lead role and swan lake, thanks to her hard work, support from the lands, and lift. >> i was also born in the bronx, just like him. so, you know, coming from that area, it's hard. it tells me that i can also do it and i can achieve my dreams that he has as well. >> the brilliant stephen melendez, paying it forward to the next generation of dancers. will take us off the air tonight. and on that very, very beautiful note, i wish you all a very good night. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thanks for staying up late. i'll see you at the end of tomorrow. of tomorrow >> i am not a crook. if any line is associated with president richard nixon, is that one. but that line was not about nixon's biggest scandal. it wasn't actually about watergate. nixon didn't even say that line

at the white house. he said it at disney world. richard nixon was famously a huge disney fan. the nixon presidential library says that he still holds the record for the most visits to disneyland of any president, which is just not a record you'd necessarily associate with richard nixon. in fact, nixon was so into disney that he and his family were literally the first guest ever to ride the disneyland monorail. his daughter's got to cut the ribbon and everything. but this trip, the i am not a crook trip, that was business, not pleasure. in november of 1973, the month after nixon's vice president spiro agnew reside in controversy, the month after the saturday night massacre, where nixon had to attorney generals resign on him on a single night because he ordered them to find the special prosecutor investigating watergate, the associated press held a conference at the brand-new contemporary resort at disney world in orlando.

and nixon flew down to do an hour-long televised q and a in a disney world conference room. it was filled with 400 of the associated press is managing editors. this was clearly going to be a tough crowd, nixon knew this. and he did it so that he could show he was clean, to declare his innocence. but it was not watergate or the agnew scandal that prompted nixon to famously declare i am not a crook. it was his taxes. >> and i want to say this to the television audience. i made my mistakes. but in all of my years of public life, i have never profited, never profited from public service. i earned every cent. and in all of my years of public life, i have never obstructed justice. and i think as well that i can say that in my years of public life, that i welcome this kind of examination. because people have got to know

whether or not their president is a crook. well, i am not a crook. i have earned everything i've got. >> the crux of nixon's tax scandal was that when he left the white house after being eyes and houses vice president, he took all his vice presidential records with him. nixon then donated those records back to the national archives, year after year, so he could write the donations off of his income taxes. for a grand total somewhere in the ballpark of $500,000. as much as we all associate nixon with watergate, his tax scandal was a huge deal at the time. it was so, big that it basically forced nixon to release some of his tax returns to the public. constant trust, him and they ordered him to show even more. and that's how we got nixon's tax candles. and to avoid scandals like, that every president since nixon has voluntarily released his tax returns. every president except donald trump. >> will you release any of your tax returns for the public to

scrutinize? >> well, we're working on that. now i have a very big reach, as you know. i have everything all approved and very beautiful. and we will be working on that over the next period of time, absolutely. >> what's the period of time? >> i don't know. i have to talk to my cows, it's not a normal tax return. >> it's not a normal tax return. it sure wasn't. that was january 2016. trunk promised to make his big and beautiful returns public, nearly seven years. ago but of course, he never did. at the very next month, february 2016, trump started claiming that his taxes were under audit by the irs and somehow that meant they could not be released. that was his lie, and he stuck to it. now, we've gotten pretty major peaks over the seven years over to what exactly trump has been unwilling to disclose. thanks to the pulitzer prize-winning investigation what trump taxes and the new york times. and we'll be speaking with one of the lead reporters in that very investigation, suzanne craig, in just a second. but we the public have never truly gotten full transparency into former president donald

trump's financial background. tonight, that changed. way back in 2019, the house ways and means committee subpoenaed six years worth of trump's tax returns from the treasury department in the irs. they actually use the same legal mechanism that congress used way back in the 1970s to get the rest of president nixon's taxes. but rather than complying, as nixon did, trump started a more than three year long legal battle which went all the way up to the supreme court. and just last month, the court ruled on the side of the committee. what is really amazing here is how down to the wire the saw was. i mean, trump tried to pull his typical delay, delay, delay move. and it almost worked. because in a week and a half, republicans take control the house. and they would have almost certainly put the kibosh on this entire thing. but tonight, just over an hour ago, the house ways and means committee voted along party lines to release trump's tax returns from 2015 to 2020. now, the actual process of

releasing the may take a few days. the committee is going to put out its report with its analysis. but it's also going to put up trump's raw tax returns from 2015 to 2020, which as trump said, are big and they are beautiful. or so he says. they just have to redact all of the social security numbers and personally identifiable information first. because that is how much detail we the public are gonna be getting here. is how muchso nitty-gritty thae committee has to redact the social security numbers. now, i know we are very much in the throes of other ginormous trump scandals. today is literally the meat in the sand wedge tween the bread of yesterday's final january six committee and tomorrow when they release their full report. but i mean, after seven years, the country is finally going to see trump's taxes. moments ago, democrats from the committee addressed the media to explain about. and from that, we've already gotten a huge new revelation about trump's taxes. the reason the committee wanted trump's taxes in the first places to make sure the irs was handling them properly.

in 1977 after the nixon tax scandal, congress passed a law requiring all presidents to have their taxes undergo a mandatory audit by the irs. we now know that when president trump became president trump that somehow that audit did not happen. >> and the case of the trump years, there was only one time when the mandatory audit was triggered. and that was when chairman neal wrote a letter. but actually none of the examinations during those years were ever completed. and in 2018, 2019, and 2020, the start of this examination wasn't even begun until after trump left office. >> joining us now is congressman dan kildee, democrat michigan, who sits on the ways and means committee. congressman kildee, thanks for making time tonight. i know your behind closed doors

until just a few months ago. what can you tell us about the timing of this mandatory audit that all presidents are supposed to undergo? >> well, part of the problem with the fact that it's a policy of the irs and not codified in law is that it's up to the irs to determine when and how they will conduct this sort of an audit. and what we know now of course after examining all these documents is that the audits were never complete when it came to president trump. and as representative chu just noted on air, it was not until chairman neal, on april 3rd of 2019, set letter requesting these documents under section 60 103, the authority we have to get access to the documents. it wasn't until then, and it was that very day, that an audit was actually initiated. but no audits from 2015 all the way through today, no audits of the president, of president trump's taxes have ever been completed.

and very few were even tag for audit, in fact, none were tag for audit. and that was after we began that process of trying to obtain those documents. clearly the irs -- clearly taxes are a matter of public interest, in the sense that he was the president of the united states, with unique authority that no other person has. the reason that we ask for these returns was determine whether we need to strengthen this aspect of american law, of the american tax code, and clearly, after examining the audits that we look there, the tax returns that we looked at and the joint committee on taxation and the ways and means staff, it was clear that we need to follow through with legislation. no documents make the argument stronger then the need for us to codify this in law and strengthen the mandatory audit program then an examination of

those tax returns. and that's why it was so important that we felt they needed to be forwarded to the house of representatives, which makes them public, in order to take that step. >> i have got to ask. having no idea what the answer to this is, trump's tax return were such an object of debate, they were so much in the news media, how to the irs forget they had a mandatory audit of the presidential tax returns? i mean, is there politics involved here? do you think there's something bigger at play then just omission? >> it's hard to say. we know that this was a failure at the irs. there is no question about that. how that came to pass is another question that i think obviously people will speculate about. i mean, it is the case that the president of the united states sits atop the federal government. one might speculate that there could've been influence. maybe not. but one of the reasons why we felt like it was important to codify this is that we don't want to leave it up to somebody

sitting in the irs an employee of the federal government, deciding that they should uninitiated the audit of the president of the united states. we think that ought to be done by operation of law, and not left up to a person who indirectly or directly reports to that very same president of the united states. that obviously doesn't make sense. and that's one of the reasons why we are anxious to move forward on legislation. why we areit's the purpose we al this in the first place, is to try and see whether this is working, and how bad, if it is bad, how bad it is to correct it. and of course, we've come to the conclusion that this is worse than many of us expected. i didn't expect there would be no audits initiated. i was shocked to see that. >> i think the other thing that confuses people is that president trump said for a while the reason he could not release his tax returns is that they were under audit. how does that factor into all of? this was at a different -- i'm assuming that was a different audit, him as a personal citizen versus this

presidential audit. but perhaps you can clear that out. because he was asserting that while before any audits actually started being -- started happening. >> yeah, it's an interesting. question the president, as an individual, may have been under audit the way lots of americans come under audit. and he had been, previously, under audit. but he was not under the mandatory audit, which we believe needs to be done on a particular timeline. i mean, there is no excuse, for example, that any audit of the president, present trump, whether it began in 2015 or afterward, none of them have been completed, not one. so, we don't want to leave ourselves in a situation where it's up to the irs to decide to audit him, and up to the irs to fight with the president of the united states over the conditions of that auditing process. the mandatory audit of the president and the vice president of the united states ought to be codified in law and strengthened so it has to happen and has to happen on our

timeline, not in a situation where the president then can simply delay, delay, delay, and of skate, which is obviously been attacked that he's used throughout his entire business career. we can't let that happen when it's the president of the united states, with incredible authority to affect policy and affect his own fortunes. >> can i ask, because we're talking about delay and because the clock is very much ticking down to the end of the year, the ways and means committee receive these tax returns last month. today's the day that there's actually been a debate and a vote about whether to release them. what explains the gap between when the committee first got them and the vote happening today? and when do you think the public will actually see the returns? will it be this week? >> it will be. you will be as soon as we can get the redactions done, the republican and democratic staff are working together to make sure that we identify that person -- identify, that person identifiable information that should not be released.

but the reason why we're just acting now is because we were just able to, as a result of the supreme court decision in november, november 22nd, we were just able to get access to the documents. it takes some time to go through these voluminous returns and to prepare reports so that we can inform ourselves, our cells, on the decision. the reason is taken so long, just to be clear, isn't because we want to wait till the end of this calendar year, the end of this term, it's because this case was tied up in the courts. we won four different cases in three separate courts, ending with the supreme court under justice roberts, determining that we were correct in our authority to seek these documents. i don't believe in wasting a single day in congress, even if it's one of the last days of a congress, we still have an obligation to continue to do our job. now the question is whether or not we can get legislation enacted into the presidents desk so that it becomes law. and another question is whether republicans will join us in

this. they may have objected to the release of these documents. i think it was important because it's the important contacts to support the need for the legislation. but if they're willing to say, look, they still believe that we ought to codify the mandatory auditing program, and let's do that, let's do that in a bipartisan way. >> it's going to be a great test of how allegedly are going to be to the former president. but you know, big, beautiful tax returns. they are a source of controversy in the modern-day. democratic congressman dan kildee of michigan, member the ways and means committee, congressman kildee, thank you for being here tonight, i appreciate your time. >> thanks alex. >> now let's turn to suzanne. craig she is an investigative report for the new york times and one of the lead reporters on the times multi year investigation into donald trump's finances that won a pulitzer prize in 20. 19 so, she is literally the perfect person to talk to about the ways and means committee decision today. sue, how are you greeting this news as a reporter? is there stuff in here that you still do not know the answer to?

is there information that you are particularly interested in finding out that you have not thus far been able to find out in your extensive reporting? >> i'm smiling, because one second before i came on air, their poor came out. so, i'm trying not to look over here and read it. >> [laughter] >> there's probably going to be a lot in there. but i think we're not, i don't think we're going to find anything too crazy that we have not known before. the new york times obtained three out of the five years that are being released today. we have more information than they do in terms of individual businesses. you know, we found donald trump is not a great businessman. most of his businesses lose a fair bit of money. i don't think we're going to see a break from that, we're gonna find out in the last two years he had a change of fortune. in fact, we're probably going to see covid had a pretty big effect on his businesses. but this audit issue is

interesting. and i want to break out the presidential audit and then the audit that we found that goes against him could cost him an excess of $100 million. we learn today, that that audit which started in 2009, it's still open it sounds like. and then there's the regular presidential audits that are supposed to be done that we're not done. i have to say, it's been one of the least shocking things i've heard today. but you know, it is sort of surprising that they were not even bothering to do it. >> wait, can i interrupt you, sue? >> yeah. >> why is that not surprising to you? congressman kildee seemed very shock. and you don't seem shocked at. all >> [laughter] >> explain the golf there. >> when i find out there's gambling in a casino, i'm not surprised. i mean, after everything we lived through with the trump administration, to learn that, oh, the irs didn't -- audit his taxes as they're supposed, to that's the least surprising thing i think i've heard come out of the four years of the trump

administration. it's upsetting as a taxpayer and a citizen. you would've hoped they had done. it i don't know why they did not. maybe they don't have enough staff to dedicate to it. you think they would have a team of people that could do it. you know, maybe there was an order on high not to do. it we don't know. but i just, you know, it's shocking but not shocking, is i guess what i'm saying on that. but it is interesting that the other audit that we learned about when we did the story in 2020, when we got a huge amount of tax information, we also learned some information about that big audit. that that apparently is still open. so, that's definitely something to watch. and it goes against him. you know, with penalties and interest now, it can go well above 100 million. that is not a small amount of money for anybody, including donald trump. >> when we talk about the financial straits that trump finds himself in, there's that potential looming $100 million. last month, a judge appointed an independent monitor to oversee the trump organization. you know, allan weissenberg, his chief financial officer for

the trump organization, is going to jail. letitia james, the new york a.g., has a civil fraud suit against him that could cost, could effectively shut down business, affect operating in the state of new york. >> let's stop on that one. because that one, it may settle and we don't know what is going to happen. but that could go upwards of $250 million. and these fines are not taxed deductible. he can go in and then use it to reduce his taxable. income i mean, that's a big number. and you think, you know, you are seeing signs of stress in his business. the biggest one we can point to is the sale of the old post office hotel. he recently built it. it was, you know, a crown jewel in his collection of hotels and golf properties that he has. and they sold it. and that separately, i have to say, everybody is kind of laughing at this, whenever these fungible, this nft thing he is doing, where he's putting

out trading cards. i mean, that look crazy, right at i don't think anybody is saying it doesn't look crazy. this is a guy who cares about his brand, or at least cared about. this is not good for the brand. and this is sort of where he's at. and you have to question why is he doing it? well, i think there's probably a bag of money at the end of it. and that's why he did it. but it's not good for his brand. and a lot of things he's been doing aren't good for his brand. but he just continues down the slippery slope. but at some point -- there was a point in time where he had a brand that was thought of in many circles to stand for high quality. >> yeah, i think a lot of people looked at the sale of the nfts, trump dressed up as a superhero and like a firefighter and an astronaut, and chuckled at it. that was actually indicative of a man who seems desperate. this is the kind of marketing. this puts the trump vodka and the trump stakes look like high class marketing ploys, right?

>> no, it makes the trump ties look like the best thing ever. it does. and the first thing when i saw it was wow, he must need money. >> and his fundraising, even as a political figure, is greatly diminished from his announcements he raised exponentially less money then when he announced his last presidential bid. so, what we're looking at is a picture of a man who seems increasingly desperate in the arena that he perhaps cares most about, which is financial prowess. >> right, and the other thing that is important, you know, and the tax return information that we saw was up until 2018. x reand you are seeing going ino that, you know, he had the apprentice, and the apprentice brought in a lot of money, not just directly from the apprentice, but also he got all these other deals around it, these branding deals. and he was able to do hotel deals overseas and other things. and we saw going into the presidency, leading up to actually when he, ran that he

was falling off. and it's not doing well now. you haven't seen since he left office the countries around the world, there's hotels calling him saying, put your name on my hotel. so, that income has dried up. you know, there's just not a lot of good signs that we were seeing coming into this. and i just don't think, you know, the additional information we are going to get, there's probably gonna be some really interesting stuff in. it by don't think it's going to cut across the narrative that we were seeing. >> suzanne craig, investigative reporter for the new york times, the oracle when it comes to trump's taxes. sue, thanks for joining us. we'll be back to you soon for more. >> thank you for having me. >> we have much more ahead tonight. we are just hours ahead from the january 6th committee releasing its final report, wrapping up a year and a half of investigation into that violent day at the capitol and the weeks leading up to it. but over the department of justice, the investigation into january 6th very ongoing. and it is an open question

about what special counsel jack smith is up to as the investigation in congress comes to an end. and just how much did the secret service know about what donald trump supporters were doing on generous except? new reporting from carole lanning, the reporter who wrote the book on the secret service. that's just ahead. stay with us. stay with us 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. [finger-tapping] if your work, works for your community,

then you're on team earth. >> as the january 6th committee

held its final public meeting yesterday unveiled for criminal referrals for former president donald trump, it also released a 154 page executive summary. a very hefty 154-page summary, highlighting the committees key findings from its 18 month investigation. chief among those findings, president trump disseminate false election fraud allegations. he pressured vice president pence and other election officials in congress, as someone a violent mob to washington, d.c., all in support of a multi party conspiracy to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 presidential election. but there were other less principal findings in that report that were bombshells in their own right, like this one. the committee believes some witnesses with close ties to trump were less than honest with the committee. the committee called out people, including ivanka trump, kayleigh mcenany, hope hicks and former secret service

official tony ornato. and now we're learning from the cnn report that don trump talk ethics or stephen peasant keno advised his former client, cassidy hutchison person, who gave that explosive testimony to the committee to summer, pasadena told her to advise the committee that she did not recall details that she did indeed remember. according to cnn, trump's save america political action committee paid for passing pinot to represent hutchinson. which is something that should certainly demand further investigation. in other words, the questions around january 6th certainly haven't all been answered. and there are likely to be more of them tomorrow. in less than 24 hours, the committee will start to make the mother lode of its evidence public. and that will include much of its nearly 1200 witness interview transcripts and tons of documents about trump's involvement in january 6th. for months, the doj has asked the committee for many of these items. and for months, the committee has been reluctant to acquiesced that request.

until now. hours ago, punchbowl news reported that the justice department's butt justic department's but jack smith sent the select committee a letter earlier this month requesting all the materials that the committee is gathered for the last year and a half. as a last week, the committee began to send over the goods. reams of documents in transcripts. nbc news confirms that the committee has been actively cooperating with the justice department for the past month, just ahead of tomorrow's big public reveal. joining us now is luke broadwater, congressional reporter for new york times. luke, thank you for being here tonight. i got some questions about what's happening between the doj and the january six committee. because for a long time, we've had reporting that there was tension between the two. does now seem that they are working hand in glove and do you read anything into that cooperation as far as potential criminal indictments based on the referrals from the committee? >> right, well we know that the justice department wants everything the january six

committee has. for a long time, the january six committee was reluctant to turn over all the materials to the justice department, but they have begun to do so. we know from the committee's report yesterday, the executive summary that they have already given them some materials about possible obstruction and witness tampering in the committee's view. that they're going to begin giving them all the transcripts, hundreds and hundreds of transcripts before the end of the month. this was justice has wanted for a long time, they feel the committee has done a really robust investigation here and as they're interviewing some of these witnesses they want to see exactly what those witnesses said to congress, before they questioned them themselves. so there was a bit of a, i think in my view bureaucratic fight of this for several months. and what people view that is unfortunate, but does seem now that this is going to be full cooperation.

>> so we're not at a point yet where one might say, oh there specific cooperation or -- we were seeing eyed eye on these specific criminal referrals that the committee issued yesterday and will inform the indictment process if there is one. >> i guess if you don't know the answer to that, let me also, ask loop -- luke broadwater. go ahead, go ahead. >> i think little too soon to read into that based on this. i think what we can safely assume is that the justice department is interested in investigating all these things. not that they've reached the same conclusions that the january 6th committee put out yesterday when they issued this criminal referrals. so they want to see all the evidence they, can. we >> know they are really ramping things up. they put out subpoenas in all seven states where the so-called, fake electors scheme, was carried out and we know that that was carried out by the trump campaign, lawyers from the trump campaign. we know that that was the basis of many of

the referrals that we saw yesterday. so, there's a very active investigation. i think this is just one more sign that jack smith is getting out of business and will be very serious about how he's going about his work -- >> it seems like the committee also painted some red flags for jack smith to further investigator. they repeatedly speak on witness neighboring, that there are numerous witnesses whose testimony was unreliable and equally sort of suggested, perhaps the doj will have more -- they'll be more effective in their line of questioning, should they choose to call these witnesses in. >> is your expectation that people like tony -- kayleigh mcenany, mark meadows, dan scavino -- where do we think the doj is in terms of following up on witnesses in testimony that the committee has found questionable? >> right, well the committee has long said that the justice department has certain powers and abilities that they lack.

>> remember, they are a congressional investigation, their legislators not federal prosecutors. they don't have the power to tony put body in jail, anybody in handcuffs. they can't even, really, threatened to do that. but the justice department certainly can and so i think many of these witnesses may well treat a subpoena from the justice department differently than a subpoena from a legislative branch. we've even seen the justice department subpoena some of the same witnesses that have already testified before the committee in fact, get some -- the sum of the privilege assertions that some of the witnesses made before the january six committee. so i do think if they put their full effort into the investigation they can easily go beyond what congress has done here in the congressional investigation was very robust. >> that is saying something, to go well beyond what the committee did given how, as you

say robust there investigations been. luke broadwater, congressional reporter for the new york times, thanks as always. >> thank you. >> still ahead this hour, the generators committee final report is likely to focus on the actions of the foreign president, but there's still a lot we don't know. about what the secret service did and did not do leading up to the riot on the capitol. carol leonnig at the washington post has reported extensively on the secret service's role that day she will join me to discuss questions that very much stale linger. stay with us.

research shows people remember commercials with nostalgia. so to help you remember that liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's one that'll really take you back. wow! what'd you get, ryan? it's customized home insurance from liberty mutual!!! what does it do, bud? it customizes our home insurance so we only pay for what we need! and what did you get, mike? i got a bike. ♪ only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

>> on december 19th, 2020, one donald trump tweeted this. a protest in d.c. on january 6th, be, there will be wild. less than a week later, december 24th, the secret service received an alarming report about how trump supporters were reacting to his message. from the report, trump can't exactly openly tell people need to revolt. this is closest you will ever, one person wrote. >> i read the president's tweet as armed. >> there's not enough cops in d.c. to stop what's coming, offered another. >> be in place when congress times get to the meeting and i'm sure they know who they fear. comes to tweet was being interpreted as a call to arms, as an invitation to revolt.

two days later, december 26th, the secret service got another tip. this time, about the proud boys plan to literally kill people during unarmed march in d. c.. the informant then added, please, please take this tip seriously. three days later, on december 29th, the secret service held an intelligence briefing where it concluded present trump supporters have proposed a movement to occupy capitol hill on january 6th. it does not get much clearer than that. the secret service in other intelligence agencies knew ahead of time, the capital was likely to become a target of violence on january 6th. one of the many things we learned from the executive summary of the january six committee released yesterday and from that report we also learned that the person who was charged, in charge, even for me the white house about these alarming threats doesn't recall if he informed anyone about these alarming threats. them and his former white house deputy chief of staff and former secret service agent tony ornato. this is the question from the committee. do you remember talking to chief of staff mark meadows about any

of your concerns about the threat landscape going into january 6th? >> ornato, i don't recall. however, in my position i would have made sure he was tracking the demos which received a daily brief of presidential briefing. despite having key intelligence in hand, it being literally his job to inform the white house about these threats, mr. ornado told the committee doesn't recall if he did. it's important pay tension to the language here, because it is not the first time that the committee has been stonewalled with those exact words. in fact, another big revelation from the committee yesterday is that it has specific evidence that at least one witness was asked by pro trump allies to not recall the facts during an interview. that witnesses lawyer would not tell her who was paying his fees. quote, the lawyer advised witness that the witness could, instance or can stances, telling me that she did not recall facts. when she did,

actually, call them. we don't know for pro trump group told mr. or not to do the same thing, but one does wonder. especially because ornado seems to have had a close relationship with trump lawyers secret service agent. so much so that trump to come to work at the white house. then there is this, the summary from january six panel says a small group of secret service agents relied on private counsel. rather than using representation assigned by the secret service agency, that representation would have been free. the committee then cites footnote 704, which lists tony ornato as one of those agents. now, it's unclear if the secret service would have assigned one to ornato, since he was a white house employee during january six, but it is a fact that he retained private counsel. who is paying for? it we don't know. the committee is planning on releasing the full transcript of ornato's testimonies to the public so that and perhaps more importantly, at the justice department can make its own conclusions. especially because the january six committee has

found or not out to ornato to be significantly unreliable. joining us now to discuss this is carol leonnig, a national investigative reporter for the washington post. she is also the host of zero fail, the rise and fall of the secret service. carol, it's great to see you, you're the first person i thought of yesterday coming through the the summary. about the secret service, when you make of the fact that there were instances cited in the report that a retaining privacy council and in lieu of taking on free agency representation. >> well, it seems as if in the course of your public servant role that you have a very specific job, you assess the security for the president or vice president or family members. you provide protective intelligence about potential threats to the protectees of the secret service. it seems like in the course of that job, nothing too controversial

actually actually or legally compromising is going to come up for you. so, i understand why the committee highlights their concern about private counsel. the idea is, why spend all that money just answering basic questions about you doing your proper job, which is pretty much supposed to be a political. the problem for tony ornato is that he really breaks a lot of barriers in norms in the secret service as donald trump did throughout his presidency. tony ornato used to be a secret service head of security detail for donald trump. donald trump grew extremely fond of him, thought really well of, him thought he was very loyal. an excellent detail lead all leader and wanted him to be elevated to director. tony did not want that job, the president made him the white house deputy chief of staff. what's the problem with that, alex? you know it very well because you have really studied this

too, he became a political operative. in the white house even though he had a public service job and still, technically, worked for the secret service. what was his new mission? not to be looking out for the security of the president, but to be looking out for how the president could be reelected. creating events moments and public photo ops that would make the president look stronger and help him win over voters. that was a big issue and i can see, now, why ornado would want his own council because he did have an exceptionally unusual job as a political, basically a political deputy who enabled donald trump in some of his worst instincts. especially in 2020. the fact though, is, carol leonnig, even people that were not tony ornato, apparently given the committee some questionable testimony. and as you say, this is the

secret service. this is supposed to be fairly straightforward. this is supposed to be black and white. and yet we keep returning to this topic because the -- particular position on january 6th. they knew with the president was trying to do. they had a very clear view into his intent, in terms of actions that day. and yet it seems like it has been very difficult to get a full testimony and the full truth from the key agents, imam them bobby engle who was the lead in president trump's detail. he was not mentioned at all in this committee report. but you have reporting on bobby angles testimony very much going against the testimony of other witnesses who were there as president trump tried to return to the capital. can you tell me a little bit more about what bobby engle said? >> absolutely. i would like to just flag one thing you said a minute to go before i answer that question, alex, which is that you could

not be more dead on about the secret service being what they call at the right hand of the president. this detail leader is on the shoulder of the president, a witness to everything he says and does, almost everything except go into the bathroom or having a private meeting in the oval. when the president is moving towards the ellipse, when he is leaving his speech, and when he is demanding to be taken to the capital, when he is getting briefed on the weapons that people have outside his speech, it is the secret service that is right at his shoulder. and here is what bobby engle told the committee in his recent -- according to my sources who are briefed on that interview. he said, he did not see the president make any lunging motioned towards his driver in the suv, as cassidy hutchinson relay that she had been told. bobby engle told the committee that there was no physical altercation. he was not assaulted by donald trump and he was not grabbed or

lunch for by the former president the person that he was sworn to protect as his detailed leader, and why is this significant, alex? bobby angle said that this did not happen. he does not say, i don't recall. and here is the problem for the committee they have witnessed in cassidy hutchinson, a former aide to mark meadows, the chief of staff, who had some incredibly powerful testimony. much of it firsthand. she was there when mark meadows said the president did not want to act on any of the requests from his aides, to please tell the rioters to leave the capital. she was there and heard that the president had been briefed. mark meadows had been briefed -- and was going to brief trump on the fact that there were weapons in the crowd of trump supporters. they were these are really important moments, casten also relayed a bombshell that was secondhand. she was clear i was told by 20 no, she, said that the president lunch for his detailed -- for his

detail either, bobby engle, lunged for the steering wheel. he was so irate and he was so furious he physically went for the jugular of these individuals when bobby engle told him it's not safe to take the capital, we are not going there. that also goes, in some respects, to donald trump's insistence on joining his supporters at the capitol. that is crazy. you have a loaded missile directed by the president at the capitol, when you know there are weapons at the crowd and as you all know it because they became violent and there was a mob that attacked then icon of democracy. cassidy hutchinson didn't see it herself and now

we have tony ornato saying he doesn't recall now we have bobby engle saying that did not happen in the car. and i was. there >> i will tell you, when the full report comes out tomorrow. that means i'm looking for. the transcripts i want to see our bobby angles and tony ornato's. carol leonnig, national investigative reporter for the washington post. thank you as always for your wisdom, carol. -- thanks, alex. >> after voting shortly before it released on trump's taxes, the house ways and means committee just released two reports about donald trump's taxes. nbc news national reporter sauteed kapoor has been reading the reports and it's going to talk about them. that's coming up next. 's coming up next.

detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is for some adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment or replacing their current hiv-1 regimen. detect this: no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this:

most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. research shows people who take hiv treatment as prescribed and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit hiv through sex. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you take dofetilide. taking dovato with dofetilide can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. hepatitis b can become harder to treat while on dovato. don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor, as your hepatitis b may worsen or become life-threatening. serious or life-threatening side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, lactic acid buildup, and liver problems. if you have a rash or other allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are, may be, or plan to be pregnant. dovato may harm your unborn baby. use effective birth control while on dovato. do not breastfeed while taking dovato. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this:

i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. the house ways and means committee only had their hands on former president trump's taxes for a few weeks. check it what they spotted already. they believe the irs are teenage to examine closely. they cared a net operating loss in trump carried a net operating loss in 2015 of $105 million, and then carried that operating loss over for several more years. he made loans to his children, loans that apparently concerned the house ways and means committee because they -- could gifts disguised as loans to avoid the gift tax. trump also apparently claimed that a company controlled by him called dj t holdings -- 126 point $5 million as a cost of goods sold deduction but did not say what goods have been sold.

that's all from the report released tonight by the needs committee after their historic vote to release president trump's tax returns as the very initial speed read. nbc nbc's onside kapoor has also been -- sahel kapoor -- we have had this granted for a number of minutes but what is your tagline here and what can you tell us about these reports. >> yeah, alex, i have been attempting a speed read two of these multiple reports that the committee has put, out one by the ways and means committee itself in one by the joint committee on taxation, which has some more specific numbers on donald trump's tax return over six years from 2015 to 2020. the biggest thing that stands out to me alex is a specific purpose in ways that they wanted this tax return to begin. there is a procedure by which they subjected tax return to mandatory review. the chairman had a specific shun

that program was not operating as it should. they were the first president 40 years to consult in the presidential campaign, could be unduly influencing that came hen after viewing these tax returns. that is precisely what happened neil says, quote, we know now the first mandatory audit was open two years into his presidency. in other words, the review found that under the previous administration under the trump administration the program was dormant. that's why rich o'neil said that he one of those tax returns. a valid legislative purpose that he cited for viewing and americans tax returns. which a chairman has the site, you can just do that for any reason. this is a congressional committee. you have to say that purpose under the very arcane statute that goes back by the century. they said this was a specific legislate purpose that they want what they wanted for their audit that information was not coming to them on end. after

that they found some specific issues that they found should have warranted further auditors, maybe that information was not further coming to them on, and that includes some of the things that you mentioned, including charitable contributions where there are certain as the actions that were supported, by required documentation or whether more was necessary, on reimbursing business expenses and illegitimacy -- and also this question of why the loans made to the former president's children were loans or disguised gifts that could trigger gift tax. these are the kinds of things that the ways and means committee said should have trigger that audit and should have raised questions. the conclusion that this committee come to hear that congress needs to codify that out a program into law to make sure that presidents cannot evade them, that the american public deserves to know this kind of information so that they can have trust in the presidents finances and potential involvement and potential foreign bank accounts and entanglements, that this

gets all the way back -- and it validates his entire purpose of wanting these -- in the first place, alex. >> i was also struck by the fact that this was a president who said repeatedly that stacks returns are so big and beautiful and he did not use the word voluminous but other people have. in the other hand, the agents say that they were expecting large, large amounts of tax returns and all they got were one bankers box in the size of paper files into bankers boxes in the size of tax returns from the six years of tax returns and information requests from the former president. not so big after all. what else is new? >> senior national political reporter sahil kapur, it's great to see you, my friend. thank you for doing that speed read for us. that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow. and now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence o'donnell. >> good evening, alex. >> when you show those pictures of the four bankers boxes being rolled along saying these are the donald trump tax returns. i thought that would've been one year.