hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york and it's friday. so it's a well-established fact at this point that donald trump wrestles with his own complicated complex, rooted in his own feelings of inadequacy. as a leader, a politician and a businessman. well, that appears that a florida judge has rendered him not just a giant legal loser, he's really hit him where it works by calling the claims in his latest lawsuit, quote, inadequate. ouch. the latest blow to the ex-president on the legal front a federal judge has ordered donald trump and his attorney to pay just about $1 million in sanctions for filing a lawsuit he brought against more than 30 people. he has labeled his political enemies as part of his warped and paranoid world view. it's a group that includes people that won't surprise you.

it was dismissed in less than six months. practically actually laughed out of court. now the ruling by u.s. district judge donald middlebrooks ordering trump and his attorney to cover the legal costs of the defendants in that suit is one for the ages. it is a stinging rebuke of donald trump the man and of donald trump's lies and his tried and true now legal strategy of jamming and gumming up the courts with lawsuits. it starts off like this, quote, this case never should have been brought. its inadequacy -- there is that word again -- as a legal claim was evident from the start. no reasonable lawyer would have filed it. the judge then makes it crystal clear that the ex-president himself bears responsibility for the suit. he goes on, quote, trump is a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries. he is the mastermind of

strategic abuse of the judicial process, and he cannot be seen as a litigant blindly following the advice of a lawyer. here is why according to the judge that trump's, quote, strategic abuse of the judicial system has to be addressed. quote, 31 individuals and entities were needlessly harmed in order to dishonestly advance a political narrative. a continuing pattern of misuse of the courts by trump and his lawyers undermines the rule of law, portrays judges as partisans and diverts resources from those who have suffered actual legal harm. already there are signs that trump's latest setback is having an impact. the ex-president dropped his lawsuit against new york attorney general tish james which is being overseen by the very same judge who just sanctioned him and his attorney. legal consequences, finally, for the disgraced ex-president's weaponization of the law is where we begin today. with us at the table mike schmidt joins us, his by line is

on that reporting, andrew weissmann is back former justice department prosecutor as well as a senior member of robert mueller's special counsel time and tim miller is here, a writer at large for the bulwark, they are all msnbc contributors. mike, this is your reporting, take us through it. >> i mean, so late last night where this message comes through in this channel that my colleagues and i at the "times" are on that this ruling has come out and to me someone who has been covering this donald trump and the investigations of donald trump all the way back until right after the 2016 election i was like, wow. i was like -- >> finally. >> no, well, there have been so many damaging disclosures about donald trump, but so few times do we see there actually are consequences. now, this may be appealed, maybe the number is knocked down, but it was different and it stood out because for one of the first times there was a dollar figure

put on his behavior. to me as someone who at times thinks how do we continue to cover this story? what other disclosures could there be that really change the narrative? i was pretty intrigued by it because there was a consequence and on top of that it's not just a consequence but it's a consequence for the legal team and that the legal avenues pursued by them are coming home with a big pay -- you know, payday on them of a million dollars. so, look, the trump story is one that goes and goes and goes and sometimes it doesn't surprise you and sometimes it does, but for me i said, wow, there is a consequence. >> well, the intrusive disclosure, we read the story at the same time and my thought was the opposite. my thought was where is everybody else? finally this judge who i had never heard of calls bill barr's favorite word bs on the whole gumming up of the courts that is clearly a strategy -- i mean, i

think the most interesting and pointed thing he says is this isn't a client at the whim of his lawyers. he's directing the legal strategy. why did it take this long for a judge to call him out? >> so i actually am more with mike on that. >> of course you are. >> because i think if you step back i think there are two really interesting things that this is emblematic of, one is exactly the fact that the court was willing to say, no, this is on you, you can't say that i'm relying on counsel and that i just followed what counsel said and that's going to be quite important as we go on. he was just, as you said, was not having any of that and saying, you know, this is your consistent pattern. but the other is i think it is a sign that if you look at the three branches of government and how they have fared, even during the trump administration, we have seen by far the judiciary is the one that has stood up and not uniformly, we do have judge canon, but if you look at what

happened to judge canon's rulings, whether it's by trump-appointed lawyers -- judges or not, that was, you know, completely lambasted. you saw judges in the january 6th investigation whether they were trump appointed or not holding people responsible and then in trump's many, many, many claims at the federal and state level that there was a fraudulent election also holding him to account. there are courts already referring lawyers for disciplinary proceedings, you do have rudy giuliani being suspended. so, yes, this is the first sort of large find, but i do think that you're seeing the courts really saying, do you know what, if you want to politically say a lot of things that are not true, we can't do anything about that, but when you say it in a court of law, there are consequences. it is fair to say, you know, why wasn't this done before but i do think that it is a sign that this is a branch of government that really has shown that they

will help the rule of law. >> maybe they can apply for jobs at doj. tim miller, when you look at how january 6th became a fringe production, it is for the reason andrew wiseman is articulating, it's because rudy took his junk lawsuits to state courts and lost every one, i think it's 60 cases he lost, one case was won. the reality, though, is that all the people -- i think i've interviewed at least three quarters of the people that are sued in this frivolous lawsuit, which is no doubt some kernel of an idea he saw on right-wing media and decided to hairs these people even further. they have paid with their reputations, they have paid in all sorts of manner of ways, but they have also had to hire lawyers. i mean, these are not asinine lawsuits that a judge mocks and so we lead with it that don't have real consequences for real human beings and i'm not sure we've seen a tipping point of that ship being righted yet,

have you? >> no, and i think it's overdue, too, nicolle, so count me in your camp on that one. >> thank you, my friend. >> it isn't even just the stop the steal stuff, trump has been doing this stuff since the '80s, you know, frivolous lawsuits, abusing the courts in order to bully counterparties. this is just a long-held strategy for this guy and i'm glad we've finally reached the find out portion of his chicane ri. the one thing i do agree with andrew on which i think is a good point here is is that time and again the courts have really stood up in the face of a big assault. we spend a lot of times on this show and the bulwark talking about areas where democracy is fraying at the seams and institutions are fraying at the seams, as andrew said not every single time but even trump appointed judges in some cases.

so it has been good to see in the face of in mod erch times the unprecedented assault on our democratic institutions that time and again it has been the courts, you know, that have been the ones that have come through. it hasn't been congress, you know, certain not now with a republican congress that was able to do it, the republican senate didn't hold donald trump to account, you know, unfortunately we have had to rely on the courts. i think just one quick thing about the lawyer fee, this is something that i'm worried about and to keep an eye on going forward with the investigations with that republican house, with the investigations of the january 6th committee. >> right. >> with the investigations of staffers, you know, once again, you know, hopefully in these situations we can get these people, you know, restitution if they're having -- not just their reputations but financially having to deal with these ridiculous types of investigations. >> yeah, i mean, ridiculous investigations being waged by in some instances ridiculous lawyers. we found some footage of the lawyer sanctioned in this case,

sort of spreading -- remodeling and who doesn't want to remodel around 4:00 on a friday afternoon. excuse us while we thiel with our housekeeping issues. this is the lawyer on tv sort of spreading -- this is the play back, right, spread disinformation conservative media, file a frivolous lawsuit and hope it doesn't end up before a judge like this one. let me play this for you, mike. >> the former president looked at me and he told me, do you know what, you're not going to win. you can't win. just get rid of it, don't do the case. and i said, no, we have to fight, it's not right what happened. you can only lie so much and i would really appreciate if the left wing media started to be accountable for what they're doing. this is a real -- they're destroying democracy. >> the reality is they're not supposed to be litigious. they're supposed to be cooperative. this is the department of justice. >> so one fox news appearance, a couple on news max, mike, you could take out this individual's

name and face in this lawsuit and this is what they do every time. they accuse the others of doing what they have done over and over and over again. the "washington post" found trump to have lied 36,000 times. there is a problem with lying. there is a problem with inciting insurrections and whatnot but it's not the people they're trying to target with their lawsuit. >> there's also something embarrassing that happened sort of behind the scenes in this suit and that's that about a week after it was filed a server, someone with a suit, went to serve it to jim comey at jim comey's house and jim comey was out in the front yard spreading mulch, you know -- >> of course he was. >> -- and there was -- he was taken out of a pickup truck and spreading mulch in his yard and the server takes a look at him, jim comey is a pretty recognizable guy, takes a look at him and walks up to the front door and knocks on the door, rings the doorbell, looks in, you know, looking for jim comey.

>> he is a hard guy to miss. >> hard guy to miss. so trump's servers are not being that informed. the guy turns around, starts walking out, takes a look at comey, heads out, gets in his car, leaves, doesn't serve him with the suit. >> it gets back to the incompetence, i guess, of all of this operation, from top to bottom his legal operation right side incompetent. you and your colleagues are reported on lawyers having to hire lawyers, will she need a lawyer now? >> i mean, everyone in trump's orbit who is providing him with legal advice now i think is -- has to be thinking about that if not confronting it. look, dating back to don mcgahn in the first year of the presidency he needed a lawyer, but this is -- there is full blown criminal investigations look at every part of this and it doesn't seem like the legal bench that he has is that big, it seems like there is a lot of reoccurring people who are working on different, you know -- all these different

investigations. so definitely i think that all of these lawyers have that and as we've seen the justice department has been trying to talk to them. >> let me read more from this rebuke to you. these allegations about investigating mr. flynn, signing fisa parent applications pertaining to mr. page or leaking information about his interactions with trump do not allege that mr. comey initiated an investigation of trump much less a prosecution and the implausible claim that comey conspired with ms. clinton given the impacts of his announcements on her 2016 campaign not only lack substance but is categorically absurd. the amended complaint is a hodgepodge of disconnected often immaterial events followed by an implausible conclusion. this is a deliberate attempt to harass, to tell a story without regard to facts. i thought of the dominion billion and a half dollar libel lawsuit against fox news.

this is as accurate a claim of trump's not just lifetime but his presidency. to an implausible claim that comey conspired -- given the impact -- you know, basically this judge saying that comey hurt her. it is categorically absurd. i wonder -- i wonder what we do with this. i mean, you look at how david carter's pronouncement, again, from the other branch -- from another branch of government that donald trump and john eastman likely committed felonies, had it had a transformative effect on not just how people covered january 6 but how americans saw donald trump's criminality in the deadly insurrection. i wonder how we take a judge without a dog in the fight other than dealing with the cases before him who is plainly calling it out. >> i do think one thing to keep focused on is as much as everyone is thinking about criminal accountability and certainly that is very valuable thing to keep an eye on, suits like dominion, this case with

sanctions, this sort of civil remedies are really important and now that the former president is repeating some of the same lies now that he is a former president, the protections you have, you have a lot of immunities and privileges when you say things as the president, those don't exist anymore. >> yeah. so his saying these things is going to expose him over and over to these kinds of lawsuits. many people are asking the question in the dominion case essentially will he get added in and you will see more of these civil suits. one of the reasons we have not seen rudy giuliani and sidney powell, these sort of stellar lawyers making a lot of public comments is because they are in the middle of a billion dollar lawsuit where they are making preposterous defenses and there really is an effect in having a civil and criminal accountability and today is a good example. there is no way to top what the judge did here.

>> correct. >> and to say it in any better words, it's so beautifully written that there is no point in paraphrasing because it's just so incredible. >> the other big reveal in this to miller is that donald trump is still at it. he had durham, right, he got -- he actually got a real u.s. attorney, durham was once highly regarded as a u.s. attorney, i think, out of connecticut, he and his deputy took the job, they said we will do it. they investigated the investigators and they traveled to italy, alongside bill barr, just picture them on the plane together, right? they went all over the world hunting for fraud or wrongdoing in the investigations into donald trump. they spent millions of dollars. they found, i don't know, the legal word for it, nothing. jack didelly squat. but now what john durham couldn't find elena habba is going to find? it's amaze that go trump will find somebody to run the same

play against the same perceived enemies. >> the john durham and bill barr "white lotus" imagery in my head, wash that out to get to my answer. look, yeah, i mean, it's kind of amazing on one hand that he can find people you would think. >> right. >> i think about the embarrassment that all of these folks have gone through. on the other hand you can see her there. it might not be where you want to be spending your afternoons on newsmax but there is this theme, this access and there's always going to be that draw. i think that this is, you know, something to keep in mind as we look ahead to a trump 2024 campaign, that he has announced, right, is that there will, in fact, be people that sign up for this again. it's not going to be the a team, you know, and i think that both on the legal side and the political side he's continuing to, you know, find new rubes both to believe the bs he's selling but also to come down to mar-a-lago and work for him.

>> it is -- it is sad. i guess he offers to show them his classified trinkets. the judge seems to allude to sanctions for her as well the lawyer. >> it looks like he was evenly divided between the two of them. >> whether trump pays his share. >> donald trump with a history of not paying lawyers, i can't imagine is very happy about the fact that he has to find a million dollars in crash to give. he can appeal this and we were reading through it very quickly last night but i believe there was something in there where he could appeal it under seal, but i think he would have to say what his net worth was so i'm sure that's not something that he wants to do under seal. that sounds pretty dicey given everything we know about his net worth and what he thinks. so, you know, i don't know what happens from here. it is interesting that they did drop this other suit today as quickly as they did and, look,

the other thing about it and the judge hit on this and some of the quotes that you read from the ruling show this, this has been his tool. this has been his go-to. he didn't have the -- it didn't seem like when he was in the white house that there was -- you know, he had a lot of other tools to play with, but this is such an old school long-standing tool of his and to be rebuked on that, not just for what he did here but for the history of this and the pattern of this and for a president of the united states who obviously ran -- you know, had the justice department underneath him and to have this handed to him, it just -- it just -- it was just, you know, there have not been a lot of consequences. he suffered the ultimate political consequence in 2020, but besides that -- >> there have been no legal consequences really handed over to him that stood out. thank you. you're going to be back later in the show, later in the next hour. andrew wiseman and still miller

stick around a little bit longer. when we come back it's been a pile up of news about embattled congressman george santos since the first big story broke about his completely fabricated resume. that story broke in the "new york times" one month ago. we will have a chance to talk to one of the reporters who has had nearly two dozen more stories on this beat since then about where he thinks this saga is heading next. plus, another power grab from the power hungry governor of the state of florida. he has banned books, muffled teachers from talking about who they really are and now -- well, now he's censoring some parts of american history in high schools throughout his state. we will tell you about the latest move. later in the show in his very first ever television interview since the congressional investigation into the january 6th insurrection concluded, that committee's lead investigator tim hahey will be our guest live on set. how their expansive and wide-ranging probe came to be and where he thinks the justice department will take the

mountain of evidence they so anxiously wanted and produce all those stories and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. se" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. we're talking about... rooty tooty fresh 'n fruity yep, it's back. for a limited time. the six dollar rooty tooty fresh 'n fruity combo. 2 eggs, 2 bacon strips, and 2 fruit topped pancakes. only from ihop. when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis persists... put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when uc got unpredictable,... i got rapid symptom relief with rinvoq. check. when uc held me back... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc got the upper hand... rinvoq helped visibly repair the colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief. lasting, steroid-free remission. and a chance to visibly repair the colon lining. check. check. and check. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke,

and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older... with at least 1 heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq... as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. put uc in check and keep it there, with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq. and learn how abbvie could help you save. 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. because the way we care is anything but ordinary. ♪♪ as a business owner, is your bottom line isry. always top of mind. 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. i'd like to thank our sponsor liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. contestants ready? go!

only pay for what you need. jingle: liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. one of the biggest stories consuming official washington right now has no end in sight. it's been one month since "the new york times" reporters broke a story about an incoming republican congressman with a resumé that, let's say, scratched a little bit. turned out to be full of lies. it was supposed to be for a simple profile piece about a new lawmaker named george santos with what looked like an inspiring personal story and a

quote dynamic biography of philanthropic efforts. the surprise they got in their first basic fact checking phone call led to more curious investigating up and down that resumé. what they found pretty quickly was a serial liar who deceived local new york republicans, donors and then voters about nearly every aspect of his life. since then reporters michael gold and grace ashford have published new reporting nearly every day moving the story forward about more lies, new investigations and growing calls for his resignation from within the republican party. here is where we are this week, we're following revelations that george santos lied about his mom being in the south tower on september 11th. he's pushing back against reports that he took money from a fund that was supposed to go to a veteran's dying dog's surgery. now "the new york times" is writing about an investor who says he was duped by george santos and has been in talks with the sec.

it is safe to say reporters michael gold and grace ashford could not have predicted from that first story would take any of us. joining us now "new york times" politics reporter, michael gold, tim allen and michael wiseman are still with us. michael, i spoke with you when the basic elements of george santos's resumé had turned out not to be true but before these really dark, dark and fantastical stories and the people injured by those lies started to speak out, i'm thinking of the veteran yesterday, thinking about anyone impacted who actually did lose someone in september 11th. where are we heading? >> i think that's a great question and i don't have a great answer for it right now. you know, we are at a place where ten republicans in congress have called on congressman santos to step down. it doesn't seem like there's going to be any pressure from republican leadership.

for now it seems like his seat in congress is safe. at the moment we know that federal and local prosecutors are looking into the possibility of whether mr. santos committed crimes whether through finance issues or the lies he told on the campaign trail. we know that there are at least two pending ethics investigations that might be in the works, the house ethics committee has been asked to take a look at the congressman as well as the fec. it's hard to say where the story goes from here. i think there have been a lot of revelations that have come out that we weren't expecting and i don't know whether there are more or not. >> i think i joked about this the first time i talked to you, you know, i said we may get to the point where the things that stayed true are easier to keep track of than the lies. are we at that point yet? what in terms of his political persona that he took to the district in which he won has held up? >> i think it stands his stance on some issues are clear. he has said that crime and inflation are his two major issues, he's doubled down on that. did he an interview i believe

last week on steve bannon's podcast, representative matt gaetz was filling in, he said crime was his top property. we know he has worked on some firms in his biography, link bridge investors he has done work for, he worked for harbor city capital that our story was about today and we know that he worked at a company called met global doing hospitality technology. there are things he has said that have been true and his argument since we published our story is that voters elected him for his stance on the i wish issues not personal geography. i think he ran in 2020 as a much further right candidate than he represented himself in 2022 and it's not clear to us yet how his politics will play out in congress. i don't know how his voters might feel if he turns back to the right. >> and what is sort of your assessment of the vigor with which new york state republicans have turned against him, calling him a disgrace and a liar and not even recognizing the

validity of his victory really? >> i think it speaks to a kind of betrayal that new york republicans have felt, especially in nassau county on long island. the sentiment at the press conference where all of these elected officials called for his resignation is that this was a man who came from outside their party's organization but they trusted him. he seemed to have the best interest of them and their constituents at heart and then for them to find out that a lot of the things that he told them were falsehoods i think there is a profound sense of betrayal. the other piece of the equation is long island republicans had a great year. we were told there would be a red wave all over the country, it didn't materialize but it did materialize on long island and i think there is a sense that what's happened now with congressman santos has threatened the progress that republicans have made after years of being shut out of electoral politics here. >> i mean, andrew, it threatens the republican brand entirely, he's making a mockery of anything that they thought they were going to usher in as newly

in the leadership in the house republican congress -- house republican caucus. i wonder of the myriad of investigations which one do you think will move the fastest and threatens him the most. >> one the comment was that crime was his top priority, you don't have to be sigmund freud to evaluate that comment because he would have that expertise. i think one of the things that's going to be tricky for him is the ethics investigation and i know you might be thinking but the ethics investigation might lead nowhere, but he's going to have to fill out forms and answer questions both in writing and orally. that could be really difficult and that could be sort of an exit ramp for the republican leadership that you know are thinking how do we get rid of him. >> right. >> and they're probably rooting for the federal and state prosecutors although it's not a good look to have to get rid of somebody only after they are indicted and obviously that

takes time, but i would think a financial investigation is definitely in the works and is going to pose some exposure. but i think false statements to an ethics committee could be a very easy sort of off-ramp here. >> is that the same as the crime of lying to congress? >> exactly. this is -- everyone has a crash course in law. absolutely. those are made under penalty of perjury and that's a felony. so that sort of seems like something that could clearly target him and, you know, that's something that he's going to need really good counsel as to how he's going to answer that and obviously if he just takes the fifth, you know, that also is another way for the republicans eventually to dealing with this which is that you haven't actually answered the questions that are necessary. >> it suggests that he knows he's guilty of something or would answer them. tim miller, one of the things that's so remarkable about this story -- actually two things. some of the shenanigans on the

right i think outside of washington it's hard to sort of -- not that they go -- santos said that he couldn't tell the truth to his voters because it would go over their head. that's not the problem. voters are very smart and understand these things at an actual level and an intuitive level and he is a fraud, full stop, but no one can lie and keep their job, not at the post office, no the at the grocery store, not at nbc, not at the bulwark, not at the justice department. you simply can't have a background check or form -- you can't be a baby-sitter, you can't be a dog walker, you can't adopt a dog but you can be in kevin mccarthy's house republican conference. what does that say? >> yeah, no doubt. i mean, there literally is i don't think any job -- we don't even know the person's name. what would you hire him for? we keep calling him santos but are we sure? >> he has used other names, right. >> a boyfriend the other day they did an interview with who said i've known him as devolder.

he has a drag name as ell kitara. there are levels to the crimes that andrew has gone over. we have to gloss over some of them. he has crimes in brazil from when he stole the checks of the dying person in order to buy shoes. we have unknown about his finances still which i'm sure michael is continuing his good reporting and looking into and i think there will be more to come. we don't know how this guy with no money gave all this money to his campaign. a lot of questions about some of those disbursements on the campaign. i think there's campaign finance issues. there's layers upon layers of this. the republican conference is just the final or continued maybe rather corruption of the trump era which is like there is no red line. you can do no wrong and be in our party. we will take you for a job that you couldn't be hired for if you were a dog walker and i think it's even particularly acute right now for kevin mccarthy because he only has this four-vote gap and he just passed a rule that said you have to be present to vote, meanwhile, one

of the republicans had an injury in arizona is going to be in the hospital so that takes you don to three. so i disagree with andrew's point about how i think they're hoping that -- whoever takes this problem off their hands. long island this has been a traditionally democratic district, it's hard to imagine that he gets replaced by another republican after all this ludicrous behavior. >> michael gold, a lot of what we know because the republican party is everything tim just said and more and it doesn't have the ability to purge people that don't vet out, i'm not clear that they even vet people. we know from the journalism about this race and about this congressman and a lot of it is your journalism so thank you so much for telling the story and keeping us informed. to you and your colleagues, our thanks. tim miller, thank you for starting us off and for taking my side in the last block. andrew returns with mike at the end of the next hour to be part of that conversation with tim hafey. up next for us governor ron

desantis of florida says african american history lacks educational value. we will tell you what he's doing about that ridiculous statement and world view on the other side of a break. don't go anywhere. r side of a break don't go anywhere. from the ris. 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.

♪ every search you make ♪ ♪ every click you take ♪ ♪ i'll be watching you ♪ - [narrator] the internet doesn't have to be so creepy, the duckduckgo app, lets you search and browse pria blocking most trackers all forf your search history is never tracked, so it can't be shared. and when you leave search, duckduckgo helps keep companies from watching you as you brows. join tens of millions of people making the easy switch by downloading the app today. duckduckgo, privacy simplified.

so, you're 45. that's the perfect age to see some old friends, explore new worlds, and to start screening for colon cancer. yep. with colon cancer rising in adults under 50, the american cancer society recommends starting to screen earlier, at age 45. i'm cologuard, a noninvasive way to screen at home, on your schedule. and i find 92% of colon cancers. i'm for people 45+ at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider if cologuard is right for you. desantis in an attempt to pander to republican primary voters ahead of an anticipated 2024 presidential run is seemingly

working to erase blackness from florida's curriculum. the "miami herald" reports this, quote, without bothering to give floridians any details desantis' department of education rejected an advanced placement course on african american studies that prepares students for the essential college entry exam, the s.a.t. the powers that be simply decided that the course, quote, lacks educational value, end quote. it's just the latest move from the governor in his so-called crew said against what he calls wokeness after the passage of florida's stoep woke act last year. joining us our conversation basil michael democratic strategist and director of the public policy program at hunter college. you know, we cover the intersection of republican politics and domestic violent extremism so often and the problem and the thing that makes people dangerous is never being overeducated. what is this about? >> well, it's the continuation

of the politics of cruelty that we've talked about quite often and to be clear ron desantis has been busy not only did he make this move and you talked about the sort of woke education bill but he has been replacing trustees on at least one florida university, he's been actively involved in school board elections so that -- and this is particularly problematic because what that means is that from the cradle to college as long as desantis is in charge the government will not allow academic institutions to teach black history unless it's being authored and sanctioned by white conservatives. that is incredibly troubling and, you know, one of the more pernicious aspects of this is that this is an ap course, there are about 38 of them, there is german language and culture, irish language and culture, italian language and culture, world history, human geography

and apparently in florida no black history. so as you said in the beginning it's an effort to essentially eradicate all institutions of any mention of the contributions of african-americans. and the fact that this was an ap class, it would allow black students to see themselves in college-level work. taking that away from them is, again, this politics of cruelty. and just very quickly, there is an author named latoya baldwin clark who wrote a great piece about stealing education, she talks about something i absolutely believe in, as education as it seems becomes more and more exclusive and not inclusive, it's being treated more like private property and less a public good. if ron desantis has the opportunity to be president of the united states you better believe that he will do everything he can to nationalize these policies. >> i want to follow up on that very idea.

i think we have two hours, we could fill all two of them every day with stupid human tricks coming out of the state of florida republicans. but the other part of it is he's popular in florida. these aren't disqualifying things. what does that speak to? what is wrong with us that these things don't disqualify him, they make him a much talked about potential presidential candidate. >> well, it's absolutely right. in fact, as much as we may have questions and complaints about what he's done particularly through the pandemic, florida voters rewarded him for that. and should he decide to run for president and be the nominee, should he even be president? you better believe that even though federal policy doesn't have that much impact on state and local level education policy and curriculum, he would make sure that every republican governor in this country is following through on his view of what curriculum and k 12 education and indeed higher ed

should be. as we said we could talk about stupid human tricks all day, but this is the stuff that really impacts the future of this country, it's nation building, it is where you engage in cultural, political and social reproduction that happens at the school level and he is making sure that it happens in his way according to his followers and supporters. >> it is an incredibly political move and we should talk about it for an hour at some point because it has our youngest citizens in this country as it's either itended or unintended victims. basal, thank you for joining us for this story. up for us dr. redlender and his partner will tell us how the humanitarian efforts in ukraine are going and also about their latest plan to help the hundreds of thousands of displaced and traumatized children and families still very much in need

ahead of their next trip back to the region. that's next. their next trip bao the region that's next. so it's decided, we'll park even deeper into parking spaces so people think they're open. surprise. [ laughs ] [ horn honks, muffled talking ] -can't hear you, jerry. -sorry. uh, yeah, can we get a system where when someone's bike is in the shop, then we could borrow someone else's? -no! -no! or you can get a quote with america's number-one motorcycle insurer and maybe save some money while you're at it. all in favor of that. [ horn honking ] there's a lot of buttons and knobs in here.

if your business kept on employees through the pandemic, getrefunds.com can see if it may qualify for a payroll tax refund of up to $26,000 per employee. all it takes is eight minutes to get started. then work with professionals to assist your business with its forms and submit the application. go to getrefunds.com to learn more. nothing. nothing. absolutely, nothing. it really is something. as an expedia member, you can save up to 30% when you add a hotel to your flight. so you can have a bit more money, to do even less. because you've got a whole lot of nothing to do and absolutely nowhere to be.

♪ what will you do? ♪ what will you change? ♪ will you make something better? ♪ will you create something entirely new? ♪ our dell technologies advisors provide you with the tools and expertise you need to do incredible things. because we believe there's an innovator in all of us. your heart is the beat of life. if you have heart failure, entrust your heart to entresto. entresto helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. 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. as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those... ...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com ukrainian president zelenskyy is making another urgent request of ukraine's allies in the west. aid to help keep that country's power grid online and functioning. ukraine has pleaded with the u.s. and other allies to secure transformers, generators and other equipment to prevent a total collapse of the energy

grid and hence the heat and wifi and everything in the face of a harsh winter and a relentless barrage of air strikes from russian forces. the kremlin's attacks from damaged about 40% of ukraine's electrical network leaving 17 million ukrainians, many of them children, without a regular supply of electricity, clean and safe water and heat during the cold winter months. let's bring in msnbc public health analyst our friend dr. irwin redlener professor of pediatrics at the albert einstein college of medicine an karen redlener executive vice president and co-founder of the children's health fund, they are both co-found rts of the ukraine children's children's action project a new initiative designed to provide urgent mental health and educational support to displaced ukrainian children living in a war zone. nice to have you here as well. you're heading back to ukraine. tell me what your mission will be this time. >> well, our mission always is to try to make sure that we're

partnering with people that know what they're doing, that are going to fulfill the mission that we have. in other words, we will raise the money and partner with people but we want to make sure that they will deliver exactly what's needed over there. so this is one of the purposes, we're going to probably be going back every six or eight weeks at the most. we just have to keep track of things. the other thing is we're meeting incredible people over there. the ukrainians are very resilient, they are fantastic, the children are amazing and we have to keep up the fight. it's not just a military thing, we have to make sure from a humanitarian perspective that these kids and their families are being taken care of through what a brutal winter will become thanks to putin's unrelenting terror campaign. >> i mean, the helicopter crash, it's not completely clear if that was part of the terror campaign or just an accident, but you couldn't -- if you tried to conjure up the most tragic of circumstances, a helicopter

crash into a kindergarten would be it. children are not spared from this war, not just losing moms and dads and being far away from them, but losing their lives and now facing a winter without heat and water. as you sort of triage the needs of ukraine's children, where do you put those needs on a matrix or on a list? >> right. right. well, irwin and i have been working for many decades with children that have very little, that are living in circumstances with a lot of challenges, poverty, violence, other kinds of situations, and, you know, we know from that experience that education and health and mental health just priorities for them because if they don't receive the education and receive the support they need from a health perspective at their young age, then their lives are very changed in the future so that's our focus is to address mental health issues either through the lens of the teachers that are working with kids helping the teachers help

children with trauma. direct services to kids. but we have a lot of people as irwin said that live in lviv that have insights that people from out of the country don't so we are working with great partners, organizations that help us understand where to target our funding and our programs. >> what do you need? >> well, first of all right now things karen just described, our mission, that's our mission but starting in october when whatever kind of war it was was converted to just nonstop terrorism, knocking out as karen was saying electrical grids, water supplies and et cetera, also targeting schools and hospitals, nothing is off-limits to these people. but now there's a humanitarian need that's layered upon the other need and like we were

talking yesterday about the fact that the russians knocked out and destroyed every single school bus and operational vehicle in the area so they're going shopping for us in germany and around europe to get -- if we get the money to buy the school buses and drive them. >> for people that donate could help to buy a new school bus. that's incredible. >> there's no other organizations that are doing that and then we're contributing to president zelenskyy's program. >> presidential fund. >> presidential fund to buy lots and lots of generators. i mean, i don't know how people get through a winter without heat and electricity and access to clean water. it's just frightening and it's the overlay on top of the other challenges that karen is talking about, make sure these kids to get their psychological issues

diagnosed and treated and then for god's sake get them to school. we know from the pandemic here when lots and lots of children who lived in adversity didn't go to school for a year they're behind the eight ball in ways that will be very difficult to fix, so we have a big agenda and we're just trying to make sure we got the right people working with us and that every dime that we raise is going where it needs to go. >> on the ground in ukraine. >> on the ground, yeah. >> you guys are my heroes for doing this work. i think -- we talked to igor all the time about what life is like in kyiv and it's what you're describing, with civilians as the targets of russian strikes are so dependent on these centers with generators. thank you for your work. >> hoping to meet igor. >> we'll put you guys together.

thank you so much for being here. a quick break for us. www..ukrainecap.org. check it out. share what you can. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. we really had our hands full with our two-year-old. so naturally, we doubled down with a new puppy. thankfully, we also have tide ultra-oxi with odor eliminators. between stains and odors, it can handle double trouble. for the #1 stain fighter and odor remover, it's got to be tide. in the next minute, 250 couples will discover...

(laughs) they're gonna need more space... yep...the house... we gotta sell it! we gotta stage it. excuse me. fix it up. they don't pre-rinse. strangers touching everything. or, skip the hassles and sell with confidence to opendoor. close in a matter of days. oh, wow. when life's doors open, we'll handle the house. request a cash offer at opendoor.com ♪ [acoustic soul music throughout] ♪ ♪ [acoustic soul music throughout] ♪ when life's doors open, we'll handle the house. ♪ [acoustic soul music throughout] ♪ (vo) if you have thyroid eye disease and things are a no go because you keep seeing double, or...your bloodshot eyes have you seeing red,

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." you've all heard me say it, right, don't go anywhere but today i really mean it. in a minute we have a television exclusive that you're not going to want to miss. you may not know his name yet but i promise you know his work. he was one of the january 6th select committee secret weapons, tim was the chief investigator for that massive history-making investigation and he's here in our studio live for his first television interview. we have a million questions for him from what he thinks doj's next move should be to the unbelievable true story of cassidy hutchinson's testimony, how it came to be next after a quick break. thank you so much. >> thank you. but shingrix protects.

proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today. 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. ubrelvy helps u fight migraine attacks. u put it all on the line. u do it all. so u bring ubrelvy. it can quickly stop migraine in its tracks within 2 hours... without worrying if it's too late or where you are. unlike older medicines, ubrelvy is a pill that directly blocks a protein believed to be a cause of migraine. do not take with strong cyp3a4 inhibitors. most common side effects were nausea and tiredness. migraine pain relief starts with u. learn how abbvie can help you save. ask about ubrelvy, the anytime, anywhere migraine medicine. ♪ every search you make ♪ ♪ every click you take ♪

♪ i'll be watching you ♪ - [narrator] the internet doesn't have to be so creepy, the duckduckgo app, lets you search and browse pria blocking most trackers all forf your search history is never tracked, so it can't be shared. and when you leave search, duckduckgo helps keep companies from watching you as you brows. join tens of millions of people making the easy switch by downloading the app today. duckduckgo, privacy simplified.

hi, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. when the history of these extraordinary times we are living through is written, one of the things that will be remembered is the sudden and dramatic rise of political violence and extremism in american politics. whether it's the failed republican candidate who masterminded a string of shootings against his political rivals in new mexico or the unstable assailant who brutally attacked paul pelosi with a hammer, this kind of extremism is becoming our new normal in america. let's turn back the clock 5 1/2

years. we'll turn to the summer of 2017 when this kind of violence and violent rhetoric was still mostly unfathomable, when a mob of violent extremists marched through charlottesville chanting, jews will not replace us. in the wake of that deadly white supremacist rally, the city of charlottesville faced a reckoning of its own. in a city they wanted to know how did it happen in our city and how do we make sure it doesn't happen again? the results of that reckoning and the questions being asked was a brutally honest 270-page postmortem of how what happened in charlottesville came to pass. among its conclusions was this, quote, the charlottesville police department were ill-prepared and devised a flawed plan for responding to the rally leaving to disastrous results. that brute lil a honest analysis

of what went wrong in charlottesville soon became known as the heaphy reporter, a nod to the man who led that investigation, former u.s. attorney tim heaphy. now, the name tim heaphy may not ring a bell for you just now just yet. for close viewers of this program they're familiar with tim heaphy's work. >> was there anyone in that conversation who in your observation had too much to drink? what was your view at the time as to what he should or shouldn't say? >> with mr. meadows and the -- >> i believe had. >> how about pennsylvania, we were talking to the u.s. attorney in philadelphia about it, the alleged discrepancy because absentee ballots issued and those cast. >> attorney general barr made a public announcement on december 1st less than a month that he

had received on december 1st you -- >> was it your impression the vice president had directly conveyed his position on these issues to the president, not just to the world through a dear colleague letter but directly to president trump? >> many times. >> that was former u.s. attorney tim heaphy whose expertise in understanding and litigating these issues understanding and examining political violence and extremism, whose skill with unwieldy witnesses and unwieldy mountains of evidence made him the perfect candidate to tackle the january 6th select committee's massive investigation. it is why he was recruited to partner with chairman bennie thompson and vice chair liz cheney and why he became one of the committee's not so secret weapons. joining us now is tim heaphy, chief investigator for the january 6th select committee. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me, nicolle. >> i listened to your podcast.

it was a little wonky. you drew my attention to your body of work sort of one of the inflection points being charlottesville and another being january 6th. talk about that a little bit. >> you know, lawyers become reluctant experts because of the work they do, and as your lead-in indicated i did a long report about a horrific incident in charlottesville where i still live and not a lot of people had spent time looking into not just that event but how she's vents come together so when the january 6th committee was being pulled together, i was interested in helping do something similar for january 6th and there are a lot of commonalities, nicolle, between what happened in charlottesville both in terms of what law enforcement knew in advance, how it was handled, some of the same kinds of intersections between people that informed both of that. so for me january 6th was not my first rodeo, so to speak, i had,

unfortunately, been through something like this before. >> donald trump appears in both. he describes people on both sides and says we love you after the insurrection. what impact does he have on it? >> he has a huge impact. we talk to both people who were at the charlottesville event and a lot of people who were at the capitol on january 6th who explicitly gave him credit for talk about him as the impetus for their personal participation. i think going back to 2017 a lot of these groups and this was a unite the right rally that was sort of purportedly bringing lots of different interests together gained in popularity and became more perceived as legitimate because of the president essentially his rhetoric and some of the sort of subtle language he used that appealed to this sense of sort of white nationalism. and then on january 6th a lot said they were there because they felt like he wanted them to be there.

>> steven ayers. >> one of our hearing witnesses says he a carpenter in erie, pennsylvania, and started paying closer attention to elections issues through facebook and when we asked him what made somebody like you want to participate in this? he said president trump. he wanted me there. he wanted us there. i went because he asked me to and a lot of people told that so president trump has a direct impact on the ascent of this. >> the witnesses you presented through the public hearings seeming they agreed with that. i mean, it's the most striking turn for bill barr maybe on cnn before the election, trotting out this disinformation about fraud and really busting doj norms saying he would investigate it. he becomes one of your star witnesses saying, i told him it was bullshit. what made them in the presence of you tell the truth about trump's reel when it came to violent extremism?

were they afraid of what they created? >> let's use bill as an example. he did the right thing because i think he put fidelity to principle over political self-interest, right? he is a longtime conservative republican who wanted president trump to win re-election. he did not and bill barr was more faithful to the rule of law as attorney general to evidence and he didn't see it and he told the truth and there were a lot of people we met over the course of our investigation who put principle over personal self-interest including members of our committee like vice chair cheney. she risked her entire career to do the right thing, to step up and say, hey, this is not right. even if it is something that hurt her politically, she did the right thing and then a lot of our witnesses were in that category thankfully because they told the truth, we were able to tell the truth. >> the body of evidence slides the time line back to the summer and email from tom fenton from

july plotting to call the election rigged so you could look at bill barr's efforts as part of the incitement. was it his testimony after the fact was so valuable you took everyone willing to make the case against trump. >> what attorney general barr did right after the election in orrizing u.s. attorneys to conduct voter fraud investigations before an election was certified at the time was sort of criticized as helping the president or was a partisan move. >> unprecedented. >> it was different than prior practice. he explained it to us and i credit this. that he thought for legitimacy of the election it was important to look into these things quickly. we wouldn't wait until certification. and it's because of his november 9th memo to u.s. attorneys go ahead and look into these things if they're specific and credible that allowed the justice department to quickly look at these allegations and determine that they were false. so when the president in the presence of rich donoghue and jeff rosen and first bill barr

said, oh, what about michigan and pennsylvania? they said, sir, we've looked at that and authorized u.s. attorneys and the fbi to conduct investigations. there's nothing there. there was a factual predicate for that which was made possible by attorney general barr's memo so i frankly credit that his november 9th memo to u.s. attorneys was anticipating controversy and trying to provide answers for america to give the election more legitimacy. >> was he trying to create answers for america or was it trump's randings and ravings, 60 lawsuits failed and there was never any evidence of fraud. >> he knew going in there would be controversy and even before the election about -- this is going to be riddled with fraud. exactly right. so there was -- there were going to be questions about the legitimacy of the election. and because of that, he, i think, rightly decided we got to look into this. regardless of which way those investigations go in order to be able to tell people the truth and uncover the facts if they

exist, if there's fraud we want to know about that. if not we want to know that too. >> if you put back on your extremism glasses, what does it say about where that 40% of the country is that wants bill barr ran an investigation for which i'm not sure how much predication there really was but to placate donald trump and disprove something that was never true to begin with, you still had people willing to come to the capitol and die. >> and to this day continue to believe that there was fraud absent any evidence. it's been two years since president biden was inaugurated. there still hasn't been -- now, manifestation of what we're dealing with in america we don't agree on a common set of facts. our goal with the committee was to start with facts. our goal in charlottesville was to start with facts. if we can't agree collectively about what happened and tell a credible story about how these things came together, who was there, what happened, that should be a baseline on which we agree on in this country.

that's really troubling. it's one of the many manifestations of diswe have to fix. >> one of the things that seemed like a strategy and you'll tell me if it was, is that all of the people delivering the truth and the facts seem to be high-profile republicans as you said from inside the trump coalition. rusty bowers, brad raffensperger, all of the trump white house officials, was that by design? >> no, it was because they were the ones who were in the room when it happened. they were the ones who had relevant information. our witnesses were almost exclusively trump supporters, were conservative republicans who, again, wanted him to win. they were the people with personal knowledge because they were in the white house, because they were state legislators who had gotten these pressured phone calls. that wasn't designed by us to put a bunch of republicans up there. they had the critical knowledge about what happened, the fact they were republican, i think, gave them more credibility or gave our evidence sort of more veracity because they were not

doing it out of political motivation. >> they had none. >> they lost as a result of this. bill barr left office. mike pence told the truth on january 6th and that was to his own detriment and gave what they said a lot more credibility and our investigation more heft. >> it had tons of heft and you had members. u.s. attorneys and members of congress are two different species, right? is that fair? >> that's a fair -- >> they co-exited in an historically economy tri matter in everything we saw but i wonder if you could take me through how congressional committee came to adapt some of the most effective investigative tools for criminal probes. >> yeah, that's a good question. i haven't done any congressional investigations before this. my understand something that typically staff kind of does the work and they create scripts that the members take and

largely read. they're kind of like nicolle wallaces on the dais. our nine members were really engaged. were day to day turning the wheels of the investigation, attending interviews, i briefed them every week as to what we were learning and they had a ton of questions. i typically had ten minutes at our member meeting that would stretch to 20 or 30 because they were so invested. we had really good lawyers on the committee from the vice chair ms. cheney, mr. schiff, ms. lofgren and even the nonlawyers were really engaged so sort of collaborative. we were setting the schedule. we were doing the vast majority of the preparation but they were actively participating so it really was, i don't want to call it a collaboration because they're in charge and we're their staff. it was clearly there was a hierarchy but it was collaborative and they did do a substantial amount of the actual

nuts and bottoms fact gathering. >> tell me about the decision to use some of the tools, there was some reporting that phone records were pursued. taping depositions, ended up being a really valuable tool for the public phase of this. how did you innovate those tools being used in a congressional setting? >> yeah, we started with the premise that the 9/11 commission report was kind of the gold standard. i read it in the summer of '21 as i was getting ready to take on -- >> i went back and read it too when the bipartisan commission that republicans were for or were against fell apart. >> which they should have approved. america is very different now than it was 0 years ago. in terms of how it assesses, receives information. so we knew pretty early that couldn't just produce a lengthy written report and think that it would have the same impact that

the 9/11 commission report had. >> why? >> because people are used to kinger hitting social media driven visual information. so that we were going to have to present our findings in multiple ways, some of which would be visually in hearings and hearings, there really weren't hearings but presentations of findings. they were essentially -- >> productions. >> exactly. so we made a decision and i think it was ms. lofgren pretty early asked if we were taping every interview and i think i said i don't think we are. we did mark milley and jeff rosen and rich donoghue right at the beginning and didn't tape them. audiotaped them but after that we started videotaping all of them thinking already and this was like late 2021, hey, these clips will ultimately help us tell the story in a way that america now needs us to tell the story, not just the written report, but a visual way of presenting the information. that was a really good decision and it ultimately was the raw

material that we used and that our help, our production staff helped to put those presentations together. >> every drop of news was covered, i think the only modern parallel was the mueller report but every subpoena or in the case of the republican members of congress, there were invitations. none of the republicans took you up on that. what did you want to talk to them about? >> they were directly involved in the relevant events of what happened before the election. there was a lot of discussion about who was going to object to what states. they were involved in some of the pressure that was being put on state officials and state legislators. they were a big part of the context of january 6th was the political coup and the stop the steal false narrative and a lot of members of congress were directly involved in that. we had gotten a lot of text messages from mark meadows and a lot of them reflected communication between white house and these members of congress so we had very direct predicates about which we wanted to ask them which we laid out in

these letters, in the hope that they would come in and share with us their perspective and as you said, none of them was willing to do that. >> cassidy hutchinson testified in 19 of them in the roosevelt room, half stopped by to drink. one of the more bullet proof vests. their own criminality, what should happen to them as far as doj is concerned? >> i think doj is going to look at the entire context just like we did and decide who specifically intended to disrupt the joint session, who specifically joined a conspiracy, they're going to look at evidence of intent to commit crimes. we put forth some of our own thoughts about what her evidence showed there. whether or not members of congress, there's evidence of their intent, hard for us to tell because we didn't get a chance to talk to them directly. they were definitely involved in efforts to use the joint session

to challenge the legitimacy certified results of the elections in these contested states. their knowledge of the fraud and their purpose in doing that, that is the kind of thing that doj is going to have to argue and we didn't draw conclusions on that because we didn't get close enough to them to determine what fire intent was. >> you did draw conclusions on four crimes that the committee believes there was probable cause to believe trump committed. one is the one you just talked about. obstructing an official proceeding. should donald trump be prosecuted for that crime? >> our evidence over 18 months established we think ample evidence that donald trump specifically intended to interfere, obstruct, that with the joint session. the key for the department of justice is his intent. so question that his actions and words did cause disruption. the question is, did he act corruptly? was there specific intent when he issued those words and when he took all those actionness

advance to disrupt the transfer of power in the joint session. we think, yes, the answer to that based on what we found. now, the justice department has tools we didn't have and they may get mark meadows and get vice president pence. they may get some of these members of congress to provide information and it's unclear which way that will go. will that provide additional evidence of the president's specific intent to disrupt the official proceeding? i think that's likely given what we learned. but will it potentially be exculpatory, potentially. we wouldn't have made the criminal referral if we didn't think the evidence exists of the commission of these federal crimes, but the doj will go further and they will have access and tools that we didn't have to get additional information. >> can we talk about mark meadows for a second. his attorney at least as far as i understand is george -- >> yeah. >> who kept him out of trouble while also arming the committee

with an unbelievably damaging body of evidence. >> yes. >> is that a fair analysis? >> look, frankly, i think it was a changed course. we were on a process with mr. meadows for him to come in and testify. he brought a lot of documents. usually it's all or nothing. people say i will cooperate. i have some privileged lines i want to draw it's sort of a yes or no thing. and steve bannon, he wasn't coming. whereas pat cipollone, he was coming and bill bar, when they came, they came and were prepared to tell the truth. mark meadows sort of edged and gave us valuable documents, like 8,000 pains of documents including text messages that were really important. but then in the interim between when we received the text messages and documents and his scheduled interview, he changed his mind or he -- maybe hard for me to tell if he changed his mind or -- >> change the his plans. >> and the problem was he already really helped the committee by providing this

really valuable information. i don't know what was going on. his book came out around the same time. the former president publicly criticized him. did he get cold feet? did he get some kind of pressure? i don't know. but the bottom line is he did not come in despite the fact that we had a date agreed for a deposition and interview and our hope was he was going to provide relevant information. >> what would the two questions be? >> did the president know he had lost the election? did he say something to you that he lost? i would want to know more about what happened on january 6th. again, state of mind is what's really crucial. and mark meadows was with president trump all day on january 6th. was literally back in the dining room next to the oval office. and his willingness to tell us what was going on would have definitely been front and center in our interview if he had agreed. >> what is the -- his texts -- i

think i read most on the air. they suggest that everybody including his sons knew he lost. cassidy hutchinson's testimony especially in the public hearing suggests trump knew he lost. what of the things you did get from the techs were you able to do the most with? >> connections. who was involved. who was participating in these discussions. the connection with a lot of media personalities. that was news to us. the connections with members of congress that we talked about. who was in the mix in terms of the discussion that was this just the giuliani lawyer team talking to the president? no, it was a much broader circle, so sort of defining the players who were involved. who was on the field. that was really important. also frankly showed some inconsistency so meadows would say, yeah, we're working on getting the president to concede, it's all going to be fine and then the next day he's

like, yeah, we're fighting the good fight, you know, keep the faith. it seemed as if there was duplicity in sort of the advice he was giving or the things he was saying consistent with what we heard from a lot of people. he would say what he thought the person listening wanted to hear. other times more of a voice of reason and we'll move this in the appropriate direction. >> we have a million questions for you like what it was like to interview ivanka and everything that went into the dramatic surprise announcement of cassidy hutchinson. we have to sneak? a quick break. stick around? >> sure, yes. >> we will be right back. when we come back, the bombshell testimony from cassidy hutchinson, the mad scramble to secure it and the face of threats to her and her safety and how it helped shake loose other witnesses and later more on those criminal referrals against the disgraced ex-president and where we think the justice department might take the investigation next. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. do not go anywhere.

for me. i may have trouble getting around, but i want to live in my home where i'm comfortable and my friends are nearby. i can do it with the help of a barber, personal shopper and exercise buddy. someone who can help me live right at home. life's good. when you have a plan. ♪ ♪ 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. ♪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♪ i screwed up. ♪liberty liberty liberty♪ mhm. i got us t-mobile home internet.

now cell phone users have priority over us. and your marriage survived that? you can almost feel the drag when people walk by with their phones. oh i can't hear you... you're froze-- ladies, please! you put it on airplane mode when you pass our house. i was trying to work. we're workin' it too. yeah! work it girl! woo! i want to hear you say it out loud. well, i could switch us to xfinity. those smiles. that's why i do what i do. that and the paycheck. so many people are overweight now and asking themselves, "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that now, there's golo. golo hps helps control stress and emotional eating, and losing weight. go to golo.com and see how golo can change your life. that's g-o-l-o.com.

i was in the vicinity of a conversation where i overheard the president say something to the effect of you know i don't effing care they have weapons. they're not here to hurt me. take the effing maga is way and remember tony mentioning knives, guns in the form of pistols and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears and flagpoles. >> did the president really think he lost and he said, you know, a lot of times he'll tell me he lost but he wants to keep fighting it. >> pat said something to the effect of and very clearly that

said this to mark, something to the effect that, mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your effing hands. >> arguably some of the most riveting and remains some of the most chilling testimony that we heard from the january 6th select committee's public hearings from the committee's star witness cassidy hutchinson. but as essential as the hearings to the hearing's success cassidy hutchinson's was, it nearly didn't happen or at least very nearly didn't happen like that. it began months earlier with trump white house deputy press secretary sarah matthews who had been in talks with the committee. she's the one would told the committee if mark meadows wasn't going to talk, then, quote, the person you should really should talk to is cassidy hutchinson. she was his shadow. so they did. but it was not until months later after cassidy hutchinson switched attorneys that there was a dramatic plot twist, on

june 28th at 10:00 a.m. the nine committee members met in a room called a skwif, a facility to receive classified information. for the first time cheney and thompson informed the others that they had been summoned back because cassidy hutchinson had shared explosive new investigations pertinent to their investigation. though they planked for her to appear as a witness along with sara matthews cheney argued her testimony could not wait. they could not risk it leaking and hutchinson's safety was at issue. the hearing was scheduled for that same afternoon in she hours. we're back with tim heaphy. tim, baseball practice, what, and it was so dramatic, nobody knew exactly what it was. can you take us inside that day. >> a little bit. this is an area where i have to be somewhat careful because as a lawyer who represented clients, i to have keep their internal deliberations confidential. i can tell you my perspective is

that we had a witness who had very pertinent information who was in danger, who had already received a great deal pressure to say certain things and not say other thing, all of which she had told us about. an investigation undergoing great scrutiny that would be unlikely to keep that information confidential for very long. and the combination of those things led to the decision to put cassidy hutchinson on in a hearing earlier than anticipated by herself. we always knew she'd be important. one of the oldest investigative tools is if witness a doesn't talk to you then you talk to other people who were close to witness a about the things that witness a knows and the things that witness a did and here mark meadows wouldn't talk to us so we talked to mark meadows' deputy and she was with him all the time as sarah matthews said

so we went to a lot of white house staffers, deputies to find out about what happened in the room when mr. meadows and the president and white house counsel so she was an important witness all along but the timing of it was frankly hastened by the pressure she was under, the danger that that created and the need in white hot scrutiny of an investigation happening in the public eye to get that information out there. in the best possible case where this were a criminal investigation, a secret grand jury proceeding we would have sequenced her differently and we would have had other things leading up to her but we didn't have that luxury. it wasn't a grand jury investigation and wasn't happening in secret and felt like without giving away the committee's deliberation felt like it needed to happen right away and was compelling. >> her transcript gives away some of her deliberations so i want to bring that up. she had a lawyer who wanted her to be loyal to mark meadows and donald trump. which meant lie to the committee. or shave the truth or tell

incomplete information. she switches lawyers and starts telling a more robust detailed story and it's clear that witness a isn't just mark meadows it's also donald trump. >> absolutely. i miss hutchinson withheld crucial information early because she was represented for a lawyer paid for by the trump administration who told her we don't need to share that. they don't know what you don't recall essentially in our opinion -- >> to lie? >> i mean i think it's a lie when you withhold a material fact, absolutely. so not only did she come in and give us new information but the explanation for the prior inconsistent statements and frankly that was consistent with what we heard from other witnesses so sort of made sense. there was corroboration for pressure being put on witnesses, some of these junior staffers in particular. so, again, the committee assessed her as credible and continues to. her testimony even after the

fact has been largely corroborated, not entirely. there's things we -- >> none of it has been knocked down. >> the bottom line, the president -- the president's desire to disrupt the joint session, his intent to go to the capitol on january 6th, the core points have been corroborated. >> she seems to get you there on his enthusiasm for violence in a way that in terms of the public testimony no one else does quite as explicitly, both the testimony about take down the mags. take down the mags. >> people aren't here to hurt me. >> and her knowledge of the knowledge of his body man and secret service agent of the specificity with which they knew what weapons were being held by trump supporters. she seems to get you there on knowledge of violence, willingness to participate in it and knowledge of who they were going to hurt. what's the significance of that in a criminal investigation. >> all very significant. i think cassidy hutchinson is one of the most significant witnesses when it comes to the crucial issue of the president's

intent. because as you said, nicolle, she had information about knowledge of weapons and threats of violence in the crowd which infuses his rhetoric on the ellipse in the speech we're going to go fight like hell. i'll be right there with you with a dig of recklessness or degree of incitement because of his knowledge of the crowd being armed and really importantly his strong desire to go to the capitol. this is the president of the united states, aware that there are angry people in the crowd with weapons who want to travel with them from the ellipse to the capitol while the vice president is presiding over the joint session of congress to certify president biden's election. could there be a more dramatic manifestation of his intent to influence that joint session? i don't think so and miss hutchinson is directly at the center. so important to the committee and to the department of justice. >> she also closes the loop on

his interest in being there the time he wanted to be there. his ellipse speech, we're up on live images, the bombs have been placed outside the dnc and rnc. now the capitol has become a target, national security crisis, the d.c. homeland security adviser has said he was calling for blood to be at blood banks, the footage of the vice president's staff including his secret service detail running, i traveled with the president for six years, we never ran anywhere to see a vice president and their detail running. >> 40 feet away from rioters on the capitol. >> how do you not -- how is a public -- is there not an appropriate expectation that there will be a criminal consequence for donald trump? >> yeah, look, during the riot itself, set aside everything that happened in advance, all the election plotting, the speech, just once it was clear that there was violence at the capitol, the inaction, the repeated prodding to get him to say something to tell people to go home, the inaction is

important evidence of intent as well. miss hutchinson testified she heard mark meadows say you know pat cipollone doesn't want to do anything, explicitly saying he's not going to call them off. he actually is happy with this or he's at least not surprised at it. crucial evidence of his intent. all of this was hard for us to get -- he wouldn't talk to us, mark meadows wouldn't talk to us so people who were in the white house during the afternoon of january 6th and emerged understandably as central sources of information. >> he says to kevin mccarthy they're more mad about the election result than you were. trump, nothing is secret. it's all on the twitter feed and all in the myriad of calls he's making. is the evidence not ample? >> i think the evidence is absolutely ample. look, he issued two tweets early during the insurrection, one of them says, stay peaceful. the other says remain peaceful, right, to me that is essentially saying to people, stay at the

capitol. don't hit cop, just but you can stay. you can remain, right? words matter. so telling people in the crowd stay peaceful is sort of telling them what you're doing is okay as long as you're not clubbing capitol police officers. >> which they were. >> which they were which is outrageous and a direct manifestation of his intent. again, he came back to that because that's the whole ball game. >> it's not us saying it but the insurrectionists hoe testified before the committee. >> saying i was there for him. i was there because he wanted me to be. >> i've had the privilege of interviewing a lot of the members who were your first witnesses and the first public hearing and want to come back to what accountability looks like for them. we'll sneak in another quick break and be right back. >> sure. >> don't go anywhere. breztri gives me better breathing and helps prevent flare-ups. before breztri, i was stuck in the past. i still had bad days,

flare-ups, which kept me from doing what i love. my doctor said for my copd, it was time for breztri. breztri gives you better breathing, symptom improvement, and helps prevent flare-ups. like no other copd medicine, breztri was proven to reduce flare-ups by 52%. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. can't afford your medication? astrazeneca may be able to help. if you have copd, ask your doctor about breztri.

nothing. nothing. absolutely, nothing. it really is something. as an expedia member, you can save up to 30% when you add a hotel to your flight. so you can have a bit more money, to do even less. because you've got a whole lot of nothing to do and absolutely nowhere to be. lomita feed is 101 years old.

when covid hit, we had some challenges. i heard about the payroll tax refund that allowed us to keep the people that have been here taking care of us. learn more at getrefunds.com. ♪ every search you make ♪ ♪ every click you take ♪ ♪ i'll be watching you ♪ - [narrator] the internet doesn't have to be so creepy, the duckduckgo app, lets you search and browse pria blocking most trackers all forf your search history is never tracked, so it can't be shared.

and when you leave search, duckduckgo helps keep companies from watching you as you brows. join tens of millions of people making the easy switch by downloading the app today. duckduckgo, privacy simplified. we proposed to the committee advancing referrals where the gravity of the specific offense, the severity of its harm and the centrality of the offender to the overall design of the unlawful scheme to overthrow the election compel us to speak. ours is not a system of justice where foot soldiers go to jail and the mastermind and ringleaders get a free pass. >> it was the big finish and some powerful words from jamie raskin of the january 6th select committee hearings, the four criminal referrals against the ex-president, obstruction of an

official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the u.s., inciting or assisting in insurrection and conspiracy to make a false statement, so the question we ask here every day now what and the proverbial baton has been passed from the january 6th select committee to doj and the form of those four criminal referrals and a jaw-dropping mountain of meticulously evidence. tim heaphy, members of the committee have been really brazen in saying if there is not criminal consequence for donald trump and that liz cheney said she had real questions about the rule of law in america. if donald trump isn't prosecuted for one or all of those crimes what will your feeling be about the rule of law in america? what you don't call out, what you don't punish you're licensing. you are tolerating, you're almost legitimizing. there was no question over the course of our 18 months that we found evidence of the violation of those four criminal offenses. again, there's more evidence the

department may get that may affect that calculus but based on what we learned it was not close, nicolle. it was really clear that there is evidence of specific intent to disrupt the official proceeding of conspiratorial conduct with other people with incitement of an insurrection and accountability means this lands in a criminal court and i credit merrick garland says he will make a decision based on the law. i don't think what we said in terms of criminal referrals will matter. does it hurt by making this political? or does it help by putting pressure on him? i don't think either. i think he's going to make his call based on the facts and the law. we made our call based on the facts and the law as we saw them and it was clear and accountability therefore leads to, we think, violation of those statutes. >> so take the politics out of this. you were of the department of justice. >> i was. >> you're a u.s. attorney. they're looking at what you looked at. how do they reach any other

conclusion? >> based on the facts i know them that's the only conclusion they could or should reach. now, again, they may get other evidence and get access to people that will say things that are different that we didn't get. i don't believe based on what we know. we didn't talk to mark meadows but we talked to his chief deputies. we know what happened in the room. i don't believe there is such ex-full pa tri evidence but they have to use the tools they have which we didn't have to get to the very bottom of it. they're going to do a meticulous job and make their decision based on the facts and the law. >> tim heaphy isn't going anywhere. andrew weissmann and mike schmitt will join the table. another quick break. we will be right back.

moving forward with node- positive breast cancer is overwhelming. but i never just found my way; i made it. and did all i could to prevent recurrence. verzenio reduces the risk of recurrence of hr-positive, her2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer with a high chance of returning,... as determined by your doctor when added to hormone therapy. hormone therapy works outside

the cell... ...while verzenio works inside to help stop the growth of cancer cells. diarrhea is common, may be severe, or cause dehydration or infection. at the first sign, call your doctor, start an anti-diarrheal, and drink fluids. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor about any fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. life-threatening lung inflammation can occur. tell your doctor about any new or worsening trouble breathing, cough, or chest pain. serious liver problems can happen. symptoms include fatigue, appetite loss, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising. blood clots that can lead to death have occurred. tell your doctor if you have pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain, and rapid breathing or heart rate, or if you are nursing, pregnant, or plan to be. i'm making my own way forward. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio. (bridget vo) with thyroid eye disease... i hid from the camera. and i wanted to hide from the world.k your doctor about for years, i thought my t.e.d was beyond help... ...but then i asked my doctor about tepezza. (vo) tepezza is the only medicine that treats t.e.d. at the source

not just the symptoms. in a clinical study, more than 8 out of 10 patients taking tepezza had less eye bulging. tepezza is an infusion. patients taking tepezza may have infusion reactions. tell your doctor right away if you experience high blood pressure, fast heartbeat, shortness of breath or muscle pain. before getting tepezza, tell your doctor if you have diabetes, ibd, or are pregnant, or planning to become pregnant. tepezza may raise blood sugar even if you don't have diabetes. and may worsen ibd such as crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. (bridget) now, i'm ready to be seen again. (vo) visit mytepezza.com to find a t.e.d. eye specialist and to see bridget's before and after photos. ( ♪♪ ) 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. a must in your 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! we're all back. mike schmidt. >> if you had a superpower and you could interview, you could get anyone involved with january 6th, those you talk to, those you didn't talk to answer a question for you or question or two, what in your mind are the things you just would die to know if you could really get the true answer to them? >> well, the obvious answer to that is president trump and what was in his head in advance and all day. we spent a lot of time trying to divine what was in his head. how disingenuous were the claims of election fraud. was he a charles la tan or misguided true believer and

there's really no way to know that from other people so if i had a superpower and could compel truthful testimony i would want to know what was in his head all the way up to and then all afternoon as people are raging at the capitol and breaking windows and hitting, killing, i want to know what's going on in his head and what he intended. that would be absolutely the most pertinent fact that we didn't get. >> what about the people around him? >> same. i would love to know what mark meadows was saying. i'd like to know more from pat zips. he took an institutionally appropriate privilege assertion, would not share with us direct communications with the president but i think pat zips is a good person, an ethical person who wants very much to tell the truth and if he were unburdened to do so i'd love to hear what he had to say more fulsome account than what he was able to share with us. the people immediately around the president building out from the principle to the others i would want to know the same thing, what was in their head and going on. >> andrew?

>> we're both former doj people and want to talk to you about sort of what doj was doing and what your impressions were on two fronts. one, something struck me as unusual but i wanted to get your take was to see congress so far ahead and from the outside it looked like there were certain people on your committee who felt that and there was some frustrations and what was your take on what doj was or was not doing and to make it a compound question so there are two in one, what's your take on sort of, you know, you referred mark meadows as you talked to nicolle about it. he was sort of seemed like he was going to cooperate then didn't and he was going to cooperate and then he didn't. and then you referred him, and then doj didn't go forward. do you have any sense of why that happened? there's some police station that he might be cooperating. what's your sense of that? >> let me take the first question first. i think we are kind of moving on parallel tracks, the committee and the department. they were really far ahead of us

on the blue collar part of this. the people that were breaking windows and trespassing, destroying property and assaulting police officers. we wanted to get information from them, from the proud boys and the oathkeepers and cooperating witnesses, and there was -- they were not going to share that information with us. we were kind of chasing behind them on the bad luck stuff. >> so what was -- what jamie raskin called the foot soldiers. >> exactly right, andrew. but on the white-collar part of this, the political coup, the election stuff, we were ahead of them. i think we were getting to people first. we were developing a story before them. i think candidly, the reporting about who we were talking to and the issues on which we were focused, and then when we started pretending some of our findings in the hearings, i think that was eye opening for them and made them race to catch up. so they were really focused, i don't know if this is resources or the attorney general wanting to stay out of things political, which is an instinct i respect and understand, but they were really focused on the foot soldiers. they weren't focused enough

early on the orchestraters. i think they are now. and i think our information now all turned over to them will help them catch up and those two parallel tracks will come together with some decisions from the department going forward. >> and mark meadows? >> you know, i don't know exactly what the principle difference was between mark meadows completely refusing to come in and testify and steve bannon and peter novarro. mark meadows was in a different position. he was a white house chief of staff. that was one position between a guy who didn't even work in the white house anymore and the trade adviser. bannon and navarro had nothing to do with the election, or as meadows arguably did. dan scavino, they didn't prosecute him either. he was communications and was there right in the inner circle. that's one principle difference. we also had some engagement with meadows and scavino. we had none with navarro or with bannon. they just refused to even contemplate or make any noise about potentially coming in,

whereas meadows and scavino did. i'm speculating, you know this, the department doesn't share their math. they just give the conclusion. they did not pursue criminal contempt charges against meadows or scavino, whereas they did against navarro and bannon. those are the differences i see and i think that's what informed their prosecutorial discretion. >> let me ask you a question about -- i know it was ant criminal prosecution, but there were real victims. and you used testimony from harry dunn and officer ganell and officer hodges in the very first public hearing before the string of summer hearings. they have all said, i've talked to most of them on this program that they will not view this as complete or as accountability as having taken place in america until donald trump is held accountable by merrick garland's justice department. do you think they will see justice? >> again, i don't know what the department is going to do. i think if they base their decision on the facts and the law, there's a likely criminal charge. i know that the officers, as you have said, nicole, are very invested in this.

they were at every hearing before them, the witnesses from our first hearing, mike fanone, daniel hodges, they were all sitting there in the front row. they brought sean penn one day, which was a little weird, surreal for us, so they're very invested. look, they put their lives on the line. there are a lot of men and women just like them. caroline edwards who testified blood on the -- these are heroic people who were put in a heroic position by their leadership, that fought valiantly to defend not only themselves but all of us. they are heroes, they are victims and they are heroes. and because of that, their words really matter. and victims have a right to weigh in on whether or not a criminal prosecution is or isn't warranted. certainly have a right to weigh in at sentencing, if there is a prosecution. so i think you're going to hear more from harry dunn and the other officers going forward. >> how did this job, this role change you? >> it's probably made me more cynical. i, for years and years, worked in the justice department and sort of took democracy for

granted. it's durable in our system's hold. that's only true if people stand up and do the right thing. and we came close here to democracy not holding, but for the courageous actions of some people that put principle over party, democracy could have failed. so it's fragile, maybe more so than i participated. and as a result, we have to participate, we have to care, we have to engage. it's not given, it's earned. it has to be continually earned. that's sobering. hopefully it held and hopefully what we've uncovered has made people consider that. >> would you consider running for office? >> i would like to do more public service, potentially, some day. but in the short-term, i want to do more investigations, so i'll probably go to private practice and try to get people to hire me to do more investigations. i like this work. i like being a person that can bring order or sense to crisis. >> or light, as the public, it was light that you brought. >> you've got to start with

facts, as i talked about before. and i have been fortunate in charlottesville and on january 6th to be a person that helps gather facts and help understand what happened as a first step towards healing. >> we waited a long time and it was really worth the wait. thank you so much for answering all of our questions, for being here, and most importantly, for the work you did on the january 6th committee. >> really appreciate that. >> thank you so much. thank you guys for being part of this conversation. a quick break for us. we'll be right back. don't go anywhere. us we'll be right back. don't go anywhere. fasenra is an add-on treatment for asthma driven by eosinophils. it helps prevent asthma attacks, improve breathing, and lower use of oral steroids. 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. ask your doctor about fasenra. want your clothes to smell freshly washed all day without heavy perfumes? try downy light in-wash freshness boosters.

it has long-lasting light scent, no heavy perfumes, and no dyes. finally, a light scent that lasts all day. downy light! power e*trade's award-winning trading app makes trading easier. with its customizable options chain, easy-to-use tools, and paper trading to help sharpen your skills, you can stay on top of the market from wherever you are. power e*trade's easy-to-use tools make complex trading less complicated. custom scans help you find new trading opportunities. while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. ♪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♪ in one second, sara yes! will get a job offer somewhere sunnier. relocating in weeks. weeks? yeah, weeks. gotta sell the house. don't worry, sell to opendoor, and move on your schedule. yes! request a cash offer at opendoor.com just look around. this digital age we're living in,s! 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. take an extra second for friday thank yous. another thank you for spending the hour with us.

it's been a brutal week of news. thank you for letting us into your homes for another week of shows. we're so grateful. "the beat" with the fabulous melissa murray in for ari melber starts right now. hi, melissa. happy friday. >> happy friday. thank you, nicole. welcome to "the beat." i'm melissa murray in for ari melber. we start tonight with the fight over women's rights. just days before the 50th anniversary of the landmark roe v. wade decision, in a moment, one of the country's most prominent voices on this issue will join us. former planned parenthood president cecile richards along with jen psaki. and later in the show, joyce vance joining us to talk about a stunning rebuke from a federal judge to former president trump. plus, howard dean discussing the gop's continued dysfunction. and once again, the clash over reproductive freedom is spilling into the streets. anti-abortion activists are holding their annual d.c. rally. the first so-called march for life event