hi, we begin with breaking news from south carolina in the double murder trial of alex murdaugh. the jury has reached a verdict. i'm joined by charles coleman, msnbc legal analyst, civil rights attorney, and former brooklyn prosecutor, and katie phang, host of the katie phang show on msnbc. i will turn it over to you, katie. you can tell us what we should be thinking about now.

>> we should be wondering why it was so fast. i mean, look, most times and charles can agree or disagree with me. as a former prosecutor, when you get a verdict this fast, it's usually a verdict of guilty. this jury has salt through multiple weeks of testimony. this trial started with jury selection january 23rd, i want to say. it's been going more than 61 witnesses presented by the prosecutor. we heard from experts witnesses, we had cell phone evidence, blood spatter evidence. at the end of the day, i think what really moved the needle for the jury was the rebuttal closing from the prosecution. when the prosecutor got up and said, alex murdaugh kicked the person he loved the most, and it wasn't his wife. it wasn't his son. it was himself. and in order to preserve his lifestyle, his addiction, his financial fraud, he picked himself. and if that's what the jury heard last before they went into the jury room, i would not be

surprised to see if the verdict is guilty. >> ellison barber is in south carolina. outside the courthouse. >> reporter: hey, joy. we saw the jury leave the courtroom to go to deliberate at about 3:50. at 6:41 p.m., that's when we heard from the clerk of court that the jury had reached a verdict in this case. remember, the charges here, there are two counts of murder, one for the murder of maggie murdaugh, the defendant's wife. and one murder charge for his son, paul murdaugh, on top of that, there's a charge for each of those murders for possession of a weapon during commission of a violent crime. there are 12 jurors that have been in that room tonight. there was one alternate that was still waiting outside in case something were to come up and possibly they needed to step in. nothing like that has happened. those 12 original jurors are the ones who are in the room. well, not original. we had a juror dismissed today. but the core 12 group that

started at 3:50 are the ones who have reached the verdict now, and i see on my screen that we're watching of inside the courtroom, the judge sitting down right now, so joy, i'm going to send it back to you in case that's something we want to listen to. we're going to listen. >> i understand there's a verdict. you may bring the jury.

>> thank you. madam foreman, will you stand for me. have you reached a verdict? >> yes, sir, we have. >> it's unanimous? >> yes, sir, it is. >> if you will pass it up to the clerk who will pass it to me. and you may be seated.

>> the defendant will rise. madam clerk, you may publish the verdict starting with the -- let's see. tell you again.

starting with the back, flipping them over one by one. >> docket number 2022-00592, the state of south carolina in the court of general sessions, in the term of 2022, july, the state versus richard alexander murdaugh, defendant, indictment for murder, sd code 16-3-0010-cdr code 0116. guilty verdict. signed by the forelady 3/2/23.

docket number 2022-00593. the state of south carolina county of colliton the july term of 2022, the state versus richard alexander murdaugh, defendant, indictment for murder sd code 16-3-0010, cdr code 0116, verdict guilty. signed by the forelady. date 3/2/23. docket number 2022-gs-15-00595. the state of south carolina, court of general sessions, july term, 2022. the state versus richard alexander murdaugh, defendant, indictment for possession of a

weapon during the commission of a violent crime. sd code-16-23-0490. cdr code 0549. verdict guilty. signed by the foreperson of the jury, date 3/2/23. docket number 2022-gs-15-00594. the state of south carolina county of colliton, court of general sessions, july term, 2022. the state versus richard alexander murdaugh, defendant. indictment for possession of a weapon during the commission of a vile want crime, ds code 16-23-0490. cdr code 0549, verdict guilty. signed by the foreperson of a jury, 3/2/23.

>> thank you. madam forelady and members of the jury, if that is the verdict, each and every juror, please let it be known by raising your right hands. thank you. any individual polling requested? >> we do, your honor. >> madam clerk, you'll need to individually poll the jury according to their juror numbers. >> number 193, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 254, is this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 326. was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 530, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is this your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 544.

>> yes. >> was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 572, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 578, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 589, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 630. was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 729. was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is the still your verdict? >> yes. >> jurjuror 826, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> juror 864, was this your verdict? >> yes. >> is it still your verdict? >> yes. >> your honor, the jury has been polled. >> thank you, jury has been polled, and the verdict is a unanimous verdict.

if you will bring the alternate juror out and have her have a seat in the audience, please. >> you can stand there or you can sit back there, whatever you prefer. okay. are there any post-trial motions? >> not from the state, your honor. >> we would just renew our previously argued motions for a directed verdict. at this point, on the grounds, on those grounds, we would make a motion for a mistrial.

>> by the state response. >> your honor, based on our previous arguments, we would submit the case properly went to the jury and the verdict is proper. >> we have been here now 28 days. first few days of jury selection and the remainder receiving testimony, an overwhelming amount of testimony and evidence that was presented to the jury for the jury's consideration, as i indicated to the jury during the jury charge, the charge of the law, that this was a matter solely for the jury to determine. the court found at the end of the state's case that there was sufficient evidence to find the defendant guilty, if the evidence was believed by the jury.

likewise, at the end of the defense's case, when a motion was renewed, the court found that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find the defendant guilty. the jury has now considered the evidence for a significant period of time. and the evidence of guilt is overwhelming, and i deny the motion. mr. murdaugh, you now having been found guilty of two counts of murder involving your wife and your son, two counts of possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime, the burden now comes upon the court to impose a sentence. given the lateness of the hour

and the victims' rights that must be taken into consideration and complied with under the victims' bill of rights and considering what i anticipate to be a number of people who might have something to say regarding sentencing, we will defer sentencing to a later date. of course, the minimum sentence for murder is 30 years, the maximum sentence is life imprisonment. as to each count. and on the weapons charge, the sentence is up to five years or five years which has to be concurrent if a life sentence is

imposed. when would you all like to reconvene for sentencing? i would like to give everyone an adequate opportunity to prepare for it? >> state will be ready at 9:30 in the morning, your honor. >> we can do it at 9:30 tomorrow morning also. >> all right. the defendant is remanded to the custody of the colliton county sheriff's department. and he may be taken away.

let's bring back ellison barber, charles coleman, katie phang. i'm going to hand it over to my colleague and our msnbc chief legal analyst and host of "the beat," ari melber. take it away. >> thank you, joy. great to be with everyone here as we cover what has been a striking resolution to a trial that has captivated much of the country. we have our guests, reporters, experts with us. katie phang, your reaction to what we just saw in the verdict. >> i was startled by the fact there was almost little to no reaction from alex murdaugh. his son buster murdaugh, who was located a few rows behind him.

i reasonably anticipate, ari, that the judge in this case, his name was clifton newman, he's done an exceptional job of running a tight ship through weeks of testimony evidence and frankly a lot of very strong emotions in that courtroom. i reasonably anticipate he will sentence alex murdaugh to life in prison with a 30-year minimum mandatory. it is kind of remarkable the verdict came back so quickly after weeks of testimony being presented, after all the evidence that was presented in this case. it clearly showed that the jury rejected any defense that was offered by alex murdaugh, including the two days of direct, cross, and redirect that alex murdaugh went through. i thought as a former prosecutor it was a huge mistake for him to take the stand and it looks like the jury agreed that at the end of the day, alex murdaugh lies and lied to get out of the guilty verdict they had just rendered. >> striking to see a guilty verdict, a conviction of

mr. murdaugh for double murder. we're looking at some images of his family. and ellison barber, some views and people around the nation have heard about this case. it's truly scandalous set of facts now, as a convicted double murder. there are various shows, netflix and others, that have signed on to tell the story. it's really an era where we don't have many quote/unquote national trials, this would seem for some americans to be one. for those who weren't following it closely, can you tell us a little bit about what led to tonight's verdict and this family that is multiple generations of legal d.a., legal royalty, really. the establishment in this state. this father, grandfather, and others were d.a. now he stands convicted tonight as a murderer. >> yeah, if you were in that courtroom tonight sitting where the judge is sitting and you were looking directly ahead at the door to the left of that door there is a wall that is empty, and it is empty because a photograph of the defendant's

grandfather was previously in that space, because for generations they have been solicitor generals here. they're a well known family in this court of south carolina. they have a well known reputation in the legal community. and also just amongst people throughout the low country in south carolina. so look, the prosecution, they did not have a lot of direct evidence in this case. the two murder weapons they say were used, a 12-gauge shotgun and a 300 blackout rifle, those were never found, but they relied on markings, tool markings on the shell casings that were left around maggie murdaugh's body, and they had experts testifying that those same tool markings were found on bullets that were fired on this hunting property, over 1700 acres, long before the murder. that was really where they tried to tie this idea that these were family weapons to the case. really, the key piece of evidence that came into this case kind of late was a snapchat

video that was taken by one of the victims, paul murdaugh, minutes before the state said he died, they based his time of death on the time he stopped using his phone. 8:49, june 7th, 2021. that snapchat video he had taken but never sent, it was recorded five minutes before that. in it, he was taking a video of a dog, and you heard two voices in the back. that alex murdaugh admitted on the stand that was his voice and his now deceased wife's maggie's voice. that was huge because for months, alex murdaugh had maintained he was not at the kennels during the time that they were murdered, that he had not gone back there until he discovered their bodies lying on the ground. so the first time when he took the stand, he admitted to a lie. and the prosecution said, you lied about what is probably the most important fact of all, that you were with the victims at the scene of the crime minutes

before they were murdered. the prosecution really centered a lot of their case around this idea of a motive. they talked a lot in their closing remarks about this idea of a gathering storm. there were really three parts to that. they say one part was the fact that alex murdaugh had stolen legal fees from his law firm in a civil case he had worked on, and people he worked with had noticed legal fees were missing and they were starting to ask questions, they were starting to investigate him. he knew he had stolen millions of dollars from his legal firm, his legal clients over the years, and with that investigation, they say he started to panic because he was worried all of the other crimes were going to come to light. the second part of that quote/unquote gathering storm that the prosecution talked so much about was a 2019 boat crash where the late paul murdaugh, his son, was accused of driving a boat that crashed and he was accused of being under the influence at the time and killed a 19-year-old named mallory beach.

alex murdaugh owned that boat and he was named in a multi-million dollar civil lawsuit. that's factor two. they said factor three of this quote/unquote gathering storm is the fact alex murdaugh's dad who he trusted so much was dying. they said alex murdaugh was someone who didn't want to be shamed because his legacy, his family name was so important to him, and he felt so much pressure from those three factors that gathering storm, that he thought his only way out was to kill his wife and child. they say his life was like a ponzi scheme. anytime something started to happen, he found out a way to become the victim, to shift taeng, and then maneuver things around to cover up his wrongdoing. this time they say it didn't work. he got caught. he went before a jury, and a jury found him guilty. ari. >> thank you, ellison. charles, i'm curious your view of the wider implications. i mentioned how much interest there's been in this case, this story, this double homicide now convicted double murder of this

individual's own wife and kid. it just is unspeakable in terms of the evil that's now convicted. and yet there's a wider story here, charles, in a country where we talk so much and see so much evidence of a two-tiered system of justice. this was an elite family, he worked at times as a volunteer investigator, the money he had, the property he had, the standing he had in the community. and while we may learn more about what else may have been covered up in the past, it would seem perhaps overdue that justice was served tonight. and that's not always the case. >> you know, ari, there are only so many times you can go to the well of privilege before the well runs dry. i think this is a classic example of that. there is no question that the implications of this are connected to how influential and impactful and well known this family was, particularly within this region of south carolina. and given the fact that you're talking about a family whose

legacy includes an hbo documentary, a netflix documentary, so much conversation about different things that have been associated with this family, where it seems as though they have continued to escape accountability because of that two-tiered justice system. finally it appears the 12 members of this jury said enough is enough. the speedy verdict that we saw in this case, in my opinion, tells me that many of those jurors walked into that jury room knowing very clearly what it is they wanted to do. i am not convinced or rather unconvinced that some of those people did not think about who this family was and what their connections were. that is not to say that they did not consider the evidence. however, the notion of privilege, the notion of power, the notion of many celebrity or celebrity adjacent atmosphere y do think played a role in terms of how the jury actually viewed the defendant in this case. it was a theme that you saw the prosecution advance, and when the prosecution put on its rebuttal case today, when they had that rebuttal closing, i

believe that was it for them. that's what changed the tide and put it clearly in their favor, because before then, i was looking at a prosecution summation that i wasn't particularly impressed by. the defense did not do everything they could have on their closing. and then on the rebuttal closing, the prosecution drove home a lot of themes that spoke exactly to what you talked about and shored it up for the rest of the jury. >> that goes to also who mr. murdaugh was. ellison, you have been following this so closely. if you're going to try to cover up a crime, and legally he's now a convicted murderer, you have to know a bit about how crimes are investigated. he and his family certainly had a leg up there. he was steeped in this. he's a lawyer, a volunteer for the prosecutor's office. he comes from generations of that. the prosecutors had to prove this case without fingerprints, without physical evidence, without blood, the things many people are accustomed to from tv trials and real trials. it's not easy to prove a circumstantial case for a double

murder, especially when some jurors say no matter how terrible this guy seems, hard to wrap your mind around someone murdering their own flesh and blood son. so walk us through a little bit from your reporting how they had, and again, i don't mean to oversimplify, but a bit of cat and mouse with someone, again, i can say now that the trial is over, convicted as a murderer who according to the jury did do this and did hide evidence in a way that only left prosecutors with a, quote, circumstantial case that they won tonight. >> reporter: you know, they kept talking about that throughout the course of this trial. six weeks of t saying this is someone who is a known liar, an admitted liar, a very good liar. they had 60-plus witnesses come through, lots of them family friends who knew alex murdaugh for decades, saying i never knew any of this. so what they kept trying to tell the jury and clearly did so successfully, is he lies to

everyone he cares about and he does it with ease. why on earth would you think he's telling the truth now? were they really crafted a dense but very specific trail, if you will, was when they leaned heavily on cell phone data from paul, maggie, and alex murdaugh that night, and also data that came from alex murdaugh's car driving through. they used the cell phone data to make the case of when the time of death was established. and also created what was an incredibly tight timeline where it was hard to believe that anyone else would have had time to come onto their property which is about 40 minutes away from here, 1700 acres. it's very rural, and the lead-up to it, the space itself is large. they said the idea that someone came and got onto your property in that little window where you were not there and then shot and killed maggie and paul murdaugh, and also came without their own weapons because they thought we can probably find weapons there

and use those, and then got out before anybody else heard, saw anything weird, and alex murdaugh just stumbled upon them. all of that was hard to believe at its face when you looked at the numbers because the timeline was so tight. at the same time, the defense said because the timeline was so tight and two weapons were used, how could this guy use both of them? a moment that had to be big for the jury is when they were physically able to go and see the scene, which is not something that happens very often. we were showing some of the footage from that scene. as someone who has gone through a lot of these documents and has looked at some of the diagrams put in evidence where it showed where maggie murdaugh was killed, where she was found laying down, it was right outside of this building here, and then you see this pan over, the door that's kind of off to the right that is this, the feed room, that's where paul murdaugh was found. when you looked at the diagram, the distance, it looked so much smaller. when i saw this video, and we had a press pool that went, so i was able to physically see it,

but even watching the video back compared to that diagram, i was surprised at how much further apart it looked than it did in the diagram. so this whole idea the defense had of, well, how could he possibly shoot his son with one gun, with that shotgun, and then pick up another gun and then shoot maggie, and there would be no sort of defensive wounds? the distance between them was, i think, bigger than maybe it looked on paper. and longer and further than the defense wanted jurors to believe. so that was a very interesting, significant moment when the jury got to go and see that, and the pool reporter who was with them said that she felt personally that it was very emotional being there, that that is a different experience. you have to think some of that factored in for the jury here, because you can look at papers, you can try and game out how somebody could have moved, could they have done it in this time, to physically see it and walk that path yourself, that's a different thing. and the prosecution argued

maggie murdaugh, based on the way she had fallen, that she was the second person shot, she was running around the corner kind of towards the gunshot wounds to check on where she knew her son was. and that as she was moving around, that's when alex murdaugh turned and shot her. she was shot four or five times. paul murdaugh shot twice. ari. >> thank you, ellison barber reporting. for our legal experts, as we go, do you expect life in the sentencing tomorrow, briefly, charles and then katie? >> the earlier point about the exemplary job clifton newman has done, this is not an easy thing to do. he's been over a number of high profile trials. he was also judge the over the walter scott trial some years ago with michael slager in south carolina, and he has continued to show himself as an exemplary jurisprudence. i expect he'll give the

defendant life and we'll see that tomorrow. >> katie. >> it's got to be, and the reason why is there's so much that has been stolen from people. and i'm not just talking about the funds that were embezzled and stolen. the lies, the emotionality of having maggie murdaugh, paul murdaugh, a young man, mallory beach, the young woman paul murdaugh was responsible for killing, all these deaths, there has to be accountability and one person who's going to stand for that accountability and that's alex murdaugh. at his arraignment, he was asked by the judge how do you want to be tried? he said by god and by my country. he also got tried by a jury of his peers, and because of that, he's going to get life in prison. >> a jury of his peers at a time where whatever privilege and connections they had, they clearly ran out tonight in this rather stark double murder guilty verdict. i want to thank ellison barber, charles coleman, and katie phang.

and thanks to each of you. appreciate it. we have been co-anchoring a little bit on a breaking news story. you never know when these verdicts are coming. thanks for letting me play along. >> clutch player ari melber coming in. our legal eagle. i so appreciate you, my friend. thank you for going o.t. all right, thank you very much. now to another legal case we're watching. we're waiting the response from fox news to the bombshell lawsuit by dominion voting systems that has shown the real fraud in the 2020 election was actually the false claims being stoked on their network by their hosts and their guests, as fox on-air personalities and senior executives privately admitted it was all a lie. with the latest filing showed which is perhaps not surprising at all is the extent to which fox news was acting as the campaign arm of the republican party. meanwhile, we're seeing a split in the republican party, put on full display with two competing events. you have the annual conservative

political action conference, cpac, that has become the island of misfit toys for lack of a better term, made up of the maga fanatics which donald trump and kari lake will be headlining, and then the jeb bush allied republicans down in florida at the club for growth annual retreat, which will include florida governor ron desantis and former vice president mike pence. but let me be clear. whatever schism exists between these two factions, the end goal is the same, going after tax cuts for the super wealthy and deregulation of their industry. for decades, they have tolerated extremists in the party base, regardless of whether that meant white supremacists or racists or violent extremists who would, let's say, attack the u.s. capitol, as long as they were willing to put their votes on the table to help put a republican in the white house. which brings me back to this melding of fox news and the republican party. perhaps the perfect example is former house speaker paul ryan, who if you didn't know, sits on

the board of directors at the parent company of fox news. in fact, he's done so almost since the time he left congress. for his one big accomplishment as speaker of the house, was passing the massive tax cut that benefitted almost solely the super rich and big corporations, for which he squinted his eyes, and tolerated the maga movement. it shows ryan repeatedly pleading with top fox executives to move on from donald trump and stop spouting election lies, but ryan has remained on that board as fox continues to this day to push some of the same lies that he was supposedly fighting against. last week, he was asked about that very decision by the bulwark's charlie sykes. >> is there a red line for you at any point where you said i cannot be associated with a company that does this? >> i want to see the conservative movement get through this moment. and i think fox is a big part of the constellation of the

conservative movement. i want to see -- it really is. >> the solution or the problem? >> i think it's going to have to be a part of the solution if we're going to solve the problem of the conservative movement, because there isn't a bigger platform than this in america. so i think the conservative movement is going through a lot of churn and a lot of turmoil. i don't like where it is right now. >> but it does appear that paul ryan is doing at fox what he did in congress. focusing not on what is right but on securing the proverbial bag, because as rupert murdoch said in his deposition, it's not about the red or the blue. it's about the green. joining me now is charlie sykes, msnbc columnist, and katie phang, msnbc legal contributor and host of the katie phang show on msnbc, is back with me as well. i want to thank you, katie, for some great legal pinch hitting on that previous story. charlie, i want to go to you first because you got a chance to talk to paul ryan. he does strike me as the human

embodiment of the problem here. he was willing to put up with a lot of shenanigans in the house as speaker and put up with a lot of trumpism and endorsed trump because he wanted the tax cut and he needed the votes of the base of the republican party to get it. >> well, it is interesting that paul ryan is taking the same approach to his position on the fox board as he did in the trump administration. when trump was president, he basically said i'm not going to criticize him in public. i'm going to talk to him in private. i want to be in the room. this is this culture that's been developed. paul ryan is not alone in all this, this idea that in order to be relevant, that you are in the room. so what they tell themselves, the story they tell themselves is they make all of these compromises and all these surrenders for the greater good because they can prevent something from happening. same thing with fox news. he thinks that if he tells rupert murdoch in private this is terrible, we can't keep doing this, that that's enough, that he doesn't have to talk to the

stakeholders, the shareholders, the public. he doesn't have to tell the american public that fox is telling them lies. and so this is basically now become this culture that paul ryan embodies, which is that whatever principles we have to shed, as long as we're in the room, as long as we can influence things. but we're seeing where it led. it didn't happen in the room. paul ryan thought that maybe he could get fox to stop spreading the election lies. tucker carlson still on the air. tucker carlson is still pushing the conspiracy theories. other people have quit. paul ryan stays. >> i mean, the thing is that something bad did happen. the problem with that logic, charlie, is that the something bad happened. there was an insurrection at the capitol, five people died, police officers were injured. over 100 police officers were grievously injured, one later dying. you know, and so they have never prevented the something bad. but the thing that they have

gotten is the one thing that has been the precious for paul ryan. that massive tax cut is what he got out of compromising with trump, and then he left. he literally physically left the congress once he got it because that's really all he wanted. i take you to this quote that you're probably familiar with, grover norquist, that he said it before, but he said it again in 2012. that it doesn't matter who the president is for him. he's the guy who wants to cut all taxes. he says i just need a republican with enough working digits to sign the bills that we have already prepared. so is that where we are? that the republican party is now saying it doesn't matter how violent it gets, how crazy it gets, how racist it gets? we just want the tax cuts. and we will tolerate anyone to get them. >> well, they want a lot of other things, and i did point out to paul ryan, who is now coming back as a fiscal conservative, that that tax cut added about $1.9 trillion to the national debt and how ironic

that was. but yeah, it is this binary choice, and again, paul is sort of somebody from the past. i kept looking at him thinking, everything you're talking about must come with a unicorn because you're not acknowledging the way the world has changed. a lot of the things you're talking about, the way you describe the republican party, it doesn't exist anymore. this is not a party that's interested in governing. this is not a party that has a philosophy or a platform. and i think you're seeing that on a daily basis when the clown cars of the house republican majority. >> and then it gets to another issue, katie, which i'm glad you're here. we need a legal voice here. as you read through what rupert murdoch was saying, i'm getting called from my friend jared kushner, he's having all these conversations with the campaign. he opposes the idea, as do many on fox, that they made this accurate call. there's a wing in there that does very accurate election calls and they didn't like what they were doing. there were reporters and angry

texting journalists at fox, the small number that are actually trying to be journalists, and saying how dare you report on this election in a way that makes our stock price be at risk. but there's a piece that i want to read to you from the dominion filing. this is a part i want to ask you about. during trump's campaign, rupert murdoch provided trump's son-in-law jared kushner with fox confidential information about joe biden's ads along with debate strategy. providing kushner a preview of his ads before they were public. this sounds like fox news is not a news organization. i think we're clear they're not. they're a propaganda outfit as they have been called by leards in the democratic party. but are they also guilty of colluding and essentially is this a campaign finance issue? are they part of the republican party and republican campaign? >> so they are a propaganda arm, but then that's a good question. was there an in-kind contribution that was made that was not documented or something

of value that was given to benefit trump because of the fact that they were given all this inside information. at the end of the day, i don't know if it rises to the level, joy, but i do think what's troubling is that it just points to the reality, which is the almighty dollar is what was driving it. if that's the case, there has to be something that accounts for what am i giving you, which is why again, maybe there's an in-kind contribution that was provided for which there was no documentation, for which there was nothing that was accounted for. but it's really, can the shareholders, joy, they are the people that could actually bring fox to its knees. they could give the financial death penalty. the shareholders suing that board of paul ryan and others and saying you breached your duties of loyalty, your duties of confidency, your duties of diligence, and the way you ran this company. kick out your executive board, kick out all the high level

personnel and make them pay for what they have done. >> let me ask you this. we're going to talk in a little bit about the fact the door is now open for the officers who were injured in the january 6th insurrection to sue donald trump. could they theoretically sue fox news? i mean, because fox news is pumping the information that then also feeds these people's rage and false information. i mean, are they open now essentially to claims by people who were injured on january 6th? >> i think you would have a serious causation problem. i think you could sue, i don't know if you could survive, you being a plaintiff, you were injured. i think the causation problem, when i talk about legally, is the idea that your injuries were directly caused by the actions or conduction of the person you're suing. is there a color argument that could be made? absolutely. the fact you didn't just put blinders on. you endorsed, encouraged. almost like inciting of what we

saw donald trump do on january 6th. it's the same thing, but the worst part is that fox news knew what it was doing the entire time. and it never did anything to ameliorate or remedy the situation. because of that, that creates the exposure. i'm going it give you the last word, charlie. we love dogs on the show. charlie, democrats now have to decide how to respond to this. do they still treat fox as a news organization and go on as normal now that they know that fox news colludes with campaigns, with republican campaigns, and from the very top is okay with lying to their own audience? it's hard to imagine they'll ever use a clip of an interview fairly or honestly. >> well, that's a decision they'll have to make. pete buttigieg haas done a pretty good job going into fox and making the case, but fox has a much more difficult question. what happens when donald trump starts moving up in the polls,

and what happens when the audience begins to respond? a lot of this is because of the panic they would lose the audience. donald trump is now attacking them and trying to drive a wedge between the maga world and fox news. what will fox news do? will they ever put donald trump on the air again to spread his lies? it's going to be an interesting choice. >> he's attacking none other than paul ryan own his fake twitter tonight. the plot thickens. katie and charlie, thank you. up next, states of disunion. mississippi and tennessee are in a foot race to see who can bring back the bad old days of injustice and barbarity of the past. stay with us. h us

(tony hawk) skating for over 45 years has taken a toll on my body. i take qunol turmeric because it helps with healthy joints and inflammation support. why qunol? it has superior absorption compared to regular turmeric. qunol. the brand i trust. why are 93% of sleep number sleepers very satisfied with their bed? maybe it's because you can gently raise your partner's head to help relieve snoring. so you can both stay comfortable all night save $1,200 on the sleep number 360 i10 smart bed. only for a limited time.

it is march so happy women's history month which in tonight's state of disunion, mississippi, the month -- which in mississippi is the month between black history month and

confederate heritage month or that's what the governor quietly proclaimed last year. governor reeves was more public about recognizing black history month this year on its final day, posting on social media about history making black leaders. the first black u.s. senator, whose election was enough to make mississippi rewrite its constitution to exclude black voters. james meredith who integrated the university of mississippi, spacking a riot in which two students were killed. medgar evers who was assassinated by a white supremacist in his own home. walter payton, and b.b. king and sam cook. these men are imminently deserving, but notice the governor of the blackest state in america could not name even one of his state's great black women. not the legendary journalist ida b. wells who exposed the horrors of lynching to the nation, or fannie lou hamer, whose speech

to the democratic convention was a turning point in the fight for voting rights. it's not surprising the governor would write black women out of his state's history since republicans don't seem to give a toss about women or believe in intersectionality. just ask ron desantis. in true republican fashion, reeves also joined in on the wave of legislation targeting lgbtq people. he signed a bill banning gender affirming care for trans youth, with matt walsh, who is against minors getting potentially life-saving health care, but defended marrying off teenage girls. >> girls between the ages of like 17 and 24 is when they're technically most fertile. that's biological. that's a fact. i'm just stating facts. that's all i'm doing. what happened recently, his is the fourth fact, recently in the last 30 years or so, we decided that that's way too young to start a family.

so what i'm saying is that the problem is not per se teenage pregnancy. it's unwed pregnancy. >> oh, yes, these modern women. we should turn back the clock and get them back at home with babies. mississippi is the eighth state to enact a ban on gender affirming care for trans youth, along with tennessee, which today decided to pile on governor bill lee signed a bill expanding restrictions on gender affirming care and a ban on drag performances. despite a photo that surfaced of lee himself appeared to dress in drag in a school photo. those bills are one way tennessee republicans are trying to end mudrnty and roll back the clock, including one republican who takes it back to the most brutal battle days of all. that's coming up next. n't care ♪ find the perfect vacation rental for you booking.com, booking. yeah.

why are 93% of sleep number sleepers very satisfied with their bed? maybe it's because you can adjust your comfort and firmness on either side. booking. your sleep number setting. to help relieve pressure points and keep you both comfortable all night. save $1,200 on the sleep number 360 i10 smart bed. only for a limited time. ♪ ♪ go anywhere. do anything in the wildly capable

electrified jeep® grand cherokee and jeep® wrangler 4xe. found it. the eagle has landed. that's one small step for man... hey, what's up? uh... houston... we have a situation. how did you get here? you're characters in our video game! video game? yeah, it's what we do with xfinity 10g. it's like, you know, the best network imaginable. what the heck is that? those are the bad guys. are they friendly? the 10g network, only from xfinity. one giant leap for mankind. republicans attend if he are

moving full speed ahead in their quest to undo the thing they hate the most, the 20th century. with governor bill lee signing a bill today that would restrict drag performances. if governor neil knew the history that republicans don't want mueller and they know that drag is an art form that goes back, literally, centuries. it's been around since shakespeare. but in their zeal to turn back the clock, they're also showing their ignorance about the history that they don't want their own children to learn, either. tennessee's history of brutal lynchings. like the peoples grocery lynching in memphis, 131 years ago today, when the white mob stormed the shelby county jail and viciously lynched three black man. the murder prompted a friend of the three murdered man,

journalist ida b. wells to begin her campaign to show the horrors of lynching. public hangings, the strange fruit worn by southern trees, billy holiday sang about. recently tennessee state representative republican paul cheryl showed his ignorance of that history, debating a bill concerning capital punishment. >> i was just wondering about, could i put a limit on that? hanging by terry also? and also i would like to sign on to your -- >> the bill was to have firing squads come back he. padres to than anyone who might have heard or offending saying it was to convey his belief that heinous crimes and adjust society require the death penalty. msnbc political analyst democratic strategist and co-host of the what a day podcast, and rick wilson, former republican strategist, what, today we need, and

bringing back the hanging tree. that is the tennessee new idea. a firing squad and a hanging tree. >> that state rep knew exactly what he was. doing he wasn't joking. he's not even remiss today. what he was doing with sending out a test balloon to see how much cruelty he could get support for among his colleagues. i guess somebody told him, hey, you should do, that but the reality is, the representative knew the legacy of lynching across this country and in tennessee, no less, and how it was used to target black bodies for decades and decades. so he knew exactly what he was doing. if anybody buys that apology he issued today, i don't know what to tell you because he meant what he said and he wanted that part of cruelty to be included. >> donald trump is also saying he'd like to bring back firing squads, that will take it to the next level. let's leave tennessee alonso timothy banned critical race theory, the first complaint was a book about dr. martin luther king junior. that's got to go, apparently, according to the critical race

theory ban, and tennessee. failed >> we can do that but irreversible impairment. they've also joined the states that are begging banning drag shows, i could go on. tennessee is actually ground zero right now for anti lgbtq bills. what the heck is going on in the state of tennessee? >> look, the central asia of the culture war to the modern maga republican party is, it cannot be overstated. they don't have any other governing philosophy anymore. they are unlimited governing can services. they want to use the power the government now, as they always accuse liberals of, doing to reshape societies the exact desire mold. they want to reshape since i attended something that is

doesn't have anything uncomfortable. they don't want any ideas that could confront them with the realities of history or society. or the weird diversity and the weird various pathways that human life takes. things that do not seem normal to them inside that little bubble that they love to create. they're gonna try to allege a tree legislate against. they've got a huge majority in the houses. they've got a governor in billy who's a willing to go out as far in the closing. can we go to see more of. this it's iterating throughout the states. they're doing a lot of copycat bills in various states. once he gets away with it, another state will pick it up. >> and he states right now have gender affirming care bands. thing is, juanita, the percentage of people who are trans, especially trans kid, is like under 1%. this is like a tiny group of people. but you would think that there was this massive wave of parents deciding i've got a girl and i would like a boy, or i've got a boy i would like a girl. and the parents are running

amok doing this. it's just not the case. but they are making it sound like it's some sort of epidemic, because it makes them uncomfortable, therefore it must be illegal. >> it feeds into the fear of the people who believe in this extremist type of platform. what is sickening is that we know it's targeting the most marginalized people who actually need support and need care. but on top of all of that, joy, tennessee and mississippi have much bigger issues that they need to address. i'm talking about clean water, quality education, quality health care. and they're ignoring all of that for this type of extremist agenda, which we know doesn't get republicans to fire off the national stage, with this is the runway they are setting up for 2024 and they're taking the same playbook that these 2024 that voters across the country rejected, but if this is the runway that maga republicans want to keep using, i don't know what to tell them if this results in the next cycle. >> we're also there also

republishing punishing nashville because they refused to host her republican convention. i remember how we met. remember when we used to debate, because you are the small government conservative and i was a crazy liberal? i used to enjoy debating with you, because you literally were like, we need smaller government and less government control. it's literally the opposite now. what you are seeing is republicans, they want the biggest government possible. they want government to tell you what books to read. they want to tell you what you can say, how you can talk. >> how you can live in your home. >> they want to monitor women's travel patterns by looking at their phone data to make sure they don't go to another state to get an abortion. i'm sorry, that is some dystopian stuff. dystopian stuff that any conservative in the past would have been appalled by. i mean, if barack obama had said something like that there would've been pitchforks and

torches in the streets. >> and here's the thing. there is a lot this is you have to use someone's pronouns. there isn't. it's saying don't be a jerk. it's somebody saying calling this pronoun, just don't be a jerk. they're saying no, we're going to make it illegal for you to have to do this. they want to literally legislate your attitude. that is some big -- >> yes. >> and your identity. they want to legislate how you live and it's gonna be all wrapped up in every bit of this, but we're even seeing how much further they are willing to go. didn't desantis just introduced a bill that would require bloggers to write about -- so they can be -- ? >> these that bill today and if you're blogging, which could mean twitter, by the way, about prince ronald the delicate or any of his friends, then you have to get a license from the state of florida. i told jason today, interact

lee, i got that license already. it's called the united states constitution. >> this is what i'm saying. they're literally thing you must not talk to him he so delicate, his feelings. what happened to f your feelings? their whole thing about black people should not have any feelings about walking under statues of traders we went to war against. it's like having a statue of hirohito. but we are so delicate that even talk about dr. king in any way we can handle it. we got feelings. it's wild. when eta tolliver and rick wilson, maybe they weren't breastfed enough. >> coddled. >> just saying. thank. you that's tonight's read out. all over chris hayes starts now. al>> tonight on all in, a quick guilty verdict in the south carolina murder trial that is has captivated the nation. then, -- >> i want to ask yourself how many times you have been lied to. >> it is being called a seminal moment in the history of mass media. tonight sen