police state actions in the west bank where, ultimately, in the endangered harm for the civil liberties, and rights of israeli jews to, and we are seeing that. >> people who are scholars of the holocaust are pointing to this government, ben-gvir, and others, saying that they are having a looming genocide. we are looking at the looming genocide. chris, somebody who was raised in jerusalem, i worry about this conflict becoming a religious one, seeing what's happening around mosques, and the synagogues, and the church. you can see that they want bloodshed. >> i am praying that that does not happen. but, it does feel bad right now. i want both of you on, because i want to talk before it gets much worse. thank you for coming out. that is all in on the internet, alex wagner tonight, starting right now, thank you >> chris, there's a lot that's wrong with this. world but i'll tell you something that's not wrong with

this world. and specifically america. it's the fact that ta-nehisi coates it is working on the superman -- >> it's been reported, but yes, i agree. >> it's like one really good thing for us all to hang on to. this week. it's always good to see you my friend. thank you at-home for being here. there's been a ton of movement in the two sprawling criminal investigations into former president donald trump. ones that are being conducted by special counsel, jack smith. those two investigations are of course trump's squirreling away of classified documents at his mar-a-lago beach club. and trump's efforts to subvert american democracy and overturn the 2020 election results. today, eli then b c reporters spotted conservative activist, tom fitting going into the d.c. federal courthouse with the grand jury along with the doj prosecutor who works for the special counsel. fifth, in is the president of judicial watch, the ultraconservative outfit that enjoys suing the federal

government to quote unquote, stop government corruption. we don't know which grand jury tom fit in was a close trump ally. which line he appeared today, because tom fit and has the dubious distinction of being of interest to prosecutors in both special counsel and instigations. on the january six front, a few days before the election tom fittin, drafted a statement from then president trump declaring, trump had won the election. even though that election hadn't happened yet. here is how january six committee member, zoe lofgren described the memo this past october. >> the draft statement, which was signed on october 31st, declares we had an election today, and i won. and the fittin memo indicates a plan that only the votes counted by the election day deadline, and there is election day deadline would matter. i don't election day just

outside of 5 pm. mr. fit, indicated that he spoke with the president about the statement. >> tom fitton -- all the votes that were counted by a made-up election day deadline. and just ignore all the other ballots. which is -- on the mar-a-lago front, cnn reported was tom fitton, who is in trump's here, that you can keep all the documents, their years. you own them. watch as it turned, out was just totally blatantly wrong. the justice department grand jury has been busy. here last week trump's top department -- can cuccinelli, testified before the grand jury invested mailing trump's effort to subvert the election. you'll remember, cuccinelli is a da official that trump asked to seize the voting machines, in key swing states six weeks after election. de cuccinelli declined the honor, but his discussions with trump are apparent interest,

federal prosecutors and also this week it was reported that two people who searched trump properties for classified documents, they also testify before federal grand jury in the mar-a-lago probe. >> meanwhile, this list is long, i know but over new york city and another investigation, into the former president trump organization controller, jeffrey mcconney, reportedly testified today before the grand jury investigating the stormy daniels hush money payments. just this, evening the new york times reported that prosecutors are warning that they may file additional charges against presently jailed, longtime trump organization cfo, allan weisselberg. in attempt to leverage work cooperation from weisselberg, and their investigation into trump. , remember weisselberg serving a five month sentence at rikers after pleading guilty to tax fraud charges. and then there is the looming threat of the fulton county, georgia, criminal investigation. into trump's effort to overturn the election results in that state.

a probe that many experts say that voice is the highest threat for trump, fulton county -- recently said the decisions are imminent, regarding indictment after a special grand jury submitted its recommendations to her last month. around juries everywhere, there are a lot of moving parts right now on multiple fronts. in terms of president trump's illegal exposure. at the federal level, there is more than enough for attorney general, merrick garland tumalo. vernon and will ultimately have to make a zeeshan, based on recommendations by the special counsel, as to whether charges are warranted in the two trump investigations. and now, there is one more thing that merrick garland has to think about. john durham, the special counsel appointed by trump's attorney general, bill barr, to investigate the origins of the trump russia. john durham still on the job. he now reports to merrick garland. if you remember. the two cases john barham brought to trial ended in acquittals.

durham has yet -- deep state conspiracy by the intelligence committee to discredit trump. but, the new york times latest reporting on durham, which is a bombshell piece, it shows just how much barr seems to have meddled in the durham probe. and how he was determined to make sure john doorknob covered something, while drinking scotch with john durham on the regular. the paper reported that three senior prosecutors of durham's team, resigned over frustrations and disagreements over the handling of this inquiry. we also learned, about a european trip that barr and durham took, where they received a credible -- linking trump to suspected financial crimes. barr assigned that criminal investigation of the former president to john durham. and the public never heard anything about it. until now. bill barr, spoke to the l.a. times last night to defend his handling of john terms investigation. in an attempt to pre spend the

eventual report's findings. and regarding that previously undisclosed criminal investigation involving trump. barr said quote, it turned out to be a complete non-issue. really? what happened there? already members of congress are demanding answers, will merrick garland tell the american public. will he release the durham report in full, or in part. joining us now is charlie savage, washington court house manu for the new york times. and the lead byline on this incredible piece of reporting in the times. charlie, thanks for being. here we've been eager to talk to you since this -- first published. and now we have a fair amount of pushback from the former a.g., bill barr, the subject of this investigation. what is your initial reaction to his affective rebuttals and his overall sense that there is no there there are, in terms of the pressing questions you raised in the piece? >> my first reaction was, oh,

he confirms that there is an investigation involving trump, that durham handled. it's interesting, we don't have anybody on the record conforming that before. that was nice of. we still don't, maybe he's right that i went nowhere. we don't know. we just don't know what that thing was. we don't know what steps durham took. we don't know what he found out. we don't know why he chose to bring no charges, perhaps it was as bill barr says, there was no there there. it's extraordinary it happened at. all that no one knew about. it and when it linked with durham's administrate of review involved to encompassing a criminal investigation, everyone thought that meant he'd found evidence of a crime by the people who'd investigated trump and russia. and the justice department let that miss impression linger when i was this very different thing. at a minimum, it's ordinary that barr confirmed that indeed happened. >> it's extraordinary the fact

of the matter is, exactly as you pointed, out the justice department what the impression that this was about the intelligence agencies are not. trump they let that linger. no one had any suspicion it was a criminal investigation into the former president. one of the things that barr -- >> exactly. we don't know if it was into him, or approximate to. ham >> somehow in the sphere of trump, and then the last not about the folks that launched the russia investigation. >> the questionable acts you highlight in the pace, is that the appointment of john durham to investigate this tip into potential financial fraud, fraudulent criminal activities regarding finances. and bill barr defenses choice of john durham as investigating this saying, the idea that there is a thin basis for appointing durham. it doesn't hold water. can you explain, how and why the times in your reporting

suggests that it was actually a thin basis to appoint durham? >> the reason that barr put durham in motion, the first instance was that barr while a private citizen, before trump hires him to be attorney general, he's just watching fox news, he'd come to the conclusion, the hutch, the suspicion, there was some kind of intelligence abuse at the heart of the russia investigation. working in the origins of the russian investigation, the cia had done something, our mi5 had done something, the italian intelligence service did something. he knew that was the case. he came in as a was concerned, telling his aides he knew this was the case, and he was gonna get to the bottom of this. when he got up -- actual origin of the russian investigation, he didn't buy it. and that's what set durham into motion. what he was saying, it was a technical matter to the l.a. times. which was that at first, it was

an administrative review, it was not a criminal investigation. , so when you're setting up someone to look at things. which is an odd thing for the justice department to do. but it happens sometimes. you don't need, a reasonable, factual basis to suspect that there's crimes taking place. you don't need a predicate. so, that's what he said, sets german the motion on his hutch. of course, durbin does eventually open, not just that side criminal investigation that involves trump somehow. but an actual criminal investigation as his hunt for a telegenic abuses, that barr thought was there it's a dead end. -- that he can find. he doesn't close up shop, he says, in barr decided that they're gonna -- this investigation into a different rationale. which is a hunt for a basis to accuse the hillary clinton campaign of dividing the government by essentially framing donald trump for collusion. it was hillary's fault that the people suspected trump, in

russia or wanted to know more about those connections. that was the theory, that they were pursuing. and it was a criminal investigation, they were going to a judge unsuccessfully, trying to get something like -- private emails, and using grand jury powers to get into private emails, of the george soros, you can't do that unless it's a criminal investigation. ultimately, they do bring to narrow indictments against people with some connection to the clinton campaign, running false statement charges, which durham uses to insinuate the conspiracy that he wasn't able to prove or charge. and both of those cases ended in very swift acquittals. and they collapsed in court. his point as well, when this thing started it wasn't a criminal investigation, so i didn't need a solid basis, just to do it. it's technically true so far as it goes, but it doesn't explain the entirety of what happened here. >> dare i say, it doesn't hold water.

paraphrasing the former attorney general himself. charlie savage, washington correspondent in the new york times, thank you for the incredible reporting, we have 1000 questions to ask you, please come back soon. i want to turn out to barb mcquade, -- eastern district of michigan. barbara, great to see. you thank you for being here tonight. i want to continue this conversation we're having about the onus on merrick garland. and his shoulders, i hope they're strong enough. do you think merrick garland is going to release the full findings from the durham probe as much of a nothing berger as it may end up being? what's your expectation given the controversy that clearly surrounds that? >> -- of course we don't know what might be contained within a final report. it's being written right now. but merrick garland needs to be very careful here. i can imagine that his instincts, especially given his desire to restore integrity, independents to the justice

department. it might be simply to disclose this in the interest of transparency. here's what john durham fat. here you go, it's out. there i think he needs to be careful to make sure that he's not assisting and enabling disinformation. coming into the ecosystem of, under the guise of, this official justice department report. there's a worry about that. of course, it depends on what's annette. but to the extent it does what john durham is already done indictments. it's throwing in a lot of extra verbiage to dirty up people who wants to dirty up. merrick garland needs to be careful about whether he allows that to be released. >> especially given the way durham, garland has behaved in recent lakes, regarding the document saga that president biden and former president trump's respectively appointing special councils to both of those in a bid to show

equanimity in the justice department. one wonders what he does with the hop data like the durham probe, right? at the same time we have to congressman saying, there needs to be an inspector general investigation into the durham probe. you have layers here. do you release the findings of the durham investigation, and launch an investigation into the investigation into an investigation? what options does he have here. does he need to do both, and how convoluted could that be? >> i think merrick garland has a responsibility to see what it is that john durham wants to release and ask him to support those conclusions. so that he feels satisfied that he can release these out into the world and so i don't think merrick garland needs to make a decision of an either or. he can ask john durham what's in there, let the basis for disclosing at. and disclose only that which he thinks will be helpful in

setting the record straight. but the origins of this, the durham investigation are really concerning. we already had an inspector general's report that found that the russia investigation was improperly opened. and then we have barr asking john berman to kind of repeat the work but clearly with an agenda. and in search of a conclusion and in search of a factual basis and so that alone i think makes me very skeptical of what john durham might also report here. the same way we saw william barr distort the findings of robert mueller and his report. the distortion, misleading where the words of a federal judge who william barr's statements about that. i'm concerned that that's what will be contained in john durham's report as. while, so merrick garland has some responsibility here. to make the hard decision and maybe that decisions do not let this be released into the public domain.

maybe that decision is to investigate further and make sure there is a factual basis for what he has to say. >> what tough decision to make it such a fraught time for the doj i we talked about the beginning of the show about the unbelievable number of investigative walls that seem to be closing in around trump world. i just want to go to the sort of breaking news we have this evening. the attorney generals office, manhattan prosecutors are trying to basically ratchet up the pressure on a man who's already in jail. who has a very important information regarding trump organization finances. and i'm speaking about allen weisselberg. there's long been talk about whether prosecutors might try and, we pressure him with further jail time to get him to finally flip on trump. that appears to be happening now, if we believe the reporting from the new york times, i have no reason not to. what's your assessment of that, and is at the right time to be

really going for broke on the stormy daniels hush money, given everything else that's happening in the world of investigation pertaining to donald trump? >> yeah, stormy daniels and i think that's the trump season one, aren't we on season five now? it's really going way back in time. it does seem that that investigation has been resuscitated. and if you think about what that hush money payment was, and the timing of, it it was really on the eve of the 2016 election. at a time when the access hollywood tape come out. so, that information could be devastating to the campaign. so, to fail to disclose that he made that expenditure on behalf of the campaign. it's a crime. i don't fault -- looking into. it and if they can put together a case that maybe they do. i just don't know that -- is the guy that's going to finally flip on donald trump. he already had an opportunity to do. it any refused to do it.

maybe he knows more about this. and he didn't know other things about -- it seems like he's been -- remain loyal to donald trump. and is even willing to go to prison for him. so, i don't know that he's gonna budge. but i suppose it's worth a try and it seems they have other witnesses in the form of michael cohen, the controller of the trump organization. maybe they can do it without. on but i suppose it's worth exploring to determine whether allen weisselberg has information that can be valuable in the investigation. >> allen weisselberg is -- as we speak. barr mcquade, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. it's always great to see you, thank you for your time tonight. we have lots to get to this evening. including the truly unbelievable first days of the republican led 118 congress, and how democrats should conduct themselves. for the next two years at least. speaking of, which house republicans voted today to strip congresswoman, ilhan omar, of the house committees seat

decrying antisemitism while totally ignoring the same problematic language and behavior from members of their own party. that's next. y. that's next. ♪ ♪ ♪ cargurus. shop.buy.sell.online. research shows people remember ads with a catchy song. so to help you remember that

liberty mutual customizes your home insurance, here's a little number you'll never forget. did you know that liberty mutual custo— ♪liberty mutual♪ ♪ only pay for what you need♪ ♪only pay for what you need♪ ♪ custom home insurance created for you all♪ ♪now the song is done♪ ♪back to living in your wall♪ they're just gonna live in there? ♪yes♪ only pay for what you need. ♪liberty liberty liberty♪ ♪liberty♪ when dry eye symptoms... keep... coming... back... inflammation might be to blame. over the counter eye drops can provide temporary relief. xiidra... can provide lasting relief. it targets inflammation that can cause dry eye disease. xiidra treats the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease. don't use if allergic to xiidra.

common side effects include eye irritation, discomfort or blurred vision when applied, and unusual taste sensation. why wait? ask your doctor about a 90-day prescription and pay as little as $0. xiidra. oof! 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. do you own a lot of bras, but not a single one you really love?

introducing wireless bras from knix. the ultimate in comfort and support, in sizes up to an h-cup. visit knix.com to find a wireless bra you'll love. - this is "the more you know" like you've never seen it before.

- these are real talks... - real experiences... - used to spark real action. - join me and others... - as we get personal about making an impact. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> it was 2019. and newly-elected minnesota

congressman, ilhan omar, responded to a tweet about the role of israel in american politics, with six words. it's all about the benjamins baby. it was a reference to the 1997 puff daddy song, all about the benjamins. and the subtext was that donor money was responsible for the outsized role that supported israel plays in u.s. politics. the tweet played into age-old antisemitic stereotypes about jewish people using money to control political leaders, congresswoman omar was called out for the, tweeting quickly issued an unequivocal apology. but now four years later, kevin mccarthy and the republican house are using that tweet as justification for their latest act of retribution. today house republicans voted along party lines to strip congresswoman omar of her committee assignments on the house foreign affairs committee. the resolution specifically cited that four-year-old tweet as a central example of why the action was justified. if you had just fallen from the sky, you might think that

manthorpe of a can party had a zero tolerance policy for antisemitic tropes. like one is about jewish people controlling politicians with their money. but anyone who spent the last seven years on this planet, who hasn't fallen from the sky, knows that's not the case. take for, instance this tweet sent by speaker of the house, kevin mccarthy during the 2018 election. we cannot allow soares, steyer, and bloomberg to buy this election. get out and vote republican november sex. hashtag maga. the people mccarthy -- are here are george soros, tom speier, and michael bloomberg, all jewish billionaires who are regular this subject of that same anti-semitic trope about jews controlling politicians. here's candidate donald trump in 2015 speaking to the republican jewish coalition during a candidate for him. >> i'm in a different position than the other candidates, because i'm the one candidate i want any of your money. i don't want your money, therefore you're probably not gonna support me. that's why you want to give me money, okay, you want to control your own politician,

that's fine. >> donald trump told a roomful of jewish republicans, he thought they were using their money to control politicians. throughout his presidency, trump regularly amplified antisemites on social media, he called nazis who chanted, units will not replace us. he called them very fine people. remember a few months ago, and trump invited antisemitic hip pop artist, was ye, and a nuance white supremacist holocaust an eye or to die notice. well mccarthy in trump -- republicans. their leaders of the party in fact. and then their congresswoman marjorie taylor greene, an ally of speaker mccarthy, who famously promoted an antisemitic conspiracy theory that blamed jewish space lasers for wildfires in california. both congresswoman greene, and paul gosar, attended events hosted by the very same holocaust denying what supremacist that trump had over for dinner. but instead of punishing them,

as he did ilhan omar, speaker mccarthy rewarded both gosar and green, and this congress by giving them back committee assignments that had previously been taken away. it's clear that, that today's vote on congresswoman ilhan omar, isn't about condemning antisemitism. she seems to have been sought out for different reasons. and today, congresswoman omar may clear, despite the -- to build our power. she wasn't going anywhere. >> is anyone surprised that i'm being targeted? is anyone surprised that i'm somehow deemed unworthy to speak about american foreign policy? or that they see me, as a powerful voice that needs to be silenced. my leadership and voice will not be diminished. if i'm not on this committee for one term. my voice will get louder and

stronger, and my leadership will be celebrated around the world as it has been. so, take your votes are not. i'm here to stay, i'm here to be a voice against harms around the world that advocate for a better world. i yield back. >> we'll be right back. we'll be right back my husband and i have never been more active. shingles doesn't care. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. 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. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today. my a1c stayed here, it needed to be here. ray's a1c is down with rybelsus®. i'm down with rybelsus®. my a1c is down with rybelsus®. in a clinical study, once-daily rybelsus® significantly lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill. in the same study, people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes.

don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down? you may pay as little as $10 per prescription.

♪ ♪ ♪ cargurus. shop.buy.sell.online. mom: hey! cheap flight alert! ♪ daughter: hawaii! can we go? dad: maybe. i'll put a request in monday. sfx: shattering glass. theme song: unnecessary action hero! dad: was that necessary? unnecessary action hero: no. neither is missing this deal. with paycom, vacation is yours to manage. unnecessary action hero: not to mention benefits, scheduling, payroll. it's hr in the palm of your hand. dad: wow. unnecessary action hero: ask your employer about paycom. and make the unnecessary, unnecessary. >> breaking right now, house dad: approved!

republicans investigating president biden's climate star, -- his talks with the chinese communist party may be undermining our economy and threatening our u.s. foreign policy. >> that's a real thing that happened today, republicans in the house oversight committee announced an investigation into john kerry. on the premise that is international climate negotiations or somehow nefarious because they involve china. the country that's the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. yes, really. that happened. this week, the week after multiple mass shootings some republicans in the house have started wearing little assault rifle cans under look at. as if there are american flags. that's, for the house natural resource committee meeting got heated not because of a policy disagreement. because multiple republican members insisted they should be able to bring loaded guns into committee hearings about them.

yesterday was ohio congresswoman -- house judiciary committee. the harry was literally titled, the biden border crisis, part one. implying that will be more parts to come. like fast in the furious or -- that hearing started with a fight over how many times a day congress people need to say the pledge of allegiance to show how patriotic they are. i, gastro, in the south business is being conducted in the house of representatives. today, jim jordan also announced that next week he will hold his first hearing as chair of the so-called subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government. so, get ready, there is a lot more of this coming. it's all nonsense. it's all trolling. there's no real policy there. but there is massive jam. lots, lots of loud messaging. house democrats -- how should democrats respond? joining us now is the man who has all the answers. robert gibbs, former white house press secretary for president obama.

robert, so good to see you. i'm sorry we need to be talking about the utter insanity here. but what is the careful act that democrats do, on the one hand they need to show they're serious about governing, they need to stay above the fray, but on the other hand republicans are gonna try to beat them into the symbolic. votes for, example -- condemn the horrors of socialism for real. and 109 democrats voted for, it but this is messaging at its empty, but it's still massive jay. so, what's the right call here from a strategy perspective? >> wow, look, i think we saw the beginnings of this, at the very beginning of the congress getting organized. we realized there is a norma's personality is now in the republican caucus. the speaker not really in control of those personalities. and a lot of different people's agendas are gonna get pushed through, you're gonna see a lot of hearings like this, we know from the last election to that republicans felt outside the

mainstream to a lot of swing voters. we know from the early pouring, the nbc poll this past weekend. that the american people already think that the republicans are gonna overreach on investigation. if you're a democrat let them overreach an investigation. the fully focused on your messaging and the issues that are most important to people. good jobs, affordable health, care affordable medicine, affordable education. and making sure that the legislation that the democrats passed during the first two years, of the biden administration is implemented well. i would, say focus on the issues that we know the american people care about the most, try to highlight the chicanery, and then stand -- this is the group that's gonna represent the republican party. and demonstrate to the republican, to the american people really for the next 15, months with a republican vision

is like. and it's worked out well for the past two democratic presidents that have played off of new republican congresses. they both went on to be reelected. >>, wild sounds like you think they should cannery, such as it is. as well articulated shall we say that there is not really the republicans can only muddy the water so. much i wonder if you think that extends to the debt ceiling? here's an example of republicans trying to lead the country off of a cliff into financial catastrophe. but you can already hear, and even from moderate senate democrats, that there needs to be some sort of negotiation that biden cannot be seen as just having a hard line. and not communicating with the people who are basically a suicide caucus. even today, this is joe biden talk about the initial talks he had with kevin mccarthy. let's hear what the president had to say about this? >> let's join hands on that again a little bit. and start treating each other

with respect, that's what kevin and i are gonna go. we had a good meeting yesterday. i think we need to do it across the board. doesn't mean we're gonna agree. and fight like hell. and let's treat each other with respect. >> roberter wit respect. >> rober how do you play this if you're in the white house? you'r in the white house i think the president's gonna be very stern, on making sure that both republicans in the house and the american people understand the obligations around the debt ceiling. and really flat cat and should

happen, which is if republicans want to have a debate, a discussion about. spending if we want to do that as an american people. there is a budget appropriations process in which we can do. that we can talk about wasteful spending, we can talk about big tax cuts. but there is a process for that that's outside of the document. and outside of what really hangs over and improving the economy. , look in some ways the joe biden's ran on being the grown-up in the room, i think joe biden and democrats are gonna have to be the grown-up in the room, and they're gonna have to show the american people what they're all about. that may not make some people on twitter happy, it may miss the opportunity to be overly snarky. or point out different things. but i think the american people particularly comes not something a serious at the debt --

ceiling want to see a serious group dealing with that. and i think that's the role that biden democrats should focus on. >> what does he do when he walks into congress next week for the state of the union? this is ground zero for a series of insane investigations aimed and nothing more than political ones? does biden call them out for this when he's standing in front of an audience of republicans who are trying to take him down? what is the do, it sounds like you think he plays the statesman? >> i think he plays the statesman. i wouldn't be surprised if you hear, something that contrast an agenda focused on the things i talked, about affordability, health care, education and jobs. versus investigations that are going nowhere, i think you'll see very much, i think the state of the union isn't really what it used to be, 20 years ago, 25 years ago lots of people -- and it can move numbers for a president. i think they're gonna be smaller audiences these days.

but this is an important moment to really start to set up a governing contrast between. the people that are gonna occupy the majority of the seats in that room next week. and a president that's quite frankly probably gonna spend most of his time talking over the heads of those people. to the american people at home. and i think that's what he should be doing. >> talking over there heads, yeah, definitely he will be talking over their heads. robert gibbs, former white house press secretary for president, pomegranate to see you, robert. thank you for your time. after the police killing of george floyd in 2020, police reform almost made it through congress. but it could not clear one very big hurdle. today in the wake of the killing of tyre nichols, president biden and congressional black caucus members put that reform right back on the table. what they're calling for, and whether it might happen this time. that's next. that's next. what's your favorite knix wireless bra?

it feels like a second skin. for someone like me who's active with big boobs, the catalyst is amazing. i feel so confident in my wingwoman. the lift is great and it's so smooth under my clothes. find your favorite wireless bra today at knix.com my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪ ♪ it was time for a nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once-monthly add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma that can mean less oral steroids. not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. ask your asthma specialist about a nunormal with nucala.

the promise of america is freedom, equality, but right now, those pillars of our democracy are fragile and our rights are under attack. reproductive rights, voting rights, the right to make your own choices and to have your voice heard. we must act now to restore and protect these freedoms for us and for the future, and we can't do it without you. we are the american civil liberties union. will you join us? call or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today. your gift of just $19 a month, only $0.63 a day, will help ensure that together we can continue to fight for free speech, liberty and justice. your support is more urgently needed than ever. reproductive rights are on the line

and we are looking at going backwards. we have got to be here. we've got to be strong to protect those rights. so please join the aclu now. call or go to my aclu.org and become an aclu guardian of liberty for just $19 a month. when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special we the people t-shirt member card magazine and more to show you're part of a movement to protect the rights of all people. for over 100 years, the aclu has fought for everyone to have a voice and equal justice. and we will never stop because we the people, means all of us. so please call or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today.

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. >> in 2021, kyle rittenhouse stood trial for wounding and killing several people. during an august 2020 protest during police violence in kenosha, wisconsin. the victims families hope for justice, and rittenhouse was charged with multiple crimes. in the, and he was fully acquitted. while some on the left like california governor gavin

newsom worried about the message the verdict might send two armed vigilantes. some on the right praised him as a hero. donald trump graduated him and invited him to mar-a-lago. the families of the victims were not done. john hubert, the family -- who tried to disarm him before he shot hubert dead, he filed a wrongful death lawsuit against rittenhouse, and local law enforcement. a family alleges that police officers deputized rittenhouse, and conspired with him to harm protesters. they say that those actions violated his civil rights, and caused his death. the law enforcement officers filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit based in part on a legal doctrine which public police officers from personal liability in civil claims, just like this one. that legal doctrine is called qualified immunity. yesterday, a judge ruled against that notion. the case can proceed, at least for now. qualified immunity is now a

live matter, which the judge will decide at a later date. he said in a statement, make no mistake, our fight to hold those responsible for anthony's death accountable continues in full force. anthony will have his day in court. a day in court, a way around qualified immunity, which has protected so many officers shooting and killing unarmed civilians like tyre nichols, and so many others. that day in court as what they discussed with president biden, vice president biden at the white house this afternoon. they wanted help in passing the george floyd justice in policing act. that bill passed the house in 2021, but fell apart in the senate. the sticking point was that qualified immunity. will this bill have a different faith with this congress? president biden put it this way today. >> my hope is that this dark memory spurs action, that we

have all been fighting for. >> joining us now is the cofounder and ceo of the center for policing equity and chair of the african american studies, and professor of psychology at yale university. i feel like we're missing a word in that introduction. phil, thank you for being here tonight. rarely do i feel the need to get very specific about part of the law in such detail. qualified immunity is the thing here. it's holding police officers accountable, in civil cases because for people it don't know, when you talk about criminal charges for police officers, the police are criminally charged in less than 2% of fatal shootings, and convicted in less than a third of those cases. it is vanishing lee rare to have police held accountable with criminal charges. civil cases are different matter. can you explain how we can live

in a world where qualified immunity is a shield for cases where there appears to be gross negligence? >> i'll try to do it without getting extra nerdy for you and your audience. i am a professional nerd though. like what happens in 1982, the supreme court case, people are concerned that -- not just law enforcement, but the staff of elected officials will not be able to go about doing their jobs if they're worried that every little thing they do could be litigated, and could become a political football, kind of like what we saw in congress today. the supreme court expands, they expand the blueprint for qualified immunity. it essentially says that if there was not an explicit it is ample of this very thing being illegal before, then you cannot be held accountable going forward. the cases where it comes, up like the case that you just

lead with, kyle rittenhouse, are so disgusting, somebody has done something so obviously outrageous, and yet there is not a case just like that before. we are not able to hold line for some accountable somehow. we throw our hands up because of the doctrine of qualified immunity. people get really outraged about it. that's why folks say to get rid of it. i can't quite tell you what the argument is that we need to keep. it no surveys of law enforcement, no social science of law enforcement supports that is a reasonable conclusion. that essentially what it is, and it is part of what they argument has been about with regards to the justice policing act. >> and qualified immunity -- the advent of qualified immunity, though there were cases that strengthened in the 80s, it started in the civil rights area. that's when people started saying that what the police are doing to civilians is not right. it's the first time that there

is justice for people, and then quickly between 1961 and 67, qualified immunity crops up to protect the people that are doing wrongs against the weakest members of society, or the most marginalized. it's not a coincidence, isn't? >> it gets codified in 1967, expanded to the current form in 1982. those are periods of time where you have particular law enforcement making sure there is a carve out sideline forsman doing dirty work that really appears bad -- and by the way, they did not have home video cameras in 1967, but the shock to the conscience of the nation was photographs in newspapers. there is new media showing pictures of things. you guys remember them from that one class that folks took during black history month without firehouses we are being turned against to school children. the same kinds of things, where we are seeing, as if almost for the first-time, they are really doing terrible things to black folks. that's the first time that we see it, second and we see it is

in 1882, and there's great outreach about it. as we're moving to think about what congress can do, though it has this terrible disgusting rates, and it is absolutely ideologically by principle, we have to get rid of it, it's not going to solve all of these problems. it's been named as the sticking point for the justice in policing act. i'm not sure that's real, other than politics. of the cases they qualify for qualified immunity, the best research that we have is only about 30% of the cases actually ending up invoking italy even a little bit. it's not clear how many of those cases hinge or turn on qualified immunity. i don't want to think that even if we get it through, that is solving a huge swath of this accountability issue. it's an important piece, it's a principled piece, but it's so disgusting to look at. it's not the largest lever that we can get done. i want to adjust peoples expectations, even if it makes it through congress, but being a vanishing lee thin margin, even on its own. >> we know that there's action

at the state level around qualified immunity, but there's another part of the civil cases that bears highlighting. if in fact the law enforcement is found guilty in the civil case, who pays the civil pay? this is shocking to me, i didn't know this. the government, the local government, not the police department, local government. in some cases, taxpayers of the people that pay out. there's a world where tyre nichols she sues in a civil case, and the people of memphis have to foot the bill for a police department that beat to death tyre nichols. is that right? >> let's make it even more specific. tyre nichols is killed in memphis, and his family pays for the misconduct. if there are taxpayers that city, that's exactly how it works. there are so many protections against officers being held individually accountable.

by the way, individual officers are not walking around with millions of dollars to do these kinds of settlements. when you have 100 and $25 million, or baltimore, $13 million just for the task force. individual officers could not do with that kind of compensation. but, yes it comes back to the city, and god forbid the city finds a way to move around that. the union would then protect and be protects individual officers. it's not the case that the officers pay outside of the criminal context. the city is the one paying the price. at the very least, the union is paying that price. insurance claims that it has said at the don't affect the budget in any way. >> it's just the level of insanity, and wrong this in all of this. philip, you did not nerd out, it was a brilliant explanation. thank you for your insight and wisdom as always. cofounder and ceo of the center for policing equity. it's always good to see.

>> good to see you. >> we'll be right back. ll be right back 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. paradontax blood when you brush could lead to worse over time. help stop the clock on gum disease now. parodontax toothpaste... ...is 3x more effective at removing plaque bacteria, one of the main causes of bleeding gums. parodontax. the gum experts.

("this little light of mine") - [narrator] in the world's poorest places, children with cleft conditions live in darkness and shame. they're shunned, outcast, living in pain. you can reach out and change the life of a suffering child right now. a surgery that takes as little as 45 minutes and your act of love can change a child's life forever. please call or visit operationsmile.org now. thousands of children are waiting.

every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food.