. there is a case called brandenburg versus ohio, where

the supreme court has set a really high bar when it comes to political speech. it allows people to say things that are really fiery. it allows politicians to talk about fighting against their rivals. the standard in brandenburg versus ohio is that the government cannot make it a crime unless the person intends to incite eminent lawless action and such action is likely based on their comments. so, because of that defense, i worry about the strength of such a charge. but if you look at just the face of the charge, it absolutely fits what donald trump did on january 6th. >> none of this is set in stone. the committee is going to be mate meeting over the weekend to make a final decision. it sounds like, from your analysis, this is probably the most controversial of the three that have sort of been put out there, if you will. let's talk about the other two. because they're both mentioned in the memo that you wrote, the prosecutorial memo earlier this year. obstruction of an official proceeding, the thing that's doug jensen, our qanon friend, was convicted of today. this seems, more on its face,

easily understood, how complex do you think this will be if the doj starts moving forward on an indictment. >> i think this one is really easy, alex. it is obstructing an official proceeding with a corrupt intent. there's an official proceeding going on on january 6th. there's a joint session of congress convening for the purpose of certifying the electors. the last step between the election and joe biden as president -- and donald trump tries to obstruct that. it is not even necessary to prove that he unleashed the mob or he conspired with the oath keepers or the proud boys. it is enough that he tried to exert pressure on mike pence to get him to avoid, shirk's duty to be the one who is counting those ballots. and he did it with the ongoing claims of a stolen election. he said it to mike pence

privately and he said it to mike pence publicly, even in his remarks at the ellipse. so, this one strikes me as actually a rather easy one to prove. there has been some litigation going on on this idea of what it takes to obstruct an official proceeding. there's some argument that says, they have to be documents involved. and that is what has been argued recently in front of the dc circuit court of appeals, whether simply going in and stopping, physically disrupting a proceeding, is enough. but i think donald trump's actions, which included the submission of the certificates from fake electors from around the country, probably meets even that standard. so this one strikes me is probably the easiest of all those potential charges to prove. >> and then conspiracy to defraud the united states. if two more persons conspire to commit either any offense against the united states or to defraud the united states or any agency thereof in a manner or for any purpose and one or more of such persons do act to affect the object of the conspiracy, it shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

you are assessment of that charge and how strong it is? >> i think this one is strong as well, alex. this is what prosecutors referred to as a client conspiracy, based on a case of that name. it makes it a crime when a person uses some sort of fraud to disrupt the proper functioning of government. robert mueller charge this particular statute against the internet research agency for their work when they conducted that influence campaign by buying up ads on facebook and other social media platforms to disrupt the fair election in 2016. so, it's that same theory that donald trump used lies about a stolen election in an effort to subvert the lawful transition of presidential power, the way it was supposed to take place. mike pence shows up on january 6th, he counts the votes, they certify the president. he tried to subvert that with false claims of a stolen election. so, i think this one too is a fairly easy charge to prove. there is some argument that when you say defraud, it means to fraud out of money. so, i suppose that is an

argument. but that argument does not succeeded in other contexts. so, i would expect that this argument to also succeed. here so, i would put it in second place behind obstruction of an official proceeding as likelihood of success. >> what about the news that we had just a few hours ago that chief judge barrel howell in washington unsealed opinions concerning communications among various trump allies, including john eastman, a lawyer, and representative scott perry of pennsylvania. in her opinion, she noted that federal investigators had prioritized accessing any email sent to or from scott perry's account. it sounds to me, in my layman's opinion, that rep representative perry maybe in some serious trouble. >> yeah. so, with the january 6th committee did discuss this conversation to some extent. this involve jeffrey clark at the justice department and trying to get him to send letters on behalf of the attorney general and to get the acting attorney general to send

letters out to states to convene legislatures for the purpose of submitting their own alternate slates of electors. republican states that had gone for biden, where the republican legislatures would say, you know, there's so much confusion about what happened in our states, that we think, in the interest of fairness, we should throughout with the voters it and just substitute our own views of slates. and by the way, we are republican, so we picked donald trump. it was a path to victory for donald trump. but it was perry and klukowski and eastman and clark who were all involved in that and so i agree with you, alex, that i think perry is someone who might find himself in trouble. unless, of course, they are cooperating and agreeing to testify about all this. but it does seem that the justice department is focusing on this aspect of the crime. and this one strikes me as right there in the wheelhouse of conspiracy to defraud the united states. >> former u.s. attorney barbara mcquade, thank you, as always, for your expertise, barbara. >> thanks, alex. >> now yesterday, 41 house democrats introduced a resolution to ban former

president trump from ever serving in public office again because of his role in the january 6th attack. the bases of that resolution is pretty simple. the 14th amendment states that no person shall hold any office, civil or military, under the united states, who engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. and the presidency is an office of the united states. so, that part is relatively easy. but that second part -- proving that president trump engaged in insurrection himself or aided or comforted the people that did -- well, the january 6th committee hearings have shown us just how tricky that is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. the section in this resolution about the actual barring of president trump from office is very short. but the section detailing how exactly trump is responsible for january 6th, that part is long. it's 26 of the resolution 20 pages. it is a detailed summary of evidence from the january 6th hearings and trump's second impeachment and public

reporting. and whether or not trump actually gets banned from holding office, all of that is now actually part of the congressional record. but beyond that, this resolution tells us something that is very useful about our next guest. the lead sponsor of this resolution was rhode island congressman david cicilline. you may remember him as one of the impeachment managers of trump's second impeachment in his role in january 6th. congressman david cicilline is also a senior member of the house judiciary committee. and thanks to the detailed argument laid out against trump in yesterday's resolution, we know congressman david cicilline is fully -- and caught up on the january 6th committee's case against former president trump. so, now with a january six committee reportedly counted when a criminal referral against president trump for the charge of insurrection, there's no one better suited to help us understand the committee's case. joining us tonight is congressman david cicilline.

thank you for joining us tonight. >> my pleasure. >> what is your reaction -- to this case for a large part, and -- to the committee may be considering a criminal referral of the president for insurrection? >> well, the committee has done an extraordinary job and they are going to make a determination as to whether or not they will make criminal referrals on what offenses. but the legislation that i introduced with 40 of my colleagues based on the 14th amendment, as you said. it disqualify someone who has engaged in insurrection, which is basically inciting rebellion against the authority of the united states. there is overwhelming evidence that donald trump did that. and section five of the 14th amendment authorizes congress to pass legislation to enforce this provision. so, this is our duty. we taken oath to the constitution. it sets forth disqualifying events that prevent someone from holding office. he has committed those acts and the resolution lays out in detail his participation. and he is barred from holding office. and so this is the first that that congress has to take to disqualify him. and we don't get to decide,

well, we will apply these parts of the constitution but not these. we all took an oath to uphold it. this is what is in the constitution. and i think it's our responsibility to enforce it. >> it faces an uphill climb, does it not, congressman? >> well, look, there's no question it does, in large part because of how little time we have left in this congress. but look, if we start to surrender all responsibilities because it's an uphill battle -- i mean, i wrote the article of impeachment for the second impeachment. and a lot of people said back then, oh, we should not impeach him again, he's already been impeached once and he's leaving office. i think it was a very important thing that he be tried and appear before the senate and the american people saw the most bipartisan conviction of a president in our history, 57 votes that he incited a violent insurrection against the government of the united states. so, this is important.

we have at least one more session left next week. and this is a responsibility that we have to bring this to the floor and be certain that donald trump is barred -- you can't lead a government who tried to overthrow. it's just not permitted. >> yeah, it seems like all of these actions, regardless of the current political stalemate, if you will, especially in the republican party as it concerns january 6th -- all of these actions, whether it is the impeachment proceedings, the january 6th committee hearings, the resolutions you have introduced -- it is both for the constitution and for history, it seems like. that a flag is planted in the ground -- that people understood the wrong that were committed and tried to do something about it for the long lens of history -- do you get the sense -- because we have talked about this in recent days -- that anyone in the republican party in congress is coming around to the idea that donald trump is an albatross around the party's neck and has acted unconstitutionally in his capacity as commander-in-chief? >> i don't see a lot of evidence of that. we are starting to see some of it.

but i say to my colleagues all the time, your grandchildren are going to know that you were in congress during this period. they are going to study the trump presidency in school. and they are going to come home and say, grandpa, grandma, what did you do? and they are going to have to say, i helped him, or i did nothing. and i want to be sure that when i am asked that question, i said, i did everything i possibly could to hold him accountable, to protect our democracy and to uphold the constitution. >> rhode island congressman david cicilline, thank you for doing the right thing for history and for everybody. >> thanks for having me. >> thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you. >> still ahead tonight -- last month, pennsylvania democrats won a majority in the state house. so, why are pennsylvania republicans blocking them from taking control? the answer is weird and it is wild. and it has not even been two months since elon musk took over twitter, promising the return of free speech, quote unquote. he is already censoring a whole lot of people. a reporter who has gone toe to toe with the second richest man in the world joins me next. stay with us.

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.♪

this cough. [sfx: coughs] this'll help. vicks vaporub? vicks vaporub's ...medicated vapors go straight to the source of your cough... ...so you can relieve your cough to breathe easier. vicks vaporub. fast-acting cough relief.

well, we fell in love through gaming. ...so you can relieve your but now the internet lags and it throws the whole thing off. when did you first discover this lag? i signed us up for t-mobile home internet. ugh! but, we found other interests. i guess we have. [both] finch! let's go! oh yeah! it's not the same. what could you do to solve the problem? we could get xfinity? that's actually super adult of you to suggest. i can't wait to squad up. i love it when you talk nerdy to me. guy, guys, guys, we're still in session. >> see, that such dishonest and i don't know what the heck you're talking about.

reporting. because, of course it happens to be nbc. which is possibly worse than cnn. possibly. >> since you attack cnn can i ask you a question? >> john roberts, go ahead john. >> no no. >> john roberts. go ahead. cnn fake news.

i don't take questions from cnn. at cnn's fake news, i don't take questions from cnn. >> that sort of exchange between donald trump and respected media outlets was a staple of his administration. trump would consistently lash out at reporters for basically just doing their jobs. less than six months into his presidency trump tweeted a video he found on the internet showing his head on a body, tackling another body with cnn 's local as its head. he used the hashtag fraud news cnn, because, of course he did. when cnn identify the handle of the reddit user who made that doctored video just a few days later, the far-right internet was not happy. they took to twitter to threaten to docks the cnn reporters and their families on the daily stormer. doxx, by the way, meaning to maliciously place private or identifying information online. threats to, jocks journalists

much like the constant detained -- which is why it was déjà vu all over again when we saw headlines like this last night. elon musk and several prominent journalist from twitter, and twitter suspends journalist who have been covering elon musk and the company. those journalist included people like cnn's donie o'sullivan, the new york times ryan mack, and the rushing washington post drew and journalist aaron rupar and others. those journalist, like the ones i have just mentioned, that have been covering elon musk and his companies have recently picked up reporting about the location of one of musk's private jets. specifically, some of these journalist have linked to an account called elon jet. links to the twitter account -- the account is run by a 20 year old former elon musk fan who has been using publicly available flight data to track the whereabouts of one of musk 's jets. the fact that that account has been able to do that and has gotten picked up by reporters is now apparently stuck in elon musk's craw. he has suspended the original elon jet account and threatened

legal action against the 20 year old behind it. he has asserted that any journalist reporting on the whereabouts of his plane are, quote, posting his exact realtime location, basically assassination coordinates -- elon musk is essentially suggesting that this is somehow a form of doxxing and decreeing that anyone doing it will be suspended, which is exactly what happened to those reporters from cnn and the new york times and the washington post. hours after suspending those accounts, musk squared off with a bunch of reporters in a twitter space audio discussion. many of the suspended journalists found a backdoor into that discussion and asked musk to explain himself. >> there is not going to be any distinction in the future between journalists and regular people. everyone's going to be treated the same. you are not special because you are a journalist. it's no more acceptable for me -- for you than it is for me -- the same thing. so -- >> so, it's unacceptable what you are doing? >> no. you doxx, you get suspended, end of story.

that's it. >> elon musk left the chat shortly after that. musk is justifying all the censorship by suggesting that the suspended journalists were somehow implicated in a bleach of private data. my plane, he said, is actually not trackable without using non public data. here is the thing, though. it is tractable using only publicly available data. we know that because we found the location of his jet today using this highly sophisticated and terribly exclusive journalistic tool called the google search bar. and that information is still online and trackable regardless of musk's account suspensions spree. what it actually appears to be happening here is this. elon musk is picking a fight with journalists who are doing their jobs, covering the whims of one of the richest man in the world, who also happens to own one of the most influential social media platforms around. and as that platform becomes increasingly boring dangerous to use, that coverage becomes more imperative. joining us now is another

journalist who has been suspended today by elon musk, linette lopez, a business insider columnist who focuses on u.s. politics, economics and controversial companies like texas. lynette, thank you for being here today. i should offer you my condolences for being suspended from twitter. but somehow i think it must be freeing in a sort of way as well. >> it is. i don't have to worry about when i'm going to be suspended. because it's already -- [inaudible] and i don't have to worry about what is on twitter because it does not involve me. >> let's just be clear. you are not suspended for linking to this elon jet account, which i think is worth exploring. there seems to be a wave of suspensions happening courtesy of elon musk that also have nothing to do with the assassination coordinates of his private jet. what do you think is going on? >> i posted legal documents that are years and years and years old. i have been covering elon since 2018. i started investigating in 2018 and i stopped deeply investigating his activity at

tesla in 2021. these documents are related to a lawsuit that started in 2019, when elon sued my source. these documents point to elon stalking my source, hacking my source, and also doxxing a prominent critic at the time. so, the reason why i felt i was suspended is because elon did not want people to see him as a hypocrite. that said, i don't know for sure. because twitter has not said anything to me. >> have you reached out? have you tried to figure out exactly why you were suspended? >> no, i have now reached out. and i have been covering 11th since 2008. so, i feel like i have a good idea of who he is. he has harassed me before and come after me on twitter, accusing the of taking bribes to bribe my sources, which was a complete and total fantasy. so, regardless of -- i mean, regardless of what he found offensive in those documents, i know that the general feeling is that he did not want to be seen as the kind of person who does what he is decrying, which is basically what they were accusing him of in those twitter spaces. -- >> have you've been given any indication that the suspension will be lifted? >> no. >> i'm really shocked -- i think, for some people, that

really closely associated him with space exploration and tesla, this new chapter in his biography is shocking. the heavy hand which with he has approached twitter, his mass layoffs, the working conditions there, the attitude he has taken towards the media, and also, increasingly, this entertainment of a sort of paranoid qanon-ish worldview that has accepted the far-right and former supporters of president trump -- he has re-platformed, i think, this today, mike lindell, the my pillow ceo, jim hough, the editor of the right-wing conspiracy cite the gateway pundit. tracey diaz, a major qanon influencer -- >> trump's welcome to go back. he just has not because he is too proud. like, me, drew hull well, all these journalists, are banned -- trump can walk in anytime he wants to and he led an insurrection. so, let's remember. let's think about what is really going on here.

>> trump's welcome to go back. he just has not because he is too proud. like, me, drew hull well, all these journalists, are banned -- trump can walk in anytime he wants to and he led an insurrection. so, let's remember. let's think about what is really going on here. >> what is really -- what does this reflect? >> what i was trying to say is that elon has always been like this. he was always doxxing people. he was always silencing his critics. i tweeted out a whole thread of how horrible he was to his employees, even tesla. he made people work in the factory during covid. he is a union buster. all of these things that we are seeing at twitter, he did at tesla. but he has been able to keep quieter because there is something about elon and the complicated things that he does that makes people feel like he is inaccessible. and whenever he talks about his brain, he says, my neural networks. he is like -- he tries to complicate his own speech. so that people understand this

the simplicity of what he is actually saying. and so what i was simply trying to point out is that elon is guilty of all of the things that he is angry at the liberal media for doing. and he has never been any different from that. we are just all seeing it. >> he is also a businessman. >> yep. >> and one would assume that this kind of behavior, this kind of punitive -- these punitive actions that are getting covered in the national media -- maybe he can suspend all of us. perhaps he will try. but this is not good for the bottom line. >> it flies in the face of twitters business model. you need content creators. and journalists are the biggest content creators. we are addicts. but he does not really care, i think, at this point. or maybe he doesn't really understand the business model. i don't know. but what the reality is, he needs to find a billion and three in catch every year to keep twitter alive. if he is going to do that, he's going to have to tell cell tesla shares. that's his most liquid asset. so, until he figures out how to get revenue out of twitter, he is putting his entire umpire empire in danger -- >> -- >> i have the same question. after years and years of reporting on this guy, all i can say is that his ego is extremely important to him. and he believes all the

conspiracy theories that he kind of puts out into the ether. >> it flies in the face of twitters business model. you need content creators. and journalists are the biggest content creators. we are addicts. but he does not really care, i think, at this point. or maybe he doesn't really understand the business model. i don't know. but what the reality is, he needs to find a billion and three in catch every year to keep twitter alive. if he is going to do that, he's going to have to tell cell tesla shares. that's his most liquid asset. so, until he figures out how to get revenue out of twitter, he is putting his entire umpire empire in danger -- for what? >> for what? >> i have the same question. after years and years of reporting on this guy, all i can say is that his ego is extremely important to him. and he believes all the conspiracy theories that he kind of puts out into the ether. he genuinely believes people are out to get him, even when they are not. he genuinely believe -- like, the whole assassination threat? he might actually believe that. i cannot imagine why anyone would want to kill elon musk. but that is what he thinks. that is his world.

unfortunately, this is not the best person to be running twitter. twitter's problems are not computer science problems. they are social problems. this is not a social guy -- >> that is the understatement of the year. linette lopez, business insider columnist and combatant with elon musk, thanks for your time tonight, linette. >> think. you >> we have much more ahead tonight. pennsylvania democrats are about to take the majority in the state house in session. but with the few seats now vacant, republicans are doing whatever they can to hold on to power for whatever as long as. again but next, president biden slated to sign the national defense authorization act, which repeals the vaccination requirement in the military, which is republicans number one legislative priority. what could go wrong? stay with us. ♪♪ energy demands are rising. and the effects are being felt everywhere. that's why at chevron,

we're increasing production in the permian basin by 15%. and we're projected to reach 1 million barrels of oil per day by 2025. all while staying on track to reduce our carbon emissions intensity in the area. because it's only human to tackle the challenges of today to help ensure a brighter tomorrow. ♪ ♪ mercedes-benz is turning electric... completely on its head. bringing legendary design... and state-of-the-art technology... to a fully-electric suv. the all-new, all-electric eqb from mercedes-benz. see your dealer for exceptional offers on mercedes-benz electric vehicles. the fabelmans has been nominated for 5 golden globe awards. including best picture of the year.

you do what your heart says you have to.

good news! a new clinical study showed that centrum silver supports cognitive health in older adults. it's one more step towards taking charge of your health. so every day, you can say... ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver. >> the must pass annual bill

that funds the u.s. military is called the national defense authorization act. and it is now passed in both chambers of congress. it has also given republicans a victory that they have been seeking for sometime now -- the repeal of the covid-19 vaccine requirement for u.s. service members. never mind the fact that members of the military are already required to have up to 17 other vaccinations, depending on where they are

being deployed. and defense secretary lloyd austin says that the vaccine mandate has kept u.s. troops healthy. house minority leader kevin mccarthy went as far as threatening to delay the bills passage over the vaccine the vaccine repeal and claimed, without evidence, that the vaccine requirement made the military less able to obtain retain service members. and then there is senator marshall blackburn, another critic who said this today. >> i am calling on the white house to publicly announce that president biden will sign the ndaa into law with the covid vaccine mandate repealed. they should make it crystal clear to china, iran, north korea, russia, that the united states is serious about our nation's security and our continued freedom and not focused on some of these woke mandates. >> woke mandates. while republicans mocked the military covid mandate as woke and raised concerns about readiness and national security, the repeal of this mandate may do actual harm to both. former new york congressman and

army that max rice makes that argument, and he has a new op-ed titled an unvaccinated military puts our national security risk. here's what he writes. absent to mandate, commanders will have to choose. they count for vaccination status when considering deployments? or do they deploy an unvaccinated service member and bear the incremental risk of an evacuation because of illness? rose goes on to right, if i'm vaccinated civilians fall ill and lack private health insurance, taxpayers may end up winding paying the cost of treatment. if service members fall ill while deployed, the price could be paid in the blood of their fellow troops. but beyond the consequences, american service members themselves could face, also at risk our relationships with our allies. a covid vaccine is required to enter south korea and japan.

those are two countries where thousands of u.s. service members are deployed. one retired general told cnn, quote, the host nation expects us to follow their regulations. and status of force agreement requires it. the ndaa -- the national defense authorization act -- without the covid mandate, that is now headed to president biden says for his signature and he is likely to sign it. allowing unvaccinated troops to live in close close quarters and potentially violating agreements with a strategic partners in the indo-pacific region. what could go wrong? if your work, works for your community, then you're on team earth.

good news! a new clinical study showed that centrum silver supports cognitive health in older adults. it's one more step towards taking charge of your health. so every day, you can say... ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver. (brent) people love subaru just because it stands for much more than just a car.u did it! ♪ (vo) through the share the love event, subaru retailers have supported over seventeen hundred hometown charities. (phil) have i witnessed and seen the impact of what we do? you bet i have. (kathryn) we have worked with so many amazing causes and made a difference. (vo) by the end of this year, subaru and our retailers will have donated over two hundred and fifty million dollars to charity. (brent) it's about more than just selling cars. (phil) the subaru share the love event going on now.

and it's easier than ever to get your projects done right. with angi, you can connect with and see ratings and reviews. and when you book and pay throug you're covered by our happiness check out angi.com today. angi... and done. >> it was october 9th, just

less than one month for election day when longtime pennsylvania state legislator tony deluca died with a battle of cancer. to look at a democrat longest serving member of the pennsylvania state legislate at the time. he had been in office for 39 years. and that loss, what tragic for his family and his constituents also created a logistical problem ahead of the upcoming election. with just one month until election day, there was not enough time to replace the lucas name on the ballot with that of another democrat. so lawmakers and pennsylvania decided to schedule a special election to replace toluca. the republican state house leader set the date for that election at february 7th which is early in the new year. which is also the normal thing to do when an elected official passes away, i want to make sure that his or her constituents don't go too long

without representation. but then something happens on election day, democrats had an unexpectedly strong showing in pennsylvania. democrat john fetterman won the state's open senate seat, democrat joshua pirro won the election for governor, and for the first time in more than a decade, democrats took control of the pennsylvania state house but just barely. when all the votes were counted, democrats won 102 seats in the state house while republicans won 101 seats. giving democrats a one seat majority. but that one seat majority includes now a vacant seats held by tony deluca, who possibly won the race it is a very strongly democratic district. and then there was this wrinkle, when democrats won although statewide victories, it also meant that some democratic members of the state house got promoted to higher office. one of them is going to the u. s. congress and the other is going to be lieutenant governor, which means they have to resign from the state house bringing

the total number of special elections for democratic seats up to three. now all those democrats were representing solidly democratic districts and the pennsylvania state house, so nobody really expect republicans to pick up any of them and jeopardize the democrats very slim majority. but lawmakers still get to decide when to hold the special elections for those open seats. the incoming democratic leader moved to schedule all of those special elections for february 7th which makes sense because that was the day pennsylvania had already set aside told the special election to replace tony toluca, what of course passed away just before the election. but pennsylvania republicans have decided, they don't longer like that data february 7th, which was a date that they chose in the first place. now those very same republicans have filed a lawsuit to try to push those special elections

until the month of may. why you ask? well, if democrats have to wait to fill those vacancies until may, that means republicans have to stay the majority for several more months, and that will give them time to pass a few constitutional amendments on things like new voter i. d. laws. just to be clear here, pennsylvania republicans lost control of their states in part because their party embraced election denying candidates with anti-democratic values. and now they are reacting to those losses by trying to pull status to keep themselves in power against the will of the voters. so how do pennsylvania democrats respond? joining us now is pennsylvania state house democratic leader joanna mcclinton. it's great to see you in this confusing and i would say in raging [laughter] predicament that seems to be unfolding and pennsylvania. joanna, either publicans going to win? are they going to be able to push these special elections off for another five months? >> they should not be able to do that because it is clear,

the only thing they want to do is delay these elections and democratic districts so they can disenfranchise about 125,000 voters, folks who live right outside the city of pittsburgh who deserve to have representation in the state house. as soon as possible! >> do the voters know what republicans in the legislator are trying to do? i mean -- i would imagine that if i were a voter outside of pittsburgh, i would be furious! >> absolutely! voters are informed. and voters are outraged! and we have to be clear, voters rejected these same election denying the stance that our republican leader has been doing since 2020. many don't know that at the time, when our publican leader was a speaker of the house, what was circulating and sent to our congressional delegation at pennsylvania was a letter to throw out millions of votes in 2020. just because they did not like who won the election, and that same election denying --

we all know, led to a deadly insurrection on our nation's capital. where over 140 members of our law enforcement were hurt and five people were killed. so they are playing the same games and the same extremist agenda that the voters and pennsylvania just rejected. >> i think you can definitely say that lessons have not been learned among some corners of the gop here. beyond the voter i. d. stuff, what else are republicans hoping to push through in this, we'll call it interacting empiric where nobody is in control of the house. -- >> in this period where they have a mirage of majority, we have to be very careful, because they passed the first requirement for constitutional amendment to ban abortion in pennsylvania. they also wanted to require the voter identification at every single time you vote with a government issued i. d., which can present a problem for some and be a barrier in certain communities. they also want to change the way our regulations happen.

they want to circumvent the new governor's ability to work on environmental regulations, and it is very serious, and it is quite concerning that they want to now disenfranchised folks for as long as possible -- holding on for just a little bit of power, for six months, where they could do some really seriously damaging things to folks all across pennsylvania. >> it really seems like a conundrum, because i think that the legislative reference bureau, something i never personally consulted -- but the opinion there, and as a non partisan organization, says neither caucus can claim the 102 members necessary for a majority in the house is left without a majority caucus until a special election fills the vacancy or seat in this case. what can democrats do telling vote is racing the republican efforts to push the special

elections until may -- i mean what practically, what lovers do they have to pull at this juncture? >> so we have to know that they should be contacted in the republican leaders office. they should be making noise. they should be letting the later know that this is not okay, that we are all watching. the world is watching these disenfranchised measures, and these delay tactics. and we are quite aware that the only thing they want to do is silence the voters. we are talking about districts where we currently employ the staff that are servicing those constituents. down in braddock, down in swissvale, in ukraine, we have stat that are in those offices because they were seats that district that we're all -- always in our caucus. so with the sound the alarm so folks recognize what they are trying to do. they are even trying to change the rules and members of the republican caucus have been talking anonymously to reporters in harrisburg, about those concerns, about this just going too far. >> pennsylvania state house democratic leader, but joanna mcclinton, thank you for your time tonight. good luck in this effort! >> thank you! >> we have one more story to get to tonight -- with just a few weeks left of holding the majority in the house, democrats about accomplished major and long

overdue! that's next -- stay with us! ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪♪ over the last 100 years, lincoln's witnessed a good bit of history. even made some themselves. makes you wonder... what will they do for an encore? ♪♪

well, we fell in love through gaming. but now the internet lags and it throws the whole thing off. when did you first discover this lag? i signed us up for t-mobile home internet. ugh! but, we found other interests. i guess we have. [both] finch! let's go! oh yeah! it's not the same. what could you do to solve the problem? we could get xfinity? that's actually super adult of you to suggest. i can't wait to squad up. i love it when you talk nerdy to me. guy, guys, guys, we're still in session. >> as democrats prepare to see and i don't know what the heck you're talking about.

their majority over one chamber of congress and go forth into the gridlock, they've managed to accomplish something that

has been a very long time coming. it has to do with this guy, former supreme court chief justice roberts or brooke tani who wrote one of the most shameful rulings in supreme court history, the dred scott decision. brett scott was an enslaved man who sued for his freedom in 1846 on the basis that he had lived for four years and parts of america where slavery was illegal. when the supreme court ruled against him in 1857 chief justice tani wrote the majority opinion, one of the clear that people of african descent, whether born free or enslaved, we're not american citizens. the chief justice wrote that ruling a few years before the start of the civil war, and delivered it in a room in the u.s. capital which is where the supreme court met at the time. the room is still there. it has been restored to look just the way it did in the 19th century when that awful dred scott opinion was delivered. and in the entry point to that room which is now kind of a shrine to the u.s. justice system, and that extra room is a bust of chief justice roger

brooke taney. and that is a problem. this is not a guy who's image needs to be according a place of honor in the u.s. capital. and that is a thing that is now about to change! this week, the house gave final passage to legislation that would roof the -- remove the bus of the man who believed that black people were not citizens. and he will be replaced by a bust of the first black supreme court justice, purple marshall who was the great grandson of an enslaved man. the bill it's on his way to president biden's desk, and a monument to racism is on its way out. that does it for us, now it's time for the last word with ali velshi, who's in for lawrence. good evening ali! >> i look at, even your conversation with joanna mcclinton in pennsylvania was remarkable. you pointed out at the beginning of, why do republicans and that's what you're not get the message on remember ninth? they lost the election and they lost the legislature because of the antics, because of the january six stuff