♪ ♪ hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. happy monday, but maybe not so happy if you are the ex-president. if last week's clown show of a fight for the speaker's gavel in the house proved anything, it is this -- donald trump seems to finally be losing his death grip

on the republican party. "new york times" puts it like this, republicans are putting trump out to pasture. that dynamic was on display the final hour for the battle of speaker, with republican members of congress playing not it, not me, as margorie taylor greene tried to get them to take donald trump's call. then there's the global condemnation for the insurrection in brazil, tragically similar to the attack on our own u.s. capitol, but is straight out of trump's playbook. that is all a very bad look for the ex-president. now today, the walls are closing in on donald trump, even more legally. legal one-two punch, if you will. first, a district judge has ordered trump's deposition in a defamation lawsuit to be unsealed. it's a deposition trump fought

for years to avoid giving. now comes news that it is pencils up for the special grand jury at a fulton county, georgia. the 26 jurors spent eight months examining potential criminal interference in georgia's 2020 presidential election by donald trump. as of today, the special grand jury completed its work and is being dissolved. they recommended that their report be published for all of us to see. it is a report that is expected to include recommendations on whether anyone should be indicted. whether criminal charges should be brought. this is a grand jury that has subpoenaed and heard testimony from some of trump's closest allies. people like rudy giuliani and lindsey graham. and a jury that had a mountain of evidence, including the smoking gun of trump's so-called perfect phone call with georgia election officials.

>> do you have cheese burgers, brad? i never get tired of hearing that. it doesn't shock me. with that, though, this case is now in the capable hands of the fulton county d.a. what comes next and how soon

next happens we don't know. we have assembled a team of exz perts to break it down for us. it's where we begin today. nbc news correspondent blayne alexander is here. she's been following the georgia grand jury. she has interviewed bonnie willis before, and she's been covering this for month. also joining us, barbara mcwade, law professor at the university of michigan. andrew weissmann is back, former senior member of robert mueller's special council investigation. and our dear friend, claire mccaskill is back. i want to start with you, blayne alexander. your interviews with the district attorney stand out with me when i read this news. i wonder what you make of where things stand and what she gathered? >> yeah. you know, i think that what we heard from her in that interview echoes what we have heard from her all among. she is not shy about pursuing charges. she's made it very clear when

she first took up this case, when she spoke in her interview with me, that if the evidence points to a crime, she's going to bring an indictment. it doesn't matter who was on the other end. i reached out to her office, they aren't commenting on this. but the d.a. is getting their first look at this report today. but what is inside is not all unfamiliar to them. she's been a very strong part of this process from the very beginning. when it comes to determining who needs to come forward and testify, when it comes to the questioning. so what ultimately comes out in this very substantial report from the special grand jury is not going to be unfamiliar to the d.a., but i do think, though, we're going to be watching very closely is whether or not this report becomes public. that's something that a lot of people who have been watching the doors of this courthouse are going to want to see. they're going to want to hear what those people said behind closed doors and under oath and what that could recommend for her action going forward. >> i want to play some of your

interview with her when she displayed some of what you are describing. listen to this. >> could we expect to possibly see additional subpoenas from people in former president trump's inner circle or trump associates? >> yes. >> are we talking about family members, former white house officials? >> i mean, we'll just have to see where the investigation leads us, but i think that people thought that we came into this as some kind of game. this is not a game. at all. what i am doing is very serious. >> i think since you did that interview with her, people fought and lost most of their challenges. i believe by the end of this investigation, she entered the governor, the secretary of state, i believe rudy giuliani and lindsey graham both lost their challenges. just talk about the scope of people she had access to. >> i think what is so

interesting about this, and watching this unfold is it started with that phone call that you played at the top of the show. as we kind of watched this uncover week by week, we saw that it was growing much wider in terms of the scope of the investigation. she talked about the fact that she wanted rudy giuliani to come down at testify about the presentations that he made in front of georgia lawmakers split from the phone call. she said she wanted to hear from senator graham on a couple of phone calls he made to the secretary of state split from the phone calls trump made. so it's clear that the scope of her investigation has significantly widened, and that is why she brought so many people forward. i want to point out those are only the people we know about. this is secret process, so those are only the people we know about because we saw them go through the doors or others told us. so that's why there is such

interest what is inside this report to come in the weeks to come. >> so i want to show you some of what bonnie willis had to say about not treating different targets of an investigation differently. let me play this. >> if you are a member of a gang and you're committing a crime in my community, i am going to make sure that you are held responsible to the full extent of the law. people also seem to think that in society that there are certain people immune from prosecution. if you are a celebrity, if you are a high ranking public official. i guess that there is something strange with me. lady justice is actually blind. this is the reality. >> a very welcome thing to hear when you take into consideration the pace of the criminal probes and to donald trump. i spoke to a couple members of the select committee only

friday, and i said look, in the time that republicans supported an independent commission to investigate the insurrection, gather votes for it, then decided against it and killed it, and the speaker assembled a select committee which hired investigative staff that conducted an interview, interviewed a thousand people, put on public hearings, and dismantled nothing from the federal criminal justice system on trump's role in inciting the insurrection on january 6th. she also in that amount of time concluded her criminal probe. what are you looking for in terms of tea leaves? >> well, first, i think it's so commendable her statement about the rule of law and treating everyone the same, because let's get real. rich people, white people, public celebrities, politicians are treated more favorably by and large in the criminal justice system. and that is deplorable.

so it's really wonderful to hear her say we're going to treat people the same, not better or worse. that's what it means to have the rule of law. and in terms of what i expect to see, obviously this is guess work. but to me, this feels like an incoming, heat-seeking missile. we're in this unusual position where there are -- there is sort of a two-step grand jury process, which is different than at the federal system. so there's a grand jury that just reported, and there is evidence, and another grand jury that can bring charges. it is inconceivable to me that the first grand jury, having heard all of the evidence that you outlined, nicolle, that they're not going to say that there is probable cause, which is a relatively low standard, to bring charges against the former president. and with that, i think it makes

it very hard for her to then not bring those charges and not have a second grand jury actually present those charges. so to me, this feels not even like the calm before the storm. i mean, to me, we are about to see the final step with georgia charges against the former president. and the final point i'll make is, we focus so much at the federal level, but these charges are the ones that can stick, because regardless of whether a republican went into the white house eventually, these charges are not subject to a federal presidential pardon. so if you are donald trump right now, you have to be really concerned about what is going to happen in georgia and you can be sure he's going to start attacking her like crazy, and the system. but these are the charges that i think he should be most worried about. >> andy weissmann, i was girding

for a technical legal term and you dropped "heat-seeking missile" on us. there is brand new reporting out today that adds to our sort of -- our picture that blayne alexander has painted for us. but let me read this to you out of today's washington post. using georgia's expansive anti-racketeering law, a statute used against gang leaders and mafia leaders, she and her colleagues got convictions of 11 in 2015 for accepting bonuses while students suffered, losing access to remedial education. now, she's considering using the racketeering statute, the question this time is whether former president donald trump attempted to overturn the 2020 election. observers say the threat to trump is real and immediate. and the fulton investigation

could make him the first former president to be indicted on charges. willis has notified at least 18 others that they are targets. the allegations are very serious. if convicted, if indicted and convicted, people are facing prison sentences. what is your assessment of that sort of legal strategy of using georgia's expansive anti-racketeering laws? >> that's such a good question. so this really goes to a strategy call that, you know, barb and maybe claire and i have had to make. i have to say that i'm generally of the view that you sort of lead with your strongest case and you keep it narrow and focused if you have a strong case. sometimes when you go broad, you create a bigger target for the defense to pick apart.

so you want to just go with your absolute strongest case and just try it and keep it clean and quick and get in and get out. so that's sort of my sort of predilection and the way i think about things. it is, however, very hard to second guess that when you're not inside and being able to truly assess the strength of the case. but in general, i wouldn't be a fan of going big unless you really have the evidence and you're not creating a target for the defense. >> so barb, i want your legal analysis, as well. i also want to add another layer to this. blayne alexander made the wise point that we don't know what we don't know in terms of who testified in front of fani willis' special grand jury. but in terms of the investigation into trump's role in overturning his defeat in 2020, she did have access to it.

we don't know what they said, but she did have access to more people than seemed to have cooperated with the january 6th select committee. so your thoughts on the witnesses that we know about, and what appears to be some reporting about what could be her legal strategy? >> so this idea about racketeering is a very interesting one. i think if you can err on the side of going too big or too small. i've used racketeering statutes when you have a different type of schemes. we had a public corruption scheme where the schemes were bribery and racketeering. so a jury can get the flavor for all the criminal activity. but it could be an overkill to do that when the criminal conduct is really very focused on one crime. as it seems to be here, which is the crime of trying to defraud an election. and so in that case, i would think that you would want to be

focused on that. but you can go too far. i have seen cases where people go for the one and only single clean charge that they can find and ignore a lot of criminal activity. and then a jury is left not to know about all the other criminal activity and to believe the sole crime was this one little thing, like the phone call. so it's very important that fani willis get one that encompasses all of the crimes here without trying to stretch it beyond its normal bounds. so i would think that anybody involvd in a conspiracy would be fair game for a crime, but i would focus on the events occurring leading up to the november 2020 election, and anything up to that phone call in early january of 2021. >> barb, let me talk about one witness that spent a day there, that's cassidy hutchinson. we know that she has firsthand knowledge that trump was defeated. it's a snippet of testimony that

has haunted me and i read it again. she and mark meadows have walking down and trump comes towards them and says, no one can know we lost, which is both delusional and it would appear sort of smoking gun evidence that even he was aware that he lost the 2020 election. and then the call comes to find 11,780 votes. how is cassidy hutchinson likely to have been used by this criminal probe as a witness against mark meadows and donald trump? >> yeah, i think the exchange, nicolle, is important. it suspect just a made for hollywood moment but a made for the courtroom moment. there has been criticism of the testimony of cassidy hutchinson when it relates to things like what happened in the presidential limousine on january 6th because her knowledge was hearsay. this is not. this is firsthand observation. she's a witness to this exchange and she can testify about it.

i would add to that, the other evidence that donald trump knew he had lost before making that call, what william barr said to him, what the justice department said to him. he absolutely knew by the time he made that call that the election was lost, and it was a legitimate election. so that is essential to proving a criminal intent to defraud. so i think cassidy hutchinson could be a very important witness in this case in georgia. >> you know, claire, i'm also thinking about all the team that told him that he lost, and that all of these smears against election officials, including shea moss were lies. that night of the call was also the night of the doj attempted massacre atop the justice department. that is the night that jeffrey clark was attorney general for long enough to show up as a.g. jeffrey clark on the white house call log. so i don't know, a couple hours to half a day.

what do you make of sort of the testimony that would have been available to fani willis to prove that he knew he lost and he was trying to really bulldoze and threaten and overturn a result knowing that he had lost the state of georgia in 2020? >> one of the disadvantages in the way that january 6th and everything that happened before has been reported is often we don't have a chance to do the timeline. and to do the context of the timeline. that is essential to a good prosecution. so the jury understands exactly what happened when. i agree with barb that, you know, the prosecutor shouldn't go too big or too small. on the other hand, this is a prosecutor, they had 11 guilty pleas and a bunch of convictions on a teacher cheating scandal. and one of the advantages of using this umbrella prosecution

is, one, you get all of the evidence in front of the jury. and two, it gives you an opportunity to flip a lot of witnesses that are now looking at criminal charges as part of this enterprise. and that's going to be really important. whether or not this becomes public, the hearing is january 24th, i think the prosecutor is going to have a lot to say in that hearing. i think she would want it to be public eventually. but probably not prior if she's planning on indicting for a prosecution. but what's funny, nicolle, republicans say one of their first bills is going to be passing a bill that requires woke prosecutors to release files when they decline to charge. so it looks like the republicans want this released publicly no matter what. >> claire, we're going to fix your shot while i ask you a follow-up question. you went blurry for a second and

we can't have that. claire, i want to broaden this out because of the countless conversations all of us have had. we now have copy cat crimes against democracy breaking out across the world. clearly not enough has done in the category of accountability to dissuade people from trying to attack democracies and question our elections. i have been unrelenting at laying the blame of mitch mcconnell and kevin mccarthy and all the republicans. but it is now also true that our department of justice has done nothing in the category of accountability for donald trump and his closest allies and accomplices in the coup plot. what do you make of fani willis being done before a single charge has been filed for anyone that was at the u.s. capitol by the justice department? >> well, umm, i think i have expressed my frustration about how slowly the federal government works in terms of

dispensing justice. this is a chronic problem, i believe. you know, i know i'm on your show with two wonderful former federal prosecutors. and i know they probably have a different view of it. but i, you know, i cut my teeth in a prosecutor's office where we responded to 911 calls. we had to go quickly, because if we didn't, violent people could be released or continue to do violent crime. we didn't have the luxury of waiting as long as sometimes the federal government does. so i think the fact that this has gotten so slowly is a problem. and now we have a copy cat crime. it will be interesting to watch how quickly justice is dispensed in brazil. >> umm, all right. blayne alexander, let me give you the last word in terms of some of what we have delved into here. what is the next piece? what is your sort of line

reporting include, trying to find the actual result, what is your sense, what are you chasing in terms of timeline? >> you know, i think it's watching the d.a. like a walk. i think it's trying to figure out what sort of indication we get from what that report says, and i think what will be interesting is watching that hearing on january 24th. there are going to be members of the media arguing to make that public and we'll hear from the d.a. herself. she will be speaking there. i think what could be interesting too is watching to see who is fighting against it, what sort of legal battles do we see in the days and weeks to come around redacting portions of that report, versus letting it be out in the open. it's important to point out that the special grand jury itself voted to make that public. the people who wrote this report, who spent the better part of eight months hearing this testimony, want it to become public.

they made that clear to the judges overseeing this. so it's going to be in the judge's hands, but i think it's interesting that they want it to be made public. and nicolle, if i could just say a word about the judge, this judge has been overseeing this from the beginning. he authorized the special grand jury last year at the beginning of last year and has been proceeding over every single hearing. so he knows the public interest in this and he knows that his courtroom is filled every time there is a hearing around this. i think it's worth mentioning that the judge has a youtube channel of his own. many of his own hearings are live streamed for anyone that wants to watch them. so i think it will be interesting to watch and see how this judge presides in this closely watched issue, as well. >> that is so interesting. thank you so much for starting us off today. everyone else sticks around. we'll pick up our coverage and

have more on who else could be in fani willis' cross hairs. could indictments be coming over that fake elector scheme. plus, over the weekend, the copy cat crimes we were talking about against democracy taking place in brazil. supporters of their ex-president breaking into the capitol buildings with claims of election fraud, trying to shut down the government of brazil. how donald trump and his allies responded to that. and newly minted house speaker kevin mccarthy's first test comes tonight. we can find out how much he gave up to the extremists in his own party. that and much more on "deadline: white house" when we come back from a quick break. we'll be right back. from a quick break we'll be right back. and this is the sound of better breathing.

fasenra is a different kind of asthma medication. it's not a steroid or inhaler. fasenra is an add-on treatment for asthma driven by eosinophils. it's one maintenance dose every 8 weeks. it helps prevent asthma attacks, improve breathing, and lower use of oral steroids. nearly 7 out of 10 adults with asthma may have elevated eosinophils. fasenra is designed to target and remove them. fasenra is not a rescue medication or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. this is the sound of fasenra. ask your doctor about fasenra.

just look around. this digital age we're living in, it's pretty unbelievable. problem is, not everyone's fully living in it. nobody should have to take a class or fill out a medical form on public wifi with a screen the size of your hand. home internet shouldn't be a luxury. everyone should have it and now a lot more people can. so let's go. the digital age is waiting.

do you remember being involved in those early discussions around thanksgiving time regarding having alternate electors meet? >> several of mr. giuliani's associates, mr. meadows, umm, members of congress, although it's difficult to distinguish if the members i'm thinking of were involved as we progressed through december. >> the committee learned that the white house counsel's office thought the plan was potentially illegal. >> to be clear, did you hear the white house counsel's office say that this plan to have alternate

electors meet and cast votes for donald trump in states that he lost was not legally sound? >> yes, sir. >> and who was present for that meeting, that you remember? >> it was in the office of mr. meadows, mr. giuliani, and a few of giuliani's associates. >> the select committee interviewed several of the fake electors. >> we were just kind of useful idiots at that point. a strong part of me really feels it's just as the road continued, as this failure, failure, failure that that formulated is what do we have on the table. let's just do it. >> we were just useful idiots. that was testimony from robert sinners, testifying in front of the select committee about the fake elector scheme. a scheme that according to cassidy hutchinson was illegal

and rudy giuliani and mark meadows quarterbacked it and had knowledge of its illegality. now the fulton county grand jury is done with their work and the case is in the fans of fani willis, the district attorney. we're back with the panel. andrew weissmann, you have the floor to respond to anything claire said about where the fake elector investigation stands. >> first, on elacrity, i do think it's important to remember that everyone always wants to see justice happen immediately, and that is a sort of -- something that's innate and you can understand why people feel that way. it's also incumbent on the department of justice to make sure that they build a case where you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and there are many, many complications to

economic and public corruption cases. that being said, that's not an answer to claire, just to say these things can be hard and difficult. you're always looking at this in the context of a specific investigation. to my mind, until the january 6th committee did their work and went public, the department of justice seemed to be perfectly content to focus on what's been described as the foot soldiers. and they did a great job with that. but they didn't look higher up, and they didn't look more expansively. we are there now where you feel like they are where they should have been, but time has passed and this is a case where if there were to be a federal charge brought months or even years from now, you could end up with a different administration that will just end all of this at the federal level. so that's a way of saying i

actually agree with claire in this situation. having been on large-scale investigations, you know, whether it's the mueller investigation or enron or barb and i work on an extremely large, complex financial crime together. you know what? you can bring charges in a matter of months. so i do think here that there was a lack of sort of political will, and i think that was -- that void was filled by the january 6th committee and explains why adam schiff and many others on the committee have been fairly vocal about their disappointment in terms of where the department was at the time. but it is important to note, i do think right now we're in a different situation federally in terms of their commitments to the case. >> can i ask you a follow-up question. just so we're doing apples and

apples. i think the congressional probe may be apples and oranges now. how far into the mueller team being established were manafort and gates charged? >> so if you remember, mueller was appointed in mid may. the team was put together, his team in june. my team wasn't formed until the beginning of july. the same thing with respect to the russia team. and our first charges against manafort, gates, and pap popdoplis were in march. it's hard to say you should do the same thing, because their cases are different.

but here, one of the most telling pieces of evidence is that there is really a dearth that the justice department was looking at people in the white house prior to the january 6th committee. that there are just whisks of evidence that was happening. phone records, you know, we have the evidence that when cassidy hutchinson testified, there is a lot of reporting that the department of justice was as surprised as everyone else. that's not a good position to be in when you're the department of justice. i think that really explains why you had adam schiff being so vocal about the incredibly unusual situation, where congress is out ahead of the department of justice, which is something the department usually does not want. >> barb, you and andrew have been super candid about this, and i appreciate that. i'll give you the last word on all of this, and i think the --

listen, there was no investigation conducted under more sort of incoming fire from a sitting president, and that investigation touched him. i think he was attacking andrew weissmann on that team. so to have that team sort of appointed in may and the first charges brought by early fall is certainly a standard that is fast, but has certainly been achieved before. your thoughts? >> well, i will defend the department of justice a little bit here. i think that cases are apples and oranges, and no down andrew and the rest of the mueller team worked with great urgency to bring that case and kudos to them for that. but i don't know that means the current justice department is lacking that sort of urgency. as we said earlier, you don't know what you don't know. and the other wrinkle here in this case i think is that when you come for the king, you best not miss. so putting together a case of

this complexity, of this scope, of this reach, takes a lot of time, and i am hopeful that eventually -- pardon me? >> go ahead, go ahead. >> the other point i just wanted to make is with regard to the fake electors. i think there's some real there there. i base that on some of the transcripts that came out after the january 6th committee completed its work. there may be a potential defense for some of them, that they signed these certificates, thinking they were a provisional ballot. that if things turned out our way after all, we don't want to miss this deadline, so let's get or name down there. laura cox, who was the gop party chair in michigan, said she was very uncomfortable because she offered to do a ceremonial signing along those lines and was told no, that's not what we want to do. we have a plan to hide overnight in the speaker's house to sign this thing on the proper day in

december in the capitol in lansing. and it was at that point that she wanted to distance herself from that. so i think there is real grounds to believe that those slates of fake electors were part of this came to defraud the united states in committing election fraud. >> claire, i think we cut you off. were you trying to get in? >> no. i -- you know, i was just going to tell you, i get that you're going for the king, i get that. but i've got to tell you this report that was issued by the committee, i mean, there is so much evidence. and it's not complicated evidence. it's people -- it's eyewitnesss. it's tape. it's videotape. it's the president's own words. it is -- or the defendant's own words. this is a lot of evidence, and i get that the special prosecutor was just appointed. the question is, why did that take so long? why in the world did merrick garland wait months and months

and months before he named a special counsel? it wasn't until he had an absolute slam dunk of the theft of government documents at mar-a-lago. i get it that cases are complicated, but this case feels open and shut to most of america. >> yeah. i mean, let me just add this. the attorney general in michigan has taken back some of her fake elector cases, because they're taking so long, as well. and barb, you were pointing out the nature of the open and shut case of the fake electors. and there is this thing they did on twitter, so they weren't trying to hide their bad deeds. to be continued. thank you for being here. up next, another attack on democracy, triggering a massive

insurrection. this was in brazil. a live report and global reaction is next. don't go anywhere. s next don't go anywhere. for a medicarn mom couldn't decide. but thanks to the right plan promise from unitedhealthcare she got a medicare plan expert to help guide her with the right care team behind her. the right plan promise only from unitedhealthcare. who's on it with jardiance? ♪ ♪ we're the ones getting it done. we're managing type 2 diabetes and heart risk. we're on it with jardiance. join the growing number of people who are on it with the once-daily pill, jardiance. jardiance not only lowers a1c, it goes beyond to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults with type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. and jardiance may help you lose some weight.

jardiance may cause serious side effects including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, (that can lead to sudden worsening of kidney function), and genital yeast or urinary tract infections. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction, and don't take it if you're on dialysis. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. a once-daily pill that goes beyond lowering a1c? we're on it. we're on it. we're on it with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance.

[elevator bell] [female narrator] we're drowning in information and it's harder than ever to separate what's trustworthy from what's not. but we can learn to see through the tricks and tactics of bad actors, develop sound habits of mind, better filter our sources. and elevate more credible information. together we can stop the flood of misinformation. let's care before we share. learn how at newsliteracyweek.org. [comcast jingle]

(vo) if you have thyroid eye disease and the pain in your eyes burns like a red-hot chili pepper, or...your inflamed eyes are so watery they need windshield wipers... it might be time to discover another treatment option for thyroid eye disease, also known as t-e-d. to learn more, visit treatted.com that's “treat t-e-d dot com." over the weekend in brazil, it's nope as latin america's heart of democracy, faced its worst attack in decades. the images of chaos were familiar to us here at home. tens of thousands of supporter of former right-wing bolsonaro

temporarily seized control of the plaza that houses the residents of brazil's new president, also the congress and supreme court. neither were in session. but two years and two days after the snushg on -- insurrection -- -- insu- damaging property and rifling through paperwork, using barricades as weapons and injuring officers along the way. the similarities are no coincidence. from the associated press --

>> joining us now, brazil news director david biller. he's live in rio de janeiro. also joining our coverage, ben rhodes, former deputy national security advisor to president obama, now an msnbc contributor. and claire mccaskill is still with us. take me through, david, the weekend and then i want to ask you where we go from here. >> well, it began with buses coming to brazil and bringing supporters and nobody really knew at that point what exactly was going to happen. but obviously, it's turned from something that was just a march into something very violent. and it does seem like the authorities should have been prepared for it. there was ample time, ample warnings. and yet the protection around

these monumental buildings, the most important buildings in the capitol, was scarce. we saw video of these protestors really meeting little resistance as they pushed through. in other videos, police were standing by, some of them chatting with supporters. and so, you know, what happened was four or five hours of this, you know, wild and uncontrolled rampage through the main buildings. they toppled furniture, smashed windows, destroyed some of brazil's treasured artworks that were in these important buildings. and were only removed from there after there was a massive outcry and the police sort of got their act together and moved in. >> david, could you characterize or describe or share what you know and reported about bolsonaro's ties to donald trump and his orbit? >> sure.

so bolsonaro, from the beginning, has really adored trump. he posted photos of himself watching trump's addresses. he sought a state visit with trump. he visited him at mar-a-lago. and his son, eduardo bolsonaro, positioned himself as the international face of this right-wing movement led by his father. he's gone to the c-pac events in the u.s. both of them have gone to dinner at steve bannon's house. and eduardo bolsonaro met with jason miller, ivanka trump on the very eve of the january 6th insurrection at the u.s. capitol. so there's a lot of interchange there, and -- and, umm, this is -- this is the sort of -- you know, the two have been sort of comparing notes and sharing -- sharing, umm, you know, sharing

notes on how exactly things are developing in their country and seeing themselves as allies. >> so ben, this is the access of authoritarianism, and it is as you have written, it is a fight for and against democracy within our countries, that is the fight of our times. >> yeah, nicolle. we talked about this. but this is a truly global phenomenon. if you look at this flavor of strong man, right-wing authoritarian nationalist politics, it's in this country, in brazil, in hungary, in the philippines. i could list more, but this gives you a sense of how global it is in scope. the second thing is bolsonaro has very much tried to model himself after trump. in his first campaign after the trump campaign, his social media strategies, his messaging drew heavily on trump themes. that's been the through line

throughout the bolsonaro presidency. like trump, he said the quiet part out loud. he was saying this election was rigged before it happened. he was starting to make false, unproven allegations about voting machines before any vote was cast. he conducted the crime out in the open, as trump did. and so i think what we have seen once again is this is a global fight. this vein of strong-man nationalist politics is everywhere. they are learning from each other. the trumps and bolsonaros of the world. we have to be more resil yemt -- resilient about how to push back against these forces. just as these are connected, we have to be connected in protecting democracy in places as important as brazil and the united states. >> i want all of you to stick around. we'll have more on this and more on the parallels of january 6th, with trump backed allies calling

yesterday's rioters great patriotses. we'll show that to you, next. we'll show that to you, next

>> tech: when you have auto glass damage, trust safelite. this dad and daughter were driving when they got a crack in their windshield. [smash] >> dad: it's okay. pull over. >> tech: he wouldn't take his car just anywhere... ♪ pop rock music ♪ >> tech: ...so he brought it to safelite. we replaced the windshield and recalibrated their car's advanced safety system, so features like automatic emergency braking will work properly. >> tech: alright, all finished. >> dad: wow, that's great. thanks. >> tech: stay safe with safelite. schedule now. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ♪limu emu & doug♪ hey, man. nice pace! clearly, you're a safe driver. you could save hundreds for safe driving with liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance... ...so you only pay for what you need! [squawks] whoo! we gotta go again. only pay for what you need.

♪liberty liberty liberty♪ ♪liberty♪ when you stay at a vrbo you always get the whole home not part of it but the whole upstairs the whole downstairs the whole fridge and the whole secret nap room because is it really a vacation home if you have to share a house with a host? ♪

only with vrbo my name is douglas. i'm a writer/director and i'm still working. in the kind of work that i do, you are surrounded by people who are all younger than you. i had to get help somewhere along the line to stay competitive. i discovered prevagen. i started taking it and after a period of time, my memory improved. it was a game-changer for me. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. all converging and now we're on as they say the point of attack. right? the point of attack tomorrow. >> look in the streets of brazil. look at the great patriots in brazil. that at a lot of danger to themselves have forward in the streets of brazil.

>> we're back with david miller, ben rhodes and claire mccaskill. david, is steve bannon known outside of far right circles? or what is the level of familiarity with him in brazil? >> i think he was better known before, when he was closer in with trump and often appearing with him. more so now you see him in connection with eduardo bolsonaro, that's jair bolsonaro's son, who is a lawmaker. and really there is the connection is more about this sort of internationalization of this right-wing movement that eduardo bolsonaro has tried to position himself as the face of, at least from in bannon an alln that effort to really, as ben was saying, to make this a global wave. >> claire, the right still gets really twitchy when their tactics are characterized as authoritarian and echoing those

used by vladimir putin. but i don't see any other fair read on the relying on tactics that rely on disinformation and anarchy to deliver where democracies don't deliver them power. >> you know, joe biden has talked an awful lot in the last several months about political violence. and that's really what this movement is about. the idea that bannon -- by the way, doesn't he look bizarre? does he not look in the mirror? does he not own a comb? it's just weird. he's so creepy-looking. anyway, the fact that these guys are embracing lawlessness, especially someone who's an american, where the rule of law in our country has been a beacon to the rest of the world about how you do it right, how you have a judicial system that's not infused with politics. and it is so worrisome to see this breaking out across the

world and to see any american cheering it on, and the fact that right now we're giving harbor to bolsonaro in florida. i hope they figure out the visa situation quickly because it makes me uncomfortable that he felt like he could flee to ron desantis land to be protected. >> ben, how does this end? >> i think we're in a generational struggle here on behalf of democracy. this is not going to end in one election in brazil just like it wasn't going to end in one election here. there are a lot of parallels with brazil. as in our election people thought that lula was going to win by a much bigger margin than he did. and the polls kind of undercounted bolsonaro's support. and then that led to these road blocks and people disrupting traffic. and there was a failure of imagination that it might evolve all the way to this insurrection. and the reality is these people, bolsonaro, trump, bannon, people like this, they are telling us what their plan is, which is not to give up.

they're in this fight for the long haul. they see it as an international fight between their brand of politics and small d democracy. and i think we need to extend our imaginations beyond any single election and think about how are we fortifying our institutions, how are we protecting democracy, how are we beating back misinformation and disinformation before it spreads like a virus as it has in many different countries. we have to extend our own time horizon because these people are telling us what their plan is. there's a reason bolsonaro is in florida. it's the first place he went after he left the presidency. where donald trump is. where ron desantis is. that's a home base for him, right? and as claire said, that should be a source of some unease to us. so i think we need to be on the side of empowering people around the world who are pushing back against this trend of strongmen, authoritarian nationalist politics that keeps telling us that they're not going anywhere. steve bannon has been across europe meeting with far right parties. it's not just brazil, right? we're in this fight, and it's a fight that is bigger than even just american democracy, and it's going to last for a while.

>> i want to have all of you back to talk about this idea of democracy voters. we talk about it. and you're right, we talk about them as they pertain to swing states and elections here at home. but it is a global phenomenon. david biller, thank you so much for sharing your reporting with us. we've been following it very closely. it's a pleasure to get to talk to you. ben rhodes and claire mccaskill, my thanks to both of you as well. up next for us the house of representatives gavels back in after what can only be called what? what can i say on tv? an extraordinary week. we'll show that to you and what we can expect from the new battered republican majority in congress. don't go anywhere. jority in congress don't go anywhere. ol turmeric because it helps with healthy joints and inflammation support. why qunol? it has superior absorption compared to regular turmeric. qunol. the brand i trust. step up. prep up. to help keep you free from the risk of hiv. descovy for prep, the smallest prep pill available, is a once-daily prescription medicine that helps lower the chances of getting hiv through sex.

it's not for everyone. descovy for prep has not been studied in people assigned female at birth. talk to your doctor to find out if it's right for you. descovy is another way to prep. descovy does not prevent other sexually transmitted infections, so it's important to use safer sex practices and get tested regularly. you must be hiv-negative to take descovy for prep. so, you need to get tested for hiv immediately before and at least every 3 months while taking it. if you think you were exposed to hiv or have flu-like symptoms, tell your doctor right away. they may check to confirm you are still hiv-negative. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. the most common side effect was diarrhea. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking descovy without talking to your doctor. ask your doctor if descovy for prep is right for you. get help paying for descovy for prep. learn more at descovy.com. get refunds.com powered by innovation refunds can help your business get a payroll tax refund, even if you got ppp and it only takes eight minutes to qualify.

i went on their website, uploaded everything, and i was blown away by what they could do. getrefunds.com has helped businesses get over a billion dollars and we can help your business too. qualify your business for a big refund in eight minutes. go to getrefunds.com to get started. powered by innovation refunds. (vo) at wells fargo, direct deposits come up to go to getrefunds.com to get started. two days early with early pay day. what if everything came two days early? (hero) have a good weekend! alright now... have a good weekend. (co-worker) but it's wednesday... (co-worker 2) see you monday! (co-worker 3) am i missing something? (hero) it's the weekend baby... see you later. (vo) like getting things two days early? when it comes to payday, you can with wells fargo.

(co-worker 4) what are you doing this weekend?

that was easy, huh? i never thought we'd get up here. two months ago you voted for a new direction for our country. you embraced our commitment to america. and now we're going to keep our commitment to you. >> hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. so that right there, we showed it to you for a reason. that was the culmination of the saga we all traveled through together last week. house republicans took four days, 15 ballots, a total of 24 hours and 12 minutes of the chamber being in session to finally elect that man, kevin mccarthy, as their speaker. the fifth longest speaker vote in our country's history ended in the early hours of saturday morning when six republicans, they didn't actually support mccarthy in the end. they had originally voted in opposition to him and they switched their vote to present, which had the effect of lowering the total number of votes

mccarthy needed to win the majority in there for the speakership. mccarthy ultimately won 216 votes. the voting on friday night was tense. at one point it almost became physical. mike rogers of alabama had to be physically restrained from going after alleged child sex trafficker matt gaetz. "the new york times" reports this. "marjorie taylor greene was seen trying to push her phone which displayed a call from d.t. on the other end into the hands of representative matt rosendale of montana, a crucial defector. it was mr. trump on the line. rosendale furiously told greene not to put him in that situation, brushing the phone away, according to lawmakers who witnessed it." even more bizarro than all the commotion on the house floor is the concessions that were made by mccarthy to get his brand new title. mccarthy now holds the gavel because he gave up so much, everything really, that those on the far right at the end, even matt gaetz said he didn't know what else to even ask for. let that sink in. among the biggest concessions,

the motion to vacate the chair, which allows one house member to force a vote to remove mccarthy as speaker any day, anytime they want. house is reconvening in this hour for the first time under speaker mckarth yis leadership. a vote on the rules that operate how the chamber operates is expected. mccarthy can only lose four votes. that's the same as the speaker votes. from those in his own caucus if all the democrats vote against the package. already one republican said he will not be voting for it. take a listen. >> i'm against the rules for a couple different reasons. one is the defense -- the cut in defense. i think that's an absolutely terrible idea. but the other is the vacate the chair. i mean, i don't want to see us every two months be in lockdown. this isn't the parliament. the american public are counting on house republicans to be the one savior in this all. if we can't get this right, it's going to be a nightmare after nightmare. >> seems like a good prediction, right? nightmare after nightmare. meanwhile, republicans are

gearing up to use their teeny tiny new majority to begin intense oversight is what they're calling it of the biden administration and other issues through the various congressional committees they now control. the brand new super chaotic congress is where we begin the hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends. nbc news capitol hill reporter ryan nobles is with us. also joining us alexi mccammond, axios political reporter. and charlie sykes is back, editor at large for the bulwark. alexi and charlie are msnbc contributors. but i start with my colleague ryan nobles. first, thank you for walking us through what was going on up there. talk about what the vibe is. does mccarthy have the votes for the rule package, which i understand to hold all the things he gave away to get the speakership to begin with, right? >> yeah, i think he does, nicolle. so far tony gonzalez, who you just played a sound bite from, is the only republican that's on the record saying that he's going to be a no vote. nancy mace from south carolina expressed some skepticism over the weekend. we're told that she's likely to

vote yes. and other than that there aren't any other republicans that are publicly coming forward and saying that they're not going to vote for this rules package. but to your point there are a lot of them grumbling behind the scenes about the concessions that kevin mccarthy was forced to make that really in many ways hobble his ability to control this caucus over the next two years. and there are real concerns about basic pieces of legislation that in past congressional sessions have passed with ease, whether it comes to raising the debt limit or spending bills or anything along those lines that are going to be real fights each and every time. and that goes above and beyond any kind of new piece of legislation that this body hopes to pass. i mean, there's obviously a degree of skepticism that any legislation they pass will ultimately become law because of the senate being controlled by democrats and the white house being controlled by democrats. but regardless, the big question that a lot of us up here have is what we saw play out last week going to become a recurring theme, that every time they're

confronted with a difficult choice, and let's make no mistake, if you're elected to congress you are elected to make difficult choices, is that every single time they're confronted with a difficult choice it's going to turn into a split between conservatives and moderates that are going to prevent them from getting something over the finish line. kevin mccarthy told me after he finally won the speakership early saturday morning that they figured out how to do this now, that they went through this process so that wouldn't happen in the future. but that's certainly something that remains to be seen, nicolle. >> what does that mean? we figured out how to give matt gaetz so much that he goes on fox news and says, "i don't know what else to ask for"? that's how we're going to govern? >> i mean, that is a great question, right? because he didn't get into the specificity of how they figured that out. but what he alluded to was that they brought everyone to the table and that they have also created a mechanism by which there's going to be a diversity within the conference and each one of these key committees that are going to make the big

decisions. the rules committee, the ways and means committee, the foreign affairs committee, all these big committees that are going to be kind of driving the agenda for the republican party they're going to have a lot of influence on. now, what the conservatives will tell you is what he's essentially done is made sure the house freedom caucus folks are on each one of these committees and in some cases will have enough power to prevent things from happening like what could happen on the rules committee. but regardless, mccarthy kind of described this as kind of the painful part of forming an organizational plan and that they should from this point forward know how to do it. we'll see. >> what is the agenda, ryan, as you understand it? >> so the big thing that this republican-led house of representatives is going to do is investigate. right? they really believe that the most powerful tool that they have at their disposal which does not require the help of the democrats in the senate or the biden white house is oversight. and so they're going to use that

to kind of look at all these conservative pet projects that they feel have been neglected over the past two years or beyond. they feel there's not been enough comprehensive investigation into the afghanistan withdrawal. that's something the foreign affairs committee wants to look at. i'm told the first thing the oversight committee is going to look into is the use of these ppp loans during the covid recovery and whether or not fraud took place there and whether or not the biden administration did enough to rein that fraud in. and then of course they're going to take it even a step further and look at the president's business dealings, his family's business dealings and whether or not there is any conflict of interest there. that's the nice way of saying they're going to investigate hunter biden. so this is something they have at their disposal now, nicolle. they of course have the subpoena power that they didn't have over the previous two years. they saw the way the january 6th select committee used that subpoena power very effectively, we might add.

this is their opportunity to use that subpoena power. and there's no doubt that some of this is going to be a political sideshow. but there is an argument to be made that things like the origins of the covid virus, the afghanistan withdrawal, many other things, that there probably does need to be a hard look given at it, and they believe these investigatory bodies are going to be able to do that. >> ryan, do you know of anyone who sought a federal pardon from donald trump is in charge of any of these investigations? >> well, we have not seen specifically exactly who's going to be in charge of which investigation and on what level. but to your point, there are certainly members of the republican party in the house of representatives that were specifically involved in efforts to overturn the election results who are now going to be involved in these investigations on some level. so we talk about conflicts of interest, that they're going to be looking into with the biden family. there are certainly questions that can be raised about the conflicts of interest with some of these members of congress as

it comes -- as it serves as part of this investigation. >> i mean, charlie sykes, scott perry is under federal criminal scrutiny for his role on january 6th. i think his phone has been seized. matt gaetz sought a federal pardon for the investigation looking into alleged child sex trafficking, an investigation into him. i think cassidy hutchinson testified to half a dozen or more other congressional republicans, i've called them pigs at the pardon trough. now they're going to investigate what, stuff? what do you think the american people are going to accept this or just the fox news audience? >> well, i mean, of course the role that jim jordan is going to play. keep in mind what the january 6th committee said about jim jordan's role in the attempted insurrection. he'll be the chairman of the judiciary committee and one of the key subcommittees. as ryan sailed, some of these investigations are -- and oversight is going to be legitimate. they're looking at the withdrawal from frngs the oirnlgz of covid. that's fine. you about the question is can they keep themselves from becoming a clown show? look, you asked what the agenda

is. and i think you can basically break it down into performative and genuinely dangerous. performative will be passing a lot of these messaging bills that will go absolutely nowhere that are simply designed to keep the base happy and to raise money. and then of course you have the question of will they shut the government down. is the dysfunction so written into these rules that the house will not be able to do the basic business of keeping the lights on, paying the bills, funding the military and avoiding a debt default? these are all questions and i know most of the attention's going to be on these probes. and i think it's going to be a very difficult job for kevin mccarthy to continue to convince the american people that these are good faith efforts when you have people like scott perry and matt gaetz and jim jordan in such prominent roles. what you saw last week was the

inability to control the crazies. the inability not to look like a clown car. and that's a real danger for republicans. and it will be be for the next two years. and it will be as congressman gonzalez says, it is likely to be nightmare after nightmare after nightmare because we are not done with the pain by any means. by any means. >> and listen, again, this will become a matter of don't take our word for it. i mean, i'm flattered that so many watch and do. but the "wall street journal" editorial board has taken a hard turn against this house republican caucus already. this is what they write, charlie. "the reality is that if defense is cut what will go first is spending for operations and maintenance to sustain military readiness as well as money for the weapons to deter china. if the gop rebels honor their demand for regular order defense hawks may have more votes. but it's worrisome that some republicans are joining the progressive calls to shrink the military when the world grows more dangerous." i have talked about how the supreme court becoming a

political dead weight for the republicans represents the most seismic structural shift in politics in my lifetime. this is the second. this shift where the american people cannot trust the republican party to protect our national security and to support our military, they are playing with loaded political weapons. do you think they know what they're doing, charlie? >> no. in fact, that's an extraordinary flex by the republican party, the party of ronald reagan, even the party of fire and fury, to not fund u.s. military defense at an incredibly dangerous time when china is rattling its sword, when russia is waging war with ukraine. i think that's politically dangerous even with the republican base. and beyond that clearly at the top of the freedom caucus agenda are massive cuts to spending that may include attacks on social security and mdcare.

look, nicolle, you know one of the dirty little secrets of the republican party is they like to talk about fiscal restraint but they don't want to actually cut spending. and polls would show that even republican voters and even the tea party voters were not on board with cutting medicare and social security, much less national defense at this particular moment. so it's worth reminding people that trump may have come out of the tea party style movement but trumpism has never been about fiscal restraint. it's never been about frugality. so this pivot, this attempted pivot to add, you know, born again fiscal conservatism to the culture wars i don't think is really thought through because i don't think the voters are going to be on board when they find out exactly what's on the chopping block here. >> alexi, let me show you how democrats responded to the chaos. >> basically, they're establishing a subcommittee or a committee on witch hunts and

deep state conspiracy theories. and i think the damage they will do will be incalculable. what it will mean is that the intelligence agencies will be very reluctant to share important information with policy makers because -- >> what i think is the takeaway is that if two months advance notice gets us what happened last week then we are really in for a dysfunctional and chaotic congress. >> i'm worried about our seeing more of the same. where that chaos persists and we are not effectively governing. >> our general concern is that the dysfunction that was historic that we saw this week is not at an end, it's just the beginning. >> so alexi, you've got congressman schiff talking about the damage to our intelligence agencies and national security. you've got the "wall street journal" warning about dangers to military readiness. then you've got democrats now who would like to go and govern saying it won't be possible with

republican control. >> and that's because the implications of these concessions that speaker mccarthy has given in his quest to become speaker and have the gavel go far beyond the sort of personal and procedural issues that he settled by making those concessions. they reflect the interests of these hard-liners. they reward these same folks. and that makes it difficult to govern in a bipartisan way to be sure. but as we're seeing, even govern within his own party and his own caucus. this defense cuts issue is becoming a flash point within the republican caucus. that's not to say everything that democrats are saying. and you look at even someone like senator mitch mcconnell, right? pushing the infrastructure law with president biden last week, really kind of showing the way in which senate republicans are still willing to kind of operate in a semi-bipartisan way moving forward, which draws a further contrast with the house republican caucus and puts a spotlight even brighter on their

chaos and dysfunction that was reflected in sort of the fears spoken by the folks you just played in that montage. >> alexi, i'm thinking back to your body of reporting. i'm looking at ryan's notes about what they plan to do, investigate the withdrawal from afghanistan, the origin of covid, the use of government funds during covid recovery. i hope they look at ron d. and the business dealings of hunter biden. republicans tried to deliver a message about the economy. there's no way that anything about the economy is going to get out to the american people with this four-headed monster of investigations run by the wacko caucus. what are they doing? >> well, as ryan mentioned and charlie too, a lot of this is around messaging. and not messaging to do with these kitchen table issues as you just alluded to. the other thing that's really not helping economic messaging for republicans is their proposals to cut social security and medicare. that's something democrats campaigned on in the 2022 midterms. that's something democrats

campaigned on in the 2018 midterms to great success. and it's something that scares a lot of voters and makes it difficult to trust those same people on their plan or lack thereof for the economy. but these investigations as you mentioned are taking away from any sort of real legislating or governing. and we're also seeing clearly how these culture wars are impacting policies and policy outcomes. that's reflected in republicans who are saying they want to go over so-called woke practices within the military, kind of using that to justify their cuts to spending. but that's really not what people care about. we heard this in our focus groups last year for axios. we hear this when we're on the road. voters are not looking to investigations of this sort of type. they're looking to people who can help them move forward. >> all right. so we'll keep watching. interesting plan. interesting opening act. ryan nobles, for your reporting today and all week last week, thank you so much. alexi, same to you. and same to you, our friend charlie sykes. and for starting us off today.

when we come back, the chaos we've seen so far in the house is only the beginning. as we've been discussing, house republicans are ramping up a slew of new investigations, many in service to the far right conspiracy fringe, even investigating the investigators themselves. we'll get reaction from a former member of the january 6th select committee after a quick break. and later in the program what prince harry's interview last night on "60 minutes" tell us about what he and meghan markle have been through and are still going through and the mental health challenges they're grappling with very publicly now in this case that goes back a decade now. and the good news story continues for the buffalo bills. they won a stunning victory in their first game back after the collapse of their teammate damar hamlin. late today we got word that hamlin has been released from the hospital and he has returned home to buffalo. we'll tell you all about that. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. hey, man. nice pace! clearly, you're a safe driver. you could save hundreds for safe driving

with liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance... ...so you only pay for what you need! [squawks] whoo! we gotta go again. only pay for what you need. ♪liberty liberty liberty♪ ♪liberty♪ ♪ this feels so right... ♪ adt systems now feature google products like the nest cam with floodlight, with intelligent alerts when a person or familiar face is detected. sam. sophie's not here tonight. so you have a home with no worries. brought to you by adt. we got the house! so you have a home with no worries. you did! pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team.

( ♪♪ ) some things leave you guessing. mailchimp takes the guesswork out of email marketing by analyzing data from billions of emails to offer suggestions for how to improve engagement and revenue. guess less and sell more with intuit mailchimp. as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. for how to improve engagement and revenue. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data

or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network. with no line activation fees or term contracts. saving you up to 60% a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers. so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities.

there's a theme emerging this afternoon, a thread that weaves its way through many of today's major stories that we have been covering. my teleprompter went down. i'm sorry. it is the grave and ongoing threat to democracies foreign and domestic posed by emboldened far right extremists right now. that theme is rather explicit in the context of the brazil riots we've covered. rabid supporters of a defeated ex-president storming a capitol in order to halt the peaceful transfer of power. but it is present as well in the conversation we just had. the american familiarity with the situation in brazil hurts a little bit more because at this moment anti-democratic election deniers in our country are sadly in the process of taking over

and gaining lots more power and control in the house of representatives. what do these insurrection-friendly republicans want to do with that power? they make no secret about it. so we'll just say it. revenge. they want to get back at those who sought to hold them accountable. house judiciary, foreign affairs, ways and means, hugely influential committees with newly empowered republican chairmen have their cannons trained on perceived political enemies. among the problems that presents for a democracy, some of the republicans who want to lead those highly political investigations are lawmakers who are under investigation themselves. take scott perry, head of the freedom caucus. the justice department has literally seized his phone as he is currently under federal investigation in relation to january 6th. listen to what he had to say over the weekend. >> the speaker has also reportedly said he's going to appoint a church-style committee to investigate the investigations. since you're part of the investigation by the justice department, will you pledge not to serve on that committee?

>> well, why should i be limited? why should anybody be limited just because someone has made an accusation? everybody in america is innocent until proven otherwise. and i would say this. the american people are really, really tired of the persecution and the instruments of federal power being used against them. >> he might choke on those words someday. joining our coverage congresswoman zoe lofgren of california. she's a former member now of the january 6th select committee. a key member of the judiciary committee. let me just dive right into it. some house republicans who sought pardons be in charge of any investigations? >> no. and perry is a great example. it's not just an accusation. i mean, a judge made a finding that there was probable cause that a crime had been committed sufficient to issue a warrant to seize his phone. that's not just some random view. that's a judicial process that's

pretty serious. and so think that you can go and then try and intimidate the department of justice over that is completely at odds with our system of checks and balances. it's wrong. it should be illegal. >> what did you think when you saw the insurrection in brazil over the weekend, that these acts in america that you spent 18 months investigating were copycatted by trump's international allies in brazil? >> it's really concerning. i mean, it looks like we've exported a little bit of chaos for the political right to try and overturn democratic elections. and in addition to invading the legislative branch they also invaded the equivalent of the white house, the equivalent of the u.s. supreme court. i mean, they took over the space of the entire federal government.

now, the reaction of the law enforcement agencies was robust. they were arrested on the spot. but i think it's not possible to separate that kind of extraordinary lawlessness from what happened here in our country and the kind of rhetoric that bolsonaro has engaged in. i mean, he's called the trump of the tropics, and he's in florida right now. >> and i would just say they haven't sought to separate themselves. bannon was there praising them over the weekend. ivanka trump welcomed bolsonaro into her office right ahead of january 6th. what is -- if we don't havecore right? with your committee's work. we have a federal judge. i won't say there hasn't been any. but short of accountability by doj, what is the mechanism to put a brake on exporting this

authoritarianism? >> well, i think there are a couple of things. one is judicial, which you referenced. the department of justice has all the evidence and probably more than we had. they have to make a determination not -- i think it's pretty obvious that there were criminal acts committed by the ex-president and his enablers. but they also need to make a judgment that there is evidence sufficient to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. and that's not something the committee's able to do for them. so that's one element. and then ultimately the american people need to make a decision on what kind of government they want. do they want a democratic republic with checks and balances, or do they want right-wing extremists emboldened to overthrow that democratic republic with checks and balances? >> the antics last week in the house had everything. i mean, i mentioned -- i had the godfather on last weekend when i was cleaning up my house from

the christmas decorations, and i finally -- i've watched all the aaron sorkin movie -- i was looking for a political analog to the trump years. i didn't find it till i sat through "godfather" 1 and 2. even restraining the guy who wanted to jump matt gaetz. and marjorie taylor greene running around with uncle donald on the phone and nobody wanted to pick up. it would be comical if it wasn't so dangerous to our democracy. but what are you girding for as they actually are now -- not just mccarthy and the republicans in control but gaetz and perry and the, you know, insurrectionists in control of the house republican conference. >> well, they have a very narrow majority, and it looks like the most extreme members of their caucus are calling the shots. now, when democrats had the majority we also had a very slim majority, but we had the capacity to move forward in a very deliberate and non-extreme manner. whether kevin mccarthy is able

to do that is very much in doubt given the debacle that was last week. i hope that he does because there are some important things we need to do for the country. we need to raise the debt ceiling. we need to have appropriations that keeps the government running in an orderly way. i don't know whether gaetz and marjorie taylor greene and boebert and biggs and others, gosar are really going to be calling the shots. but it's something to be concerned about. >> it might end up being an understatement. what are you prepared for personally? they've signaled some interest in investigating the investigators of the january 6th select committee. >> well, it's interesting. they've threatened to put all the information out there. they must not realize we beat them to the punch. we have put all the information

out there. and they can go through it. but they're not going to find that there was anything unfair. we never cherry-picked. we were very careful to make sure that our report matched the evidence and only the evidence that we had uncovered. so fine. go at it. take a look. read the report. i think it's pretty compelling. >> and we'll see. we'll send a box of donuts to any one of them that actually gets through all of it. congresswoman zoe lofgren, thank you so much for spending time with us. to be continued i'm sure. >> anytime. >> shifting gears, to the interview last night on "60 minutes" with prince harry and what we learned about the accusations he is making against the royal family, the mental anguish he so clearly dealt with since the tragic death of his mom, and why all this matters in this bigger conversation about mental health. that's next. that's next. medicine cabinet! less sick days! cold coming on? zicam is the number one cold shortening brand! highly recommend it! zifans love zicam's unique zinc formula.

it shortens colds! zicam. zinc that cold! only at vanguard, you're more than just an investor—you're an owner. we got this, babe. that means that your dreams are ours too. and our financial planning tools can help you reach them. that's the value of ownership. life... doesn't stop for diabetes. be ready for every moment, with glucerna. it's the number one doctor recommended brand that is scientifically designed to help manage your blood sugar. live every moment. glucerna. ♪ well, the stock is bubbling in the pot ♪ ♪ just till they taste what we've got ♪ ♪ ow, ow ♪ ♪ with a big, fresh carrot ♪ ♪ and a whole lot of cheese ♪ ♪ and the mirror from your van is halfway down the street ♪ ♪ well, you can say that -- ♪ wait, what? i said, "someone just clipped the side view mirror right off the delivery van." when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream.

now, where were we? why, you were fixin' to peel me. [ laughter ] your heart is the beat of life. if you have heart failure, entrust your heart to entresto, a medicine specifically made for heart failure. entresto is the #1 heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists. it was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. heart failure can change the structure of your heart, so it may not work as well. entresto helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. and just imagine where a healthier heart could take you. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure.

entrust you heart to entresto. - life is uncertain. everyday pressures can feel overwhelming it's okay to feel stressed, anxious, worried, or frustrated. it's normal. with calhope's free and secure mental health resources, it's easy to get the help you and your loved ones need when you need it the most. call our warm line at (833) 317-4673 or live chat at calhope.org today.

my brother and i love each other. i love him deeply. there has been a lot of pain between the two of us, especially the last six years. none of anything that i've written or anything i've included is ever intended to hurt my family. we had a very similar traumatic experience. and then we dealt with it two very different ways. >> that's prince harry in a raw and emotional interview. it aired last night. opening up about the trauma that he endured and still does from

his mom's death and the rifts that have been torn open and have ripped apart one of the world's most famous families, causing him and his wife, former actress meghan markle, to resign as working members of the royal family and settle here in the united states. harry spoke frankly about mental health from his struggles after his mom's death to why he says he believed he needed to leave the royal family to save his wife's life, claiming his own family fed information about meghan to the tabloids, leading to her harassment. watch. >> this all started with them briefing daily against my wife with lies to the point of where my wife and i had to run away from our -- from my country. you know, the family motto is never complain, never explain. but it's just a motto. and it doesn't really -- >> there's a lot of complaining and a lot of explaining. >> endless. >> being done through the leaks. >> through leaks. i will sit here and speak truth to you with the words that come out of my mouth rather than

using someone else, an unnamed source to feed in lies or a narrative to a tabloid media that literally radicalizes its readers to then potentially cause harm to my family. my wife, my kids. >> nbc news has reached out to representatives for king charles and prince william. they declined to comment. i want to do two things. i want to bring in my colleagues, nbc news senior international correspondent keir simmons. he's live. he stayed up for us in london. and katti kay is with us as well. u.s. correspondent for bbc studios as well as an msnbc contributor. i want to explain to both of you how we've come to cover this. we spend a lot of time at "deadline" covering mental health. we did a five-hour special. and i watched the netflix special about harry and meghan because when i was in london everyone i met in cafes and cab drivers asked me what i thought of it, if i'd seen it. so i came home and i watched it. and i found them completely credible.

a little -- i hadn't followed the royals. kooerks i think you're very familiar with my ignorance when it comes to all things royal. but i find the hunting of meghan and harry a deplorable thing. and i would really like to understand how it is explained by what they call the institution there. >> yeah, i mean, i think you have to say, don't you, that this is harry's version and he's very, very, very critical of the british press and of the wider media. but of course what he's getting to do here really is just tell his version without any kind of not intense questioning. so that being said, i think you make some very good points, nicolle. one thing, for example, it's clear that his unhappiness goes back and back and back. so let's just say it like it is. the kind of -- the idea that meghan has been the cause of him doing what he's done, that's just sexism. let's be honest about it.

she may have been the catalyst. but this is all about harry, about his relationship with his father, about his relationship with his brother and about his mom. so there is that. i think in terms of mental health one of the things that he's doing is talking about the impact on his mental health of being a part of the royal family and his particular role in the royal family as well as the impact of the death of his mom. and you know, nicolle, you and i last year around the passing of the queen and the funeral talked about the comparison between our two systems and how stoic and representative of all kinds of longevity, good things that the queen represented. well, what you're now, though, seeing is harry put his finger on and try to say actually there's lots of problems with the system here. and i think, you know, kind of grown-up people, sensible people will take a long hard look at that and historians will judge. >> katty, i want to show you -- i mean, i think keir wisely

widens the lens on this. let me show you how harry describes grieving for his mother and the blame he places on the british media. >> i had a huge amount of frustration and blame towards the british press for their part in it. >> even at 12, at that young you were feeling that toward the british press. >> yeah. i mean, it was obvious to us as kids the british press is part in our mother's misery. i had a lot of anger inside of me that luckily i never expressed to anybody but i resorted to drinking. heavily. because i wanted to numb the feeling or i wanted to distract myself from whatever i was thinking. and i resorted to drugs as well. there was this weight on my chest that i felt for so many years, and i was never able to cry. >> i mean, i think for a lot of humans -- again, put the institution and put their break with it aside. i mean, that is the anatomy of

grief for a lot of people. >> yeah. i mean, i think there's a whole lot going on just in that particular quote from prince harry that was so interesting. this is somebody who at the age of 23 managed to persuade his team, his press secretaries to show him the police report because he'd kind of been desperately hoping his mother actually hadn't died but would one day come back and he wanted to see the evidence as much as he could of it, redacted of course, of those images of that night, who went into the tunnel itself in paris. and of course that had for years lived with the thought that his mother was killed because the paparazzi chased her into that tunnel along the banks of the seine. and he was quite right. they did. if they had not been pursuing that car she was in diana wouldn't have died. and that stayed with him for a long time. but there's another clash of cultures going on too. i come from a country where my husband went to boarding school at the age of 7. my first husband went to boarding school at the age of 7.

many men i know went to boarding school very young. and the -- and you were taught very young not to cry. and if you were in the public eye you were taught even more so not to cry. it would not have been acceptable. it would not even have been understood really. even for a 12-year-old boy who'd just left his mother, particularly one in that position, to stand outside buckingham palace and cry with the crowds that were there, weeping on his hands, and he was feeling their tears on his wet hands. it would have been something completely alien to that system. and i think that's what you're hearing here as well, is somebody who has this incredibly personal relationship with the british media that is hateful and that has harmed him in a very devastating way but somebody also who has broken away from that system, gone to live in california, clearly had therapy, and that is something that is clashing up against, you know, the oldest and most reclusive and most hidden and most sort of stoic of british institutions. it's just a mismatch. it's a massive sad tragic

mismatch. >> yeah, totally incompatible. i mentioned i watched the netflix series. you're going to have to come back so we can have a conversation about that, the three of us. but i pulled this. this is meghan in her own words describing the impact on her mental health. >> it was like all of this will stop if i'm not here. and that was the scariest thing about it, is it was such clear thinking. i wanted to go somewhere to get help. but i wasn't allowed to. they were concerned about how that would look for the institution. >> they knew how bad it was. they thought why couldn't she just deal with it? as if to say well, you know, everybody else has dealt with it, why can't she deal with it? but this was different. it was really different. >> keir, is there any pushback to that? did the palace know how much she

was suffering mentally, or is mental illness not a thing in their eyes? give me what could possibly be the other side of that. >> well, i mean, remember that many of the people involved in this story can't speak, including the members of the royal family, the senior royals, because frankly if they say something -- they may say something in the days ahead but if they do they risk the potential that they kind of get into a civil war with harry and meghan. so there's that issue. and then of course there are the officials. they can't speak. so there are those aspects. there is a consciousness of mental health much more in this country. the old idea of the stoic british character, you know, has been broken down in many ways including within old-fashioned institutions. but i think katty is right, and she puts her finger on something, which is something about class that is going on here, and that is about people from leadership classes, if you like, aristocracy, royals, that

class of people actually coming out and saying you know what, life's been pretty miserable in many ways, we actually as children weren't treated very well, and that's kind of what you see harry doing. it's very interesting because you've heard his father, now king charles, say something similar in the past. and then of course you have the millions of us who didn't go through that kind of saying, what are you moaning about? you're so privileged. and so there's this whole kind of dynamic happening there. and one of the things i think about all this is it's a study in leadership, isn't it? it's a study in what it means to be in a leadership position, what it means to be in the spotlight, what it means to be kind of under that kind of focus and how much pressure it puts on you. and i would say this much. and we talked, again, last year, you and i, we talked about some of the benefits of the system that we have here with a head of state who isn't elected, but on the other hand thank god for democracy because you guys have a head of state who is in position for a while and then gets to leave. so one of the issues -- one of

the things i've thought about when listening to harry is my goodness, some of the beef, some of the resentment, some of the unhappiness goes back so far. and that's one of the issues when you have heads of state who are around for a long time, is their families and they themselves, they build up this kind of corrosive history and past that then affects the way they lead. >> well, and again, i made short shrift of this timewise but so many of the attacks on meghan are rooted in the history of racism. and the attacks and the things said about her are horrific. katty, i wonder how you think those kinds of things have been dealt with by the palace and by the institution. and i should say, they can talk. they can pick up the phone and call either one of you. their staffs, which i've learned so much about from watching the doc, seem to be in constant contact with the media. if they chose to talk, it seems that they could, katty. >> i think that's harry's biggest grievance, is that they didn't talk in defense of his wife when the press were saying

things. there is -- as you know, there is very little sympathy for harry and meghan in the united kingdom at the moment. there's a feeling that he's being self-indulgent, that he's out to attack the monarchy, that he's being irresponsible, that he should have waited to talk about all of this. but i think few people would deny that the british media treated meghan differently. straight out of compton, that kind of headline. that they talked about. and some people have been reprimanded. there was a famous, you know, television presenter, jeremy clarkson, who wrote an editorial about meghan that was, you know, definitely racist, definitely sexist and was taken down. and he had to apoll giles in the newspaper, the tabloid newspaper apologized. but that's one incident. there were several incidents of papers saying things that they would not have ever said about, you know, kate. and so i think that difference has been pointed out. but it hasn't won harry and meghan much sympathy back in the

uk. >> it is an unbelievable story. i feel like it touches on so many achilles heels in both countries and the media and the troll farms. so much more to talk to. i'm going to put you all on notice. to be continued. keir simmons and katty kay, thank you so much. when we come back, a stunning victory by the buffalo bills inspired by the miraculous recovery of their teammate damar hamlin, who he nearly died one week ago after collapsing during a game. today hamlin has been released from the hospital and is home in buffalo. we'll bring you the latest next. . ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪♪ why give your family just ordinary eggs when they can enjoy the best? eggland's best. the only eggs with more fresh and delicious taste. plus, superior nutrition. which is now more important than ever. ♪♪

realtor.com (in a whisper) can we even afford this house? maybe jacob can finally get a job. the house whisperer! this house says use realtor.com to see homes in your budget. you're staying in school, jacob! realtor.com. to each their home. (vo) red lobster's finer points of fun dining: the correct answer to starter or entree is realtor.com. who gives a shrimp, when you get both. introducing new dockside duos. get an individual-size starter and entree for just $15.99. welcome to fun dining.

new england decided to defer after winning the toss, and here's hines on the runback, breaking the tackle, and taking it past midfield, and down the sideline he goes. this is storybook. opening kickoff return for damar hamlin. >> straight out of a sports fairy tale, that is how the buffalo bills opened their day yesterday against the new england patriots almost a week after damar hamlin collapsed on the field, shocking the nation. the bills would go on to win with hamlin top of mind. they wore jerseys with 3 embossed on the front while tributes pours in while all teams paid respect and continued to show their support for hamlin, whose injury and recovery captured the attention of the entire country. as for hamlin, his progress continues to improve work a

stunning update coming in the last couple hours. doctors from the university of cincinnati health and hamlin himself announced that he has been released from the hospital and has returned home to buffalo, completing a remarkable turnaround for the player who will now begin the next phase of his recovery. joining us now, someone i saw do a fist pump with that good news, dave zirin, behind the new documentary "behind the shield" on tubi. take us through the extraordinary week for the nfl where the whole country got behind this young, generous, ben benevolen player. >> absolutely. he is all of those things. i feel great for damar hamlin, but i want to emphasize, this is not a feel great story, no matter how we feel, the it's story of someone who almost died on national television and needed nine minutes of cpr.

as someone with a son who plays football, it was absolutely terrifying. and also making it about just damar hamlin obscures the fact that players in the nfl just don't live as long as the rest of us, and i think we need to reckon with that and reckon with the sport in a way that's serious. and this is an opportunity to do so. but the nfl really is turning this into more fairy tale than fact, and i think that's something we need to keep a very close eye on. >> well, it is not normal to have a heart attack in the middle of playing the sport you spend your life dreaming you'll play at this level. is there any appetite within the nfl for having that conversation? >> there is not, but i think this is going to bite them eventually. the great journalist james reston said the media better at covering revolution than evolution. there is no revolution but there is an evolutionary process that does threaten the foundation of

what is by far the most popular sport in the united states. and you see this evolution in fewer youth players, fewer pop warner players, more rebelliousness by unpaid college players. and in the nfl, more players starting to speak out about wanting more control over their cracks. that's a big issue that came out of this, that the idea that a lot of people that said, wow, damar hamlin isn't even guaranteed his contract going forward, and then the bills corrected that and said, we will pay him what he signed for buck that is a very unique place to go, and look what it took to even get there. >> seems everyone is so relieved that that story has a happy ending. what are you watching for as his recovery continues in. >> i'm looking to see how people respond to the rehabilitation that is going take place and realize rehabilitation is in the life of every nfl player.

as the union says, it's the only sport with a 100% injury rate. and i keep thinking of this thing an old player dave megaesy who played in the '60s said to me. he said the nfl is signing away your right to being middle-aged. you go from young to old. >> this conversation has to be continued i think you're right, the media has to rumble with this as well. do we cover them as the risky injury or as the profit center and the superstars. dave, zirin, to be continued. thank you so much. quick break for us. we'll be right back. quick break for us we'll be right back. enough was enough. i talked to an asthma specialist and found out my severe asthma is driven by eosinophils, a type of asthma nucala can help control. now, fewer asthma attacks and less oral steroids that's my nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once-monthly add-on injection for

severe eosinophilic asthma. nucala is not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. talk to your asthma specialist to see if once-monthly nucala may be right for you. and learn about savings at nucala.com there's more to your life than asthma. find your nunormal with nucala.

just look around. there's more to your life this digital agesthma. we're living in, it's pretty unbelievable. problem is, not everyone's fully living in it. nobody should have to take a class or fill out a medical form on public wifi with a screen the size of your hand. home internet shouldn't be a luxury. everyone should have it and now a lot more people can. so let's go.

the digital age is waiting. thank you so