were the studio responses last night an they were not even close. some of them didn't get a response. so i anticipate this lasting weeks, if not months, and then again, you never know. once these people start to be unemployed for a long time and the studios feel the pinch of no fall shows, you see panic time. >> matthew, thank you very much for joining us. i'm -- i have no doubt we're going to have you back on to talk about what else is going on because of this strike, unfortunately. appreciate it. >> thank you. that's going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now. hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york, an important question over a hearing on capitol hill regarding the ethical lapses of one of our government's three

branches. should supreme court justices be held to the same standard as any and all other public servants? the senate judiciary committee held a hearing on the ethical standards or lack thereof for supreme court justices a topic that has come up in light of new reporting on repeated failures by justices to disclose details of lavish vacations, travel, gifts, even real estate transactions, testifying on behalf of democrats, a former federal judge and group of legal experts, guests invited by republicans included a former attorney general. more notable than who testified was who did not. chief justice john roberts declined an invitation from the committee, something dick durbin brought up at the start of today's hearing. >> in his letter last week the chief justice sent a statement of ethics principles and practices.

it was a document that was attacheded to his letter. it is an extraordinary document. not in a good way. it makes clear while the justices are fine with consulting with certain authorities on how to address ethical issues, they do not feel bound by the same authorities. last month we learned about a justice who for years has accepted lavish trips and real estate purchases worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from a billionaire with interest before the court. that justice failed to disclose these gifts and has face nod apparent consequences under the court's ethics principles. that justice claims that lengthy cruises aboard a luxury yacht are personal hospitality and are exempt under current ethical standards from even being reported. the fact that a texas billionaire paid more than $100,000 for a justice's mother's home also seems to be

an acceptable example because the justice insists he lost money in the transaction. how low can the court go? >> the question today. for their part republicans tried to portray the hearing as an attempt by democrats to smear the court. senator john kennedy returned to a line clarence thomas used in his confirmation hearing decades ago, kennedy accused democrats of a, quote, high-tech lynching, by bringing up questions swirling around thomas' relationship with republican mega donor billionaire harlan crow. that defense was undermined almost completely in a statement from leading conservative intellectual former judge michael ludig, the role he played in convincing mike pence he could not and should not joe biden's electoral college victory from being certified january 6th. ludig, submitted a statement to the senate judiciary committee calling for congress to come up

with a code of ethics for the supreme court. his statement to the senate reads in part, quote, whether the supreme court is subject to ethical standards of conduct or not, is emphatically not a partisan political issue and must not become one. this is not to say that the issue and question of whether the supreme court should be bound to ethical standards in its nonjudicial conduct and activities is not important. it is unquestionably important. it is even of surpassing importance, but it ought not be thought of as anything more, and certainly not less, than the housekeeping that is necessary to maintain a republic. the question of ethical standards at the supreme court front and center on capitol hill is where we begin today. nyu law professor former clerk to judge sonia sotomayor, melissa murray is here. joining us brian falling, co-founder and,tive director of the progressive judicial advocacy group demand justice, with us bassle, director of the

program at college. i won't ask you what justice sonia sotomayor thought of today's hearing but what you think the justices would like to be known for when it comes to ethics? my guess is most of them, you know, sort of the thing, you're not doing anything wrong you would be happy to shine a light on your finances or your travel. so my question for you is what do you think most of the justices want when it comes to this question of an ethical code of conduct? >> well, nicole, one of the first things we have to recognize is not all of the justices are similarly situated with regard to this. i was thinking about senator kennedy's response, this was a high-tech lynching of clarence thomas, words we've heard before, jus justice thomas has said about himself. can you imagine this happening to thurgood marshal, the person

who preceded clarence thomas, if marshal had accepted private jet travel or hotel lodging from a billionaire, a billionaire purchased thurgood marshal's mother's home for him, would we be having a conversation and hearing before the senate. we would have run him out on rail. i think about justice marshall's widow who died in november who talked about how she actually didn't socialize a lot in washington, d.c., when her husband became a justice of the court because she knew she had to be above reproach because he had to be above reproach as the first black justice on the united states supreme court. for people like my former boss, justice sonia sotomayor, they understand who they are in the arc of this history and that there is no room for error of this sort. they're scrupulous about disclosing these kinds of things and the fact that there have been lapses, it's okay if there's a lapse but there has to

be some kind of guidance here. we need to have firm rules, they need to abide by them and we should demand it. judge lieudig is right. this is what we need to maintain a republic. the supreme court must be above reproach. >> brian fallen, i imagine there was a day when melissa wasn't sure she would be quoting the judge on anything, but i love that last line. it's a matter of housekeeping if we want to maintain our republic. nothing less than maintaining the republic is on the line. this shouldn't be partisan. the justices would like to tell a story that this is about them, the supreme court, justices appointed by conservatives. we talk about how the partisan impression they leave is on them, cases decided by justices by democratic and republican presidents. they have hugged the far right so publicly and so consistently, that they can't see beyond it.

i wonder where you think this hearing left the public conversation around ethics for the supreme court? >> well, i think there was an interesting dynamic that came out of this hearing in terms of what you heard from the republicans today. somewhat predictably republicans sort of approached it as doing their able best to run interference for clarence thomas and so as some of the clips you played showed, they did their darnedest to try to portray the democrats' interest in this as pure lay partisan exercise. you played the statement about john kennedy referring to this as a high-tech lynching. in the next breath some of the same senators including lindsey graham and chuck grassley, while they thought that purposes behind this hearing might be partisan, they did hope that the supreme court would take action on its own to beef up its own ethical standards. there's daylight there between those sentiments from lindsey graham and chuck grassley and the position that john roberts

is taking. john roberts position is, we have it covered and don't need any more improved ethical standards and these republicans are suggesting oh, yes, you do. so that was a tell to me, that republicans know that there's a vulnerability here the longer these justices dig in their heels and don't do anything to improve the code of ethics at the court. i think they see themselves taking on water politically here because you have judges like michael ludsig making these statements, lisa murkowski of alaska signingen to an ethics bill. somebody like lindsey graham we can't hole hold up the resistance if you don't take action for yourself. democrats should take from that they have a political advantage here and need to press it. >> the reason is you can say a lot of things about republicans, i have and do, but they can read a poll. the supreme court is less popular than donald trump was on his way out the door, 37% have great deal or quite a lot of

confidence in it. >> that's right. at the beginning in your tease when you talked about the rules that impact any other public servant, i just thought about my time early on working in city government, anyone that has ever worked in government any level of government, you do so with the thought in mind that you're working on behalf of the taxpayer and all of your activity is available for public information. if i had a city car i had to be detailed where i took the car and why. if i had a parking plaque, same thing. one of the things that i think we learned out of the conversation about criminal justice reform is that there are entities that are making policy that interact with voters on criminal justice that we cannot allow to self-police. because we don't trust their ability to do it and do it well and in the public's best interest. so it's shocking to me that we still haven't figured out how to

reframe this with the supreme court. i don't think it should be partitioned from criminal justice reform because quite frankly, again, these are individuals that make policy for the entire country. i don't want it to be as compartmentalized. this is about upholding integrity of the public and some of the justices saying on capitol hill that they should not be subject to this kind of detailed documentation of their lives and their influences, is beyond the pale. >> i want to bring into our conversation, democratic senator from california, member of the judiciary committee. thank you for being here. i worked in the,tive branch and i was thinking about it today, the longer i served and the more senior i became, the more intense the background check into me became and the more clearances i was required to have to do my job, the more

scrutiny and the deeper the background check and the farther back they went in terms of years to see if i was suited for that job. the more transparency that was asked of me, you know, the longer i served and the farther up the chain i went. it is the inverse in the judiciary, especially where the supreme court is concerned. how much of laying out these facts is part of the public education piece to make sure the public understand one of these things is not like the other? >> nicole, you bring up a great point. thank you for having me. it's actually a theme that i tried to raise in judiciary committee this morning. there's i think an assumption by the general public, the ethics laws and transparency and disclosure rules apply to supreme court justices but they do not. the president of the united states, administration officials, you're an example, members of congress, elected officials at all levels of

governments, have these binding enforceable ethics laws, financial disclosure requirements, et cetera and you would assume that they apply to the highest court in the land. but we're finding ourselves in a situation where the highest court in the land is trying to abide by the lowest ethical standards and that's what we're trying to correct here. >> chief justice roberts rebuffed, the nicest way to put it, the committee's invitation. have you reached out to the other justices? >> look, i've -- i have through the chairmanship and leadership of the chair of the judiciary committee. i think senate democrats on the judiciary committee stand behind his efforts, if not to get justice thomas to come to the committee, you know, chief justice roberts to answer these very important questions, and because of his refusal, then we have to obtain these other options. it's an example of the supreme court that refuses to regulate

itself, police itself and put in place these minimum common sense ethics requirements that the general public deserves. and let's be clear here. you put up statistics about the public perception or confidence or lack thereof in the supreme court whether it's official ethics violations or just the perception of bad activity, that's not good for the supreme court, not good for the judiciary, not good for the federal government in general and needs to be addressed. it's already bad enough when the supreme court makes it easier for wealthy people to influence the outcome of elections, and makes it harder for working-class people to vote or every other important issue works its way up to the supreme court from the environmental protection to immigration, to choice and access to reproductive services, confidence in the decisions by the supreme court is paramount. >> would you like to see harlan

crowe before the committee answering questions? >> there's a lot of people starting with harlan crow that need to answer questions. you made reference to how partisan some of the discussion in the committee was, just ask yourself this, how would republican members of the senate be reacting if the reported conduct we've been reading about was by a justice appointed by a democratic president. it's not the new appointed justice in question. it is the conduct, whether a justice appointed by a democratic or a republican president, it's the conduct that is unacceptable. >> let me show you what your colleague senator blumenthal had to say about that. >> the public confidence in the united states supreme court has plummeted. we can go back and forth as to what cause is, but a lot of the american public are increasingly

seeing the justices as politicians in robes and now, after the revelation about justice thomas as corrupt politicians in robes. they want an investigation, they want the truth. it should be done by the department of justice because there are allegations of criminal wrongdoing here violations by justice thomas of the disclosure laws incomplete, inaccurate reporting and nondisclosure and in the lack of an investigation, we have a role to play in congress. the judges have a role to play, too, in protecting themselves. what chief justice roberts has done refusing to come before this committee is judicial malpractice. >> it seems like he's putting this in a couple of different buckets. one is what we've been talking about, the lack of an ethics

code that is on par with what you have to do as a senator, on par with what people serving in the executive branch, cabinet down to staffers like i was. but the second is this -- these disclosure violations which the senator alleges may be violations of law. what -- i mean are you considering a criminal referral to the justice department to investigate that? >> well, again, i think there needs to be consequences, but to get to those appropriate consequences there needs to be an investigation. and so the report that's been done through the press is -- shows there's more than smoke there. whether it's the supreme court themselves and they're refusing to hold themselves to account or their department of justice as senator blumenthal suggests, congress has a role to play, absolutely. >> senator padilla, we'll stay on this story and watched the hearing and appreciate you for joining us to talk about it. thank you very much. >> thank you so much. melissa, i want to come back

to you. i think one of the most important pieces of sort of public service and what happened today is putting this issue on the map for the public. i think the public can -- something is wrong, these numbers have plunged faster than in any institution, more than the press, congress, more than the presidency, the supreme court's ratings are down i think 35% in 25 years. but there are different buckets of issues and i just want to sort of tease them out. one is the lack of an ethics code on par with the other branches. the other are serious questions raised through this investigative journalism projects and propublica and other places about failures to disclose under their own meager disclosure laws and i wonder if you can expand on what exists to address that? >> we have seen over the last couple of months that it's not just the last couple weeks with justice thomas. there's that explosive reporting from jody cantor and joe becker

at the "new york times" that talked about a concerted campaign to influence or at least get close to conservative justices that was waged on behalf of conservative interest groups matching up justices with conservative donors for gathering and social events. again, the idea that the court could be captured, that the court could be bought and sold, by those who have the money and the influence to do so, defies every logic of our republic and it's not surprising that the public is intuiting something is off and wrong here. we don't know if anything corrupt has happened, but it's the appearance of the too close associations that make things difficult. even before that reporting, there is the discussion of whether ginni thomas had been texting with mark meadows during the insurrection on the capitol. it seems there's with the court of the ideological developments and political findings that seem to match up with the tilt in the

court toward a more conservative model and more conservative decisions and i think the public wants to know if the court is above the fray, if its decisions are really about law or if this is simply based politics and whoever has the money to play can get access to this court and that's what all of this is about. >> i mean, i think, brian, as some former politico, the third layer to the public's distrust of the court and the rapidly plunging approval ratings, is the perceived indifference to the public's distrust of the court. the conduct of going out and doing public events where they complain bitterly but don't offer any sort of skin in the game and being part of restoring -- don't -- an institution that's healthy, that wants you to see it as healthy throws open it doors. an institution unhealthy and angry that we see it as it is, bolts the doors shut. this is acting like an

institution unhealthy and knows how to tighten the bolts. >> right. you heard republican senators say this is sour grapes from democrats to be investigating this because they're disappointed with the decisions and i have to say, i've mentioned it before, public opinion survey after public opinion survey shows what is motivating and driving the erosion in public support for the court is more so the feeling that court is operating unethically or behaving corruptly, more so than disagreement over the substance of the decisions. we just did a poll a couple weeks ago and twice as many people said corrupt, unethical when asked to voice their concerns about the court, as opposed to out of touch or extreme. so it's the ethics considerations, the corruption, that is driving this as much as anything. and it's good, while it's good that this hearing happened today and any further hearings will be welcomed, i think what today showed is that there's only so much that you can gain out of a hearing like today. by that i mean, you know, there's -- with dianne feinstein

out, an equal number of republicans and democrats on the panel, some of the most partisan republicans on this committee always going to defend clarence thomas no matter what comes out. policy experts and academics testifying, everybody disagreeing what's needed and not, and then off lot of coverage that suggests it was a partisan bicker fest, what would be better would be hearings where there's actually findings of fact and investigative processes afoot, that's what drove the january 6th investigation that there was new information arising out of the hearings. and so if you had subpoenas being issued, witnesses being called in, it would be very hard for these republicans to just knee-jerk complain this is a partisan process when there's new revelations coming out from the committee's work. i hope that there's investigative proceedings to this and not hearings like the ones today. >> right. it's a really important point. they can't subpoena harlan crow unless the republicans decide to vote for that and based on what we saw today that doesn't seem likely. melissa and brian, thank you so much for starting us off on this story.

we'll stay on it. bassle sticks around for the hour. when he come back the judge telling the jurors in the proud boys seditious conspiracy trial after four months of hearing evidence and arguments to keep going. news from inside the courtroom where jurors are continuing to deliberate. what else a judge has told them this afternoon. plus one of the biggest mysteries around the dominion case, those redacted texts and e-mails, something fox news is trying very, very hard to keep from the public. a judge right now is deciding whether the public has a right to know what was in them. and later, a close friend to e. jean carroll is on the stand tout, her dramatic testimony of what she says happened between her friend and donald trump. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. k break. don't go anywhere.

(seth) not to brag, but i just switched to verizon. (cecily) wow! (seth) and i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. (cecily) not that you're bragging. (vo) switch and choose the phone you want, like the incredible iphone 14, on us. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about. verizon whoa. okay. easy does it. we switched to liberty mutual and saved $652. they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. with the money we saved, we thought we'd try electric unicycles. whoa! careful, babe! saving was definitely easier. hey babe, i think i got it! it's actually... whooooa! ok, show-off! help! oh! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ i brought in ensure max protein, with 30 grams of protein.

those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. uh... here i'll take that. ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein, 1 gram of sugar and nutrients for immune health. ♪ it's official, america. xfinity mobile is the fastest mobile service. for immune health. and gives you unmatched savings with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only $30 a line per month. the fastest mobile service and major savings? can't argue with the facts. no wonder xfinity mobile is one of the fastest growing mobile services, now with over 5 million customers and counting. save hundreds a year over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. talk to our switch squad at your local xfinity store today.

a potential for a development in the landmark proud boys seditious conspiracy trial over that group's role in the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol. the justice department has accused its leader enrique tarrio and four other members of the group of conspiring to keep donald trump in office, of wanting to be, quote, donald trump's army, and of, quote, thirsting for violence and organizing for action. the jury is on day four of their deliberations. today nbc news learned joors sent two notes to the judge which included detailed specific questions about the seditious conspiracy charge and what to do in the event that they can't reach a unanimous verdict. joining us from outside the courthouse is justice reporter ryan riley and former u.s. attorney and msnbc contributor glen kisher in is back.

bassle with us at the table. take us through what you're able to report about today's events? >> yeah. the jury after deliberating for about four days in the case that lasted since started in january, jury selection back in december, which just for context was before we even heard from the january 6th committee's final report, they essentially have said that -- indicated they may be hung up on a couple charges, i think essentially the best way to interpret what we're hearing in these notes. seems like we have a lawyer on this panel and i think that it's pretty clear that they are paying close attention, that's one thing that judge kelly remarked on in this is that they're diligent, he called them, and, you know, i think the best, easiest interpretation and takeaway seems to be that there might be something they're locked up on here but i don't think we're in a situation where -- where essentially they're deadlocked on everything. that may be a particular charge.

what they did is came to the judge and said, what do we do if we are locked up. they didn't definitively say we are at an impasse and can't move on past this point. we weren't instructed on what we do if we get to that point and the judge reminding them that they are allowed to return partial investigations verdicts, if locked up send me a note and when they would come down with the dynamic instruction, it's an allen charge and saying essentially go back to the grind, try to get this out. i think maybe more adequate description of what we saw today instead of the dynamic charge is probably a sparkler from the judge today. >> let me for context for our viewers put up what the jury has asked to reach a conclusion on. the charges in the proud boys trial, count one seditious conspiracy, ryan's reporting on, count two, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, count three, conspiracy to

obstruct an official proceeding and aiding and abenting, count four, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging any duties, count five, obstruction of law enforcement during civil disorder and aiding and abetting, six and seven, destruction of government property and aiding and abetting, eight and nine, assaulting or impeding officers. glen, the floor is yours. i wanted to broaden this out in terms of all that this jury is having to deliberate over. >> yeah. nicole, i'm glad we have ryan as the eyes and ears on what's going on down there. let me -- i can be accused of seeing the justice glass as half full, but let's talk about the fact that jury is suggesting they're having trouble unanimously deciding the lead charge, the seditious conspiracy charge. so first of all, what happens, when a jury sends a hang note out saying judge, we've deliberated, taken some votes,

having a difficult time unanimously deciding these issues, the judge at first will say thank you very much, go back and keep working. this is a four-month trial. y'all have only been deliberating four days. we are nowhere near hung jury territory. if they send out another note, look, we've tried, we are deadlocked that's when the judge will give what's called an allen charge, that's an anti-deadlock instruction, it's been around since the late 1800s, and it's an instruction that tells the jury look, you should decide this case one way or another if you can do so consistent with your personal view of the evidence. it's a gentle prodding by the court to judge them into the direction of a verdict rather than a hung jury and a mistrial. but the judge can't overstep because there's a lot of case law that says, you know, you can't coerce a verdict out of a jury so gone are the delays we sequester juries and say you're

not coming out until you reach a verdict. that doesn't fly anymore. assume that they end up hanging on the lead charge, seditious conspiracy, but convicting on all of those other counts that you just put up on the screen. that will still expose these defendants to decades in prison and it will also give the prosecutors the opportunity to retry the lead charge, the seditious conspiracy charge. it's almost win-win. people will view it as a loss if they don't win a conviction on the lead charge, but tactically speaking it won't necessarily be a loss because they can leverage a retrial on the lead charge, in favor of telling some of these defendants look, you may now want to talk with us post verdict to not only reduce your sentence that you're facing on all the other convictions, but to avoid a retrial on the lead charge. >> bassle, there is something

remarkable about sort of the pace and wheels of justice graineding on. ryan covering it, glen making sense of it. to see how involved it is, it does, i think, instill a little bit of trepidation to me that there will be any accountability for anyone other than a foot soldier? >> glen talked about the glass being half full or empty. i'm sorry, i see it half empty because -- i understand that if they're convicted on the other charges there is significant jail time there and there's a narrative that can be woven around that. but to me, if we saw them trying to take over this government, saw them trying to overthrow those -- >> with our own eyes. >> on television, all at the same time, and they can't be convicted on a charge related to that, to me that's a loss. that's a loss not just in terms of this trial, but for our country because the question then becomes, does it give cover to anyone else that wants to do the same thing and is not going

to be held accountable? >> glen, you want to jump in on this? >> yeah. you know, bass l dumped a little water out of my justice glass, but i actually -- >> hang on to it. >> i agree with his observations. but here is my follow-up to that. proving a conspiracy, a seditiou conspiracy, or any other conspiracy, involves proving beyond a reasonable doubt people entered into an agreement to commit crime. you can be involved in an insurrection, you can be involved in ap attack on the capitol, you can destroy property and assault police officers and be guilty of all of that, without necessarily having been involved in a formal conspiracy. so conspiracy charges can be difficult to prove because you don't always have direct evidence of people entering into a criminal agreement. people don't sit down and kind of scratch it out and get it notarized.

so i still think a loss on or a hung jury on the lead count, is not really a failure if they're being held accountable for everything they did on january 6th. >> ryan, we'll give you the last word. what are you watching for and your life like and do you feel like you can't leave? just take us inside what this jury watch is like for you as a reporter? >> yeah. you know, spoiler alert, some people are going to be found guilty here. right. that's something we should just come up with off the bat because, you know, there are defendants here who took the stand, talked about their actions, admitted to the criminal conduct and said they should be found guilty of a certain charge in the case of dominic pezzola, there he is bashing in the window during the breach of the capitol. he may have tried to fall on the sword during his testimony and say the others shouldn't be held accountable for what he did, but i think jurors might be -- be able to see through that. in all honesty, if i were in the jury room i would be looking the closest at the evidence against

enrique tarrio. some of the other defendants on the ground and took part in this attack a it's easier for them to settle the seditious conspiracy charge against those defendants but the enrique tarrio one is tricker. he was in a baltimore hotel on january 6th, arrested in connection with another event before the attack. and you know, what prosecutors had to end up sort of closing with is make it a spectacle. that's what they came out with. enrique tarrio said make ate spectacle. in terms of him directing them to go inside the capitol or attack the capitol i would imagine that's something that jurors are going to be looking at very closely what the government actually has in terms of evidence there, nicole. >> i will echo what glen said, we are a lucky you are our eyes and ears on the ground. thank you for bringing us your latest reporting. a judge could soon make public the damaging text messages fox news wanted to keep

secret in the dominion lawsuit. why that matters. we'll explain next. l explain net ♪ well, the stock is bubbling in the pot ♪ ♪ just till they taste what we've got ♪ [ tires squeal, crash ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream. now, where were we? [ cheering ] (seth) not to brag, but i just switched to verizon. (cecily) wow! (seth) and i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. (cecily) not that you're bragging. (vo) switch and choose the phone you want, like the incredible iphone 14, on us. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about. verizon

(cheering) imagine you're doing something you love. rsv could cut it short. rsv is a contagious virus that usually causes mild symptoms, but can cause more severe infections that may lead to hospitalizations, in adults 60 and older - and adults with certain underlying conditions, like copd, asthma, or congestive heart failure. talk to your doctor and visit cutshortrsv.com.

hi, i'm jason and i've lost 202 pounds on golo. being a veteran, the transition from the military into civilian life causes a lot of stress. i ate a lot for stress. golo and release has helped me with managing that stress and allowing me to focus on losing weight. for anyone struggling with weight and stress-related weight gain, i recommend golo to you. this is a real thing. this is not a hoax. you follow the plan, you'll lose weight.

(seth) not to brag, but i just switched to verizon. (cecily) wow! (seth) and i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. (cecily) not that you're bragging. (vo) switch and choose the phone you want, like the incredible iphone 14, on us. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about. verizon what will you do? will you make something better? create something new? our dell technologies advisors can provide you with the tools and expertise you need to bring out the innovator in you. the public would have gotten to hear from themselves more from the hosts and the producers and the executives at issue. our witness list was public and those are the people that we were planning on bringing to trial either live or by deposition testimony. so you would have heard from them. you would have heard more about

what their documents, their contemporaneous documents had to say. >> that was davida brooke, asking her what we're not seeing, what is behind redactions in the fox news filings defamation lawsuit. pretty soon a judge may solve one of the biggest outstanding mysteries from that lawsuit, what was in those texts and e-mails from tucker carlson and other news hosts that pushed fox to settle. "new york times" and media outlets are asking the judge overseeing that case to undo some of the redactions made by fox while they were negotiating. a lawyer for the "times" noting the issue was not moot because the case has been settled. there's precedent affirming the public's right to understand of what unfolded. quote here, the public's interest in having an accurate and complete record of documents filed with the court is

imperative to understanding the nature of the party's claims. fox news did not respond to the "times" request for comment. let's bring into our coverage "new york times" correspondent mike sh mid-glen kisher in and basil are still with us. what can you tell us about this effort they have waged to see the redacted material? >> many times when you have a high-profile prosecution or litigation, like this one, the media organizations will go try to find out the unredacted material, sorry, the redacted material, that has not become public, as part of ta trial. in this case we're doing what we've done with different cases where we have gone to judges and said hey, these are documents we believe are important to the public. in the case of some of these messages, we believe some of them would have become public at

the trial, this is a public interest, there's an enormous amount that public wants to know about this and would help inform the public about what was going on inside of fox in this period of time, and we believe we should be able to have access to that to try to tell that story. so that's where it is. these things, they often take more time than people think. i don't think this is the type of thing where we would see documents, you know, unredacted in the coming days. there are times and i assume in this case it will happen as well where the group who has an interest here, which would be fox, can make arguments to the judge about why this stuff should remain private. >> glenn, what is -- i was going to say the $64 million question, but it's a $787.5 million question, in the redacted material seems to be what was it that tucker carlson did, right, that was so bad that they fired

him and settled with dominion? is it that explicit? when you're arguing the law and as mike is saying the public's interest in knowing, is -- what is most persuasive way to argue the law with the judge? >> so i think "the new york times" and the public's interest in having this material unredacted and disclosed pubically would involve, if the judge used any of this information that he was privy to, what's behind those black bar redactions, in resolving all of the pretrial issues he had to resolve. i think then those matters have to be disclosed publicly because it really bears on the quality and the performance of the judge in his rulings up until the day of trial when it's settled. i also think look, the first amendment, freedom of the press, the public's right to know, is strong generally, and i don't

think we can let this go without commenting on the hypocrisy of fox news. i'm going to go with the air quotes. a news organization fighting against the first amendment, freedom of the press and public's right to know. i do think where fox's interest rates would be strongest, is if there was really proprietary business information behind the redactions. i find that unlikely, but, you know, it is a little bit of a gray area when it comes to a case having settled. not going to trial. you actually think there are arguments on both sides of the redaction issue. i will add in criminal cases we will seek to have things sealed all the time often for witness protection and witness security matters, but, nicole, once the trial is over, those matters are almost automatically and always unsealed.

i think the first amendment has the better argument here and hopefully the judge will rule that these redactions should be -- they should be unredacted. >> mike, you had great reporting last week about a single message that was the impetus or spark for the decision to part ways with tucker carlson. is the times engaged in an investigative journalistic endeavor to report that story out as well as a legal effort, managed by other people, to make these sort of public interest arguments? >> yeah. what we reported last week was that these messages, some of the redacted text messages, were set off alarm bells and so concerning and helped serve as the catalyst that ultimately leads to the dismissal of tucker carlson. what you're seeing in the lawsuit is just one tool that we could use to try and find out information. it's going to a judge and seeing if the judge will help in that

endeavor. similarly to how we reported the story last week, you know, we continue to report, to try to understand what went on around the dismissal, what went into it, and what did fox know and when did it know it, as it was settling this suit and also learning, i mean the extraordinary thing about it is that senior company executives and the board did not know about the redacted material in the messages until the sunday before the trial was supposed to start. so we're simply trying to understand like how did that happen? why was it that these executives did not know about that at such a high-profile lawsuit and such an important moment, they didn't have all the information that the or side had? >> you know, basil, the amazing thing about this story and why there is almost a say shun

shable interest of what tucker could have said is the content of his on air platform. everything has been the great replacement theory, citing in the manifestos of mass shooters, views about ukraine we learned in new reporting, rupert murdoch was on the phone with ukrainian officials making clear he didn't agree with, views about the military, the military leaders would tell you were bad for military readiness. i mean the content was so reprehensible what do you think is in a text message that's worse? >> i mean this is why i've said, considering all that we do know, i'm really curious to find out all that we don't know and how damaging it is not just for fox news as a business entity, but for our democracy, because it's clear that tucker carlson and others used the platform to undermine our democracy. dominion's attorney made a point that stuck with me, what was their contemporaneous response? were they inclined to do the right thing, say the right

thing, on behalf of the american people or their own -- even their own viewer or content with trying to deceive everyone. were they content with trying to undermine everybody's judgment that they were actually fair and balanced. >> and i guess going back to your point, for the judge to have decided and ruled on falsity, that wasn't going to be before the jury. the judge made a ruling on falsity. is that an argument for what mike is talking about, the public's need to know what went into -- why was the evidence in what the judge was able to see, which was everything, not a redacted version of their internal communications, what was he able to see that let him rule on that and a jury wasn't going to have to weigh in on falsity? >> exactly right. if any of this factored into the judge's resolution of any issues in the run up to trial, then i don't think the judge can be in a position to say, i'm going to continue to conceal that, keep it from the american people, keep it from the press, because

it reflects on the quality of my performance in the case. so i have a feeling the judge will err on the side of disclosure, which feels like the right thing to do by the first amendment, and as basil says, by our democracy. there are important lessons to be learned and important fixes to be put in place based on what we just had to suffer through, you know, tucker carlson's tenure. >> all right. everyone sticks around. up next for us, the criminal indictment against donald trump in new york, the judge will hold a hearing this week on whether the ex-president can talk about the case. publicly. that's next. i struggled with cpap every night. but now that i got the inspire implant to treat my sleep apnea, i'm sleeping much better. in fact, it's making me think of doing other things i've been putting off. like removing that tattoo of your first wife's name. but your mom's name is vicky too! that's even worse. ( ♪♪ )

inspire. sleep apnea innovation. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com. (seth) not to brag, but i just switched to verizon. safety information (cecily) wow! (seth) and i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. (cecily) not that you're bragging. (vo) switch and choose the phone you want, like the incredible iphone 14, on us. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about. verizon

weeds... they have you surrounded. you're just gonna stand there? or are ya gonna take your lawn back. we're gonna take it back. we're gonna take it back. with scotts turf builder triple action! it gets three jobs done at once - kills weeds. prevents crabgrass. and keeps your lawn growing strong. glorious! -agggghhhhhh! -aaagghhhh. no no no. get a bag of scotts triple action today, it's guaranteed. feed your lawn. feed it. (water splashing) hey, dad... hum... what's the ocean like? ♪ are there animals living underwater?

♪ is the ocean warm? yeah, it can be very warm. ♪ you were made to remember some days forever. we were made to help you find the best way there. ♪ (seth) hi, cecily. i just switched my whole family to verizon. (cecily) oh, it's america's most reliable 5g network. we were made to help you find the best way there. (seth) and it's only $35 a line. (cecily) not that you're bragging. (vo) with verizon unlimited for $35 a line, your family now gets disney+, hulu, and espn+. all three included. verizon >> woman: why did we choose safelite? we're always working on a project. while loading up our suv, one extra push and... crack! so, we scheduled at safelite.com. we were able to track our technician and knew exactly when he'd arrive. we can keep working! ♪ synth music ♪ >> woman: safelite came to us. >> tech: hi, i'm kendrick. >> woman: replaced our windshield, and installed new wipers to protect our new glass.

that's service on our time. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ it has been less than a week since the d.a. asked to limit the disgraced ex-president ability to publicly discuss witnesses and evidence in the criminal case citing his history of attacking those involved in legal proceeding against him. now trump's lawyers are pushing back calling it extreme. of course that is despite trump's recent's peterepeated attacks on truth social on the judge and the judge's family and the felony charges against him. bragg's request will be the focus of a hearing scheduled for thursday. we're back with mike. he's never faced this before, a judge trying to weigh in on how he can throw you described it as sand in the gears of efforts to

hold him accountable legally. >> yeah, i was thinking the same thing. that is sort of the difference here. when you are in criminal court, thereis just the dynamic that is different a than when you can swhafr you want as a president or even a private citizen. and we'll have to see how disciplined trump will be. because he has never listened to his lawyers over the past seven years. and my guess is they have said don't say things and looks like someone is trying to draw a line about that and we'll have to see whether he is going to follow that or not. and the consequences, this is not like, oh, you'll have bad press or you can expose yourself to a civil lawsuit. a judge in a criminal case is a completely different entity. so that will be fascinating to watch to see how he operates in an environment that we've not

seen him really operate in in the courtroom. >> and glenn, people close to trump describe him as having a reptilian survival sense. if you had to game it out, what do you think will happen? >> you know, donald trump never seems to be chilled in his speech or his reckless threats threatening. and i fear that that will continue. and he is permitted by judge after judge to continue to poison the well of public opinion, put witnesses, jurors and their family members in harm's way such that everybody has to adjust their behavior but donald trump doesn't have to adjust his. i hope the judge grants protective orders in violent crime cases and rico cases i've handled, protective orders are usual because witnesses can be put in harm's way if their

identity is prematurely disclosed. and i hope that the judge tries to put in place a narrowly tailored restriction on donald trump's speech and his posts so that he is, you know -- you know, has guardrails put up around him. >> and as we talked about, you have to keep donald trump from recruiting and strengthening the army of donald trump. and if this judge can do that by gagging him in some way shape or form, it is best for all involved that that happen. >> and just bat crazy how we're talking about a guy that wants to be president that creates danger. thank you all very much for joining us today. a bit of news has been made in the e. jean carroll trial involving a key player in the story, that would be the guy we're talking about, the twice impeached once indicted ex-president. we'll tell you about it. don't go anywhere. nt we'll tell you about it. don't go anywhere. i am... being me. keep being you...

and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. at t-mobile, your business will save over $1000. what are you going to do with it? i could use a new sign.

with t-mobile for business, save more than $1000 versus verizon. and with our price lock guarantee, we'll never raise your rate plan. ever. hey, dad. i got an a on my book report. -and i scored a goal on ashley. -that's cool. and i went for a walk in the woods and i didn't get a single flea or tick on me. you are just the best. it's probably because of that flea and tick medicine you've been ordering from chewy. we are very proud of you. you never stop surprising us, bailey. right? i'm great. you are great. i wonder if bailey's ever done a book report. be nice to your sister. what flea bit him? pets aren't just pets. they're more. this flea and tick season, trust america's #1 pet pharmacy. chewy. our customers don't do what they do for likes or followers. their path isn't for the casually curious.

and that's what makes it matter the most when they find it. the exact thing that can change the world. some say it's what they were born to do... it's what they live to do... trinet serves small and medium sized businesses... so they can do more of what matters. benefits. payroll. compliance. trinet. people matter.

oh, i was with donald trump in 1980. i was sitting with him on an airplane. and he went after me. yeah, i'm going to go after you. believe me, she would not be my first choice, that i can tell you. >> he was laughing then. hi again, it is 5:00 in new york. it was a gross really appalling repulsive response then and gross and repulsive when you hear it again today. but it takes on new legal import. donald trump denied an assault

accuse say why a woman who said he sexually assaulted her when he sat next to her on an airplane in 1979. and he said she would not be his first choice? >> i find that just ludicrous because he didn't pick me. i was there. i was available. and he was lord. >> that is all it was? >> that is you will it was. having a daughter, having a granddaughter, i wish that we could somehow or another get through to some of these men or perpetrators that the damage that they are doing is so complete that the person that they have afflicted themselves on suffers for the rest of their life.

>> wow. leeds took the stand in the e. jean carroll defamation trial and recounted her story and put the incident in perspective saying that. >> melissa: e saying that. >> melissa: she said it didn't occur, that it was an option to share what took place. in that time and place, men could basically get away with a lot she explained. and e. jean carroll said that she was a member of the silent generation. she took decades to make her allegation public but she did tell two friends about it in the immediate aftermath. just minutes after leaving that department store, she called a friend and the friend said go to the police but carroll objected. and her friend testified describing the phone call that she had with carroll and how the two then doesn't discuss the attack for decades. quote, it was her life, her story, not my story and she clearly didn't want to tell

anyone else what happened. and i honored that. she said she buried the information in her mind and as life went on it was eaier not to think about it. they didn't speak about it again until 2019 where carroll was writing a book. and i told her how brave she was. and adding i'm here because my good friend who is a good person told me something terrible that happened to her. i want the world to know that she was telling the truth. meanwhile just a few minutes ago we learned from his lawyer that donald trump will officially not take the stand in this trial. this is where we begin the hour with our favorite reporters and friends. lisa rubin is joining us at the table. and also joyce vance and katty kay. so nice to have you at the table. take us through today and yesterday and you've done a good job at sort of telling us what

is important and what you think the jury is latching on it. >> i think what the jury is latching on to is that e. jean carroll is a perfectly imperfect victim. and what i think the plaintiff's lawyers are hoping that they will see is by acknowledging all the ways in which her story doesn't comport with what we expect out of a rape victim and sort of owning those problems in her narrative, that she comes across as all the more credible. the other thing that i think the jury is taking away, is this not a he said/she said. it is more of a rings that you cut down. at the very core is e. jean carroll's story and one ring out is the story from her friend. and the second friend she told. and further out are the people who also had similar expenses to e. jean carroll. jessica leeds and we heard from today and also a writer from a magazine that says that he assaulted her at mar-a-lago.

>> and you've written about how some of -- and we were talking before we came on the air, the idea that there is a perfect rape narrative is insane. i won't use the phrase bat leap crazy again, but that she is better by scream? and it is not like tacopina would have questioned her differently. where do you think the case stands so far. >> so absolutely and tacopina i'm told actually mentioned my name yesterday in court raising the notion that small group of e. jean carroll close friends supported her during the second circuit argument. and we've been friends for years. and i think that that whole situation really goes to what you are saying here, this notion that they wanted e. jean carroll to react in the way that they thought a rape victim should and

e. jean carroll apparently reacted and has testified in a manner that is authentic for her. in many ways all of these notions that rape victim is supposed to scream when she's attacked, that she is supposed to immediately go to the police, that she is supposed to suffer for the remainder of her life and not try to re-establish friendships or even visit the store where she continued to shop. this is the societal narrative that we, i say the system, and that sometimes perpetrators, try to impose on victims. carroll is breaking out of that mold with her testimony. >> i want to show something that jessica leeds said, i want to talk about the legal significance of other accusers. but i don't want to gloss over this because i'm so hung up on it, that because she didn't scream, t tack pea know

tacopina drilled down on it.tac tacopina drilled down on it. a woman allegedly raped was supposed to scream? is this a thing that all victims that we don't cover at the top of our newscast endure when they are on the stand, joyce? >> this is precisely what victims endure. and we have evolved some in this country. it used to be that rape cases were less concerned with victims and more than concerned with rectifying the property rights that husbands or fathers had with wum who in essence were their property. we're more evolved but perhaps not as far as we should be. and victims are shielded about their prior criminal history or with what they wore. but we still see victims every day who have subjected to this sort of gruels cross-examination

suggesting that they are lying about a sexual assault or some other sort of activity that is perpetrated against them because they didn't protest loudly enough. they didn't go to law enforcement in-dig naptly. they didn't, you know, let their families know what had happened to them. it is just an appalling suggestion. as really a revictimization of these women and why so many victims don't come forward and report the case and are difficult to prosecute. and even when there is additional evidence, in this case other women who are attacked, that carroll spoke to right afterwards, ultimately in the mind of juries they are often he said/she said. and they can be difficult to go forward with. >> and katty, let me show you what jessica leeds had to say to reporters about all this. >> i would like to express my support for e. jean carroll with

her suit against trump. her story rings true to me. i also would like to encourage anyone who has suffered sexualing a agrees to aggression to know that they are not alone and they can speak up. it seems society and person operators won't get the message of how damaging aggression is until it becomes apparent and so rampant, which it is. go ask your mothers, your wives, your sisters, your daughters. and your sons. thank you. >> what did you think of the testimony today? >> it is nerve wracking. it is not fun. and i hope i never have to tell the story again. >> katty, this debt i think that we owe these women who have nothing to gain and only

reputational and perhaps personal safety to lose or to risk is almost undescribable. >> yeah, and they have all said how much they have been a pill aried on line. it is worth mentioning that these women are in their sefrpts 70s. jessica leeds is in her 80s. and so what does she have to gain to do forward -- and the last thing she said, i hope i don't have to go through this again, i don't want to live through telling the story again. and that trauma doesn't go away and every time that you have to recount it, it comes back again. every time somebody attacks you on line, it comes back. and every time you have to behave the way a victim is meant to behave and you don't, you hear from e. jean carroll that

it comes back again as well. and so i don't think that joe tacopina's questioning which i'm not a lawyer, but i've been reading lawyers' accounts and he has been pretty pillarried for the way that he is questioning her. just from the legal stance. he has allowed her to repeat her story so many times. he asked questions that he didn't know the answer to. he's got facts wrong in the process of the questioning of her. but i think that she got to something really important when she said that i was a part of the silent generation. she was born in 1943 a long time before the "me too" movement was a glimmer in anybody's eyes. and i think that it will be interesting after this is all over, we may never hear from them because they are an anonymous jury, but to see how the jury responds to their stories but also to his line of questioning. because i do think that america is a country the world as a society moved on during the "me

too" movement in a way that as e. jean carroll said has allowed her to come forward. >> and let's listen to some reporting. >> i heard echos of jessica leeds in my conversations with e. jean. and she and e. jean carroll are around the same age. they, their stories are different. jessica leeds describes a moment when she happened to sit next to donald trump on an airplane and he groped her during the flight. but you can hear echos in the weighed that they talk about the encounters. the two women being working women of an earlier era and in which as they have described it, their encounters with trump were among many encount terse of bad behavior that they experienced at the hands of men. >> what is interesting is focus on the women appropriately so, about your the pattern is donald trump's pattern.

and there are 26 women who credibly accused him of sexual assault. >> and one of the things that i think the plaintiff lawyers did masterfully was to tie the assaults that the jury will hear about back to the "access hollywood" statement essentially saying that you will hear in his own words what his m.o. was. essentially kiss them because when you are a star, they let you do it. grab them by the blank when which is essentially in the only what he did to jessica leeds under her skirt but what he did with e. jean carroll. they were trying to i will stras that this was not locker room talk but this is his playbook. >> and joyce, i don't want to ask anyone what the jury will take from all of this, but

describes conduct that he is noe execute noised for and i'm guessing that you don't go that route if you have anything else to do.noised for and i'm guessing that you don't go that route if you have anything else to do. he seems to be alienate himself perhaps with the jury because he doesn't have anything else? >> i think that might be the cased a katty said it very well. probably better than some of the lawyers have when she made the point that what the cross-examination did was it permitted e. jean carroll to repeat her story over and over firmly embedding it in the minds of the jury. now they will hear the additional evidence and the important point that we keep going back to is that this is not a criminal prosecution for rape. if it was, the prosecution would have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

this is a civil trial. and when the judge reads the jury's instructions, he will tell them that they need only believe that it is more likely than not true that trump raped car carroll. that they have to make a finding by preponderance of evidence. and because that burden of proof is different than a criminal case, her testimony repeated over and over and then supported by other women and by women she told the story to as well as experts who will talk about the behavior of rape victims, that becomes a very powerful case for a plaintiff to present. >> katty, let me play more not the evidence but something the jury will have heard from. >> that is rape. he raped you. no, no, no, it was just five minutes of my life. >> and you used that word that

this is rape. >> that is the word that came to mind, that is the concept that i -- you know it seemed like it was rape. >> when you said that that is rape, she -- because she still doesn't use that word. >> she hates that word. i didn't even understand that until now. but she didn't say -- she demured and said no, we were fighting, it -- forget it. don't tell anyone. we'll not speak of this again. i said you should go to the police. let's go to the police. i will take you to the police. and she said no, no, no, no, i just want to go home and take a shower and go to bed. >> katty, she is speaking about e. jean carroll and donald trump and the allegation of rape which she had to describe as rape. but i imagine that is not the only person who called a best

friend and had that reaction. you know, we said this is the biggest and most closely watched sort of sexual assault trials in a post "me too" moment. what are you hearing and feeling differently watching this? >> yeah, i thought the details of the way lisa described it and the kind of almost -- fast e. jean was on a rush of adrenalin when she called her just a few moments after the rape allegedly happened. and you can imagine that. you know how sometimes you are afraid or you are nervous or anxious, you might laugh involuntarily and your voice can change and you can rush your words out and she described had i thought eloquently. but i think it is that thing that -- again, i mean, i hope that rape victims today feel that they can come forward and that if they tell a friend and that friend tells them to go to the police, their immediate reaction will be of course, yeah, i'll go to the police.

our track record as a country on putting rapists behind bars is pretty abysmal and the number of women with who still feel that they can report rape is at a maximum something like 40% of women who have actually been raped. so there is not much evidence that women can feel a lot more confident and i think that is why this trial is watched beyond the he came of e. jean carroll and beyond donald trump. we went through the "me too" moment and we hope that things have changed and some things have changed. some workplace practices can change. the way men with talk to us at work has changed. i think this is a test case of somebody who says after all this time i'm coming forward, i did tell people, i didn't go to the police, i don't know what a classic rape victim is, but i won't play that part and so let's see what the jury decides. of course donald trump has a right to a defense, but it is up

to the jury to look at the evidence and decide what they believe happened. >> this is an incredible moment and a hard thing to talk about. i'm grateful to all of you for being here. when we come back, we'll switch gears. florida governor desantis is ramping up his ailing fight against disney but disney has found a potent weapon to use against him, his own words. how did it come back to haunt him. and also luke russert, son of the iconic tim russert and colleague of ours here at nbc news will be our guest on his beautiful and powerful new book. .

i love it when he strips for me. we strip as a pack. i don't care who sees me strip. josh, you strip? breathe right opens your nose for nasal congestion relief you can feel right away. helping you breathe better day or night, here or there. breathe right. strip on.

(vo) red lobster's finer points of fun dining: helping you breathe better day or night, here or there. the correct answer to starter or entree is who gives a shrimp, when you get both. introducing new dockside duos. get an individual-size starter and entree for just $15.99. welcome to fun dining. ♪ music (“i swear”) plays ♪ jaycee tried gain flings for the first time the other day... and forgot where she was. [buzz] you can always spot a first timer. gain flings with oxi boost and febreze.

so many people are overweight now and asking themselves, you can always spot a first timer. "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now, there's golo. golo helps with insulin resistance, getting rid of sugar cravings, helps control stress and emotional eating, and losing weight. go to golo.com and see how golo can change your life. that's g-o-l-o.com.

so we're wondering today what exactly did florida governor desantis think was going to happen. no one made him pick a fight with disney over theme park authority. did he expect first round knockout that would demonstrate a willingness to go to war with the woke whatever that means company? because we actually is getting as he is faltering politically big time an increasingly drawn out legal battle with one of the state's largest employers who is really popular in that state. the latest escalation happened today, the oversight board is now counter suing disney

suggesting that they wanted it tie the hands of the new board and its authority. and dizsney is already suing desantis and alleging political retaliation for coming against the "don't say gay" bill in florida. and disney's lawyers are making their case from a very likely person and that is ron desantis. more specifically his recently published memoir in which he flaunts the idea of a retaliation political campaign that he thought of himself against disney. so much so that it cites pages from his book. charlie, i'm not even going to say it, but you know what i'm thinking. how dumb are they? let me read what you ron desantis wrote and where he bragged about waging a political

retaliation campaign against disney. this is from greg sergeant. his book brags about district ad because of supporting indoctrinating young schoolchildren. he vows to work to preel the governor's law describing it as a frontal assault on it. and they would soon find out truth. and it has some echo to the trump story. there always a confession. let me play it. >> they have been exempt from laws and they have gotten massive tax breaks. so we said, no, you are free to indulge in that type of views and ideology, but that is not

consistent with our values in the state of florida. so we took action and now because of what we did, disney is not going to have its own government anymore. >> let me add this for context. what disney did was oppose the "don't say gay" law. which now desantis is trying to expand all the way through 12th grade. >> and is this now a quagmire for ron desantis. he thought he could play it out in the precincts of right wing social media or within that bubble. and now he is not able to disengage because he is doing two things. he wants to prove that is he a fighter, he won't back down. that is the name of the super pac. won't back down. no way of getting out of this. and he pledged that he'd be an anti woke bully, thatve again. there is no settlity here.

this play out very differently in a federal court than it does on twitter however. but i think that you are seeing some of the underside of ron desantis' political instincts as well as his governing philosophy. >> again like how bad is it, it is so bad that he has lost rubio, scott, and kevin mccarthy. let me show you. >> what i hope is cooler heads will prevail here. and we get back to continuing to grow the florida economy. disney continues to grow. and people get more jobs in that. >> i worry if it happens too many times, businesses will be saying maybe we don't want go there because if we get in a firestorm with them politically, they will come after our business. >> this is a big employer and i don't think that building a prison next to a place that you bring your families are a good idea.

i think that you should sit down and solve the problem. >> when you lose those three, are you in deep political sdchlt sdchlt oo-doo. >> seems like bizarro world. you have a republican attacking business. i'll having to defend a corporation for its firstrights. i'm confused. but one thing that i do know is that these folks like desantis have been saying the quiet part out loud all look along and not held accountable. but this is a federal court so we'll see what happens.ook alon held accountable. but this is a federal court so we'll see what happens.k along held accountable. but this is a federal court so we'll see what happens.k along held accountable. but this is a federal court so we'll see what happens. along ad accountable. but this is a federal court so we'll see what happens.along an accountable. but this is a federal court so we'll see what happens. >> and dwyane wade has also left florida. some people aren't waiting around to see how it works out. they are taking their families and leaving to protect their families. >> what do you have to say to some of the state legislatures

who maybe have your jersey in their closet, who brought their kids to cheer for you? >> well, you know, i think that that is another reason why i don't live in that state. people don't know that. i have to make decisions for my family. not just personal and individual decisions. obviously the taxes is great. having wade county is great. but my family would not be accepted or feel comfortable there. so that is one of the reasons that i don't live there. >> katty, the ads that i would have loved to be involved in against a candidate who is going to war against mickey and dwyane wade write themselves. what is wrong here? >> he wrote the book, right? it early wrote the book that wrote itself in terms of the lawsuit as well giving all of that ammunition to disney's lawyers. i think what is going on is that ron desantis has got caught where republican candidates are getting caught between thinking

how do i play to the base and outtrump trump. and not thinking ahead to a general election or even to what is acceptable to the majority of his state. we've seen it play out time and time again and i think ron desantis has miscalculated it. in february he was 15 points behind donald trump and now 30 points. and what has happened, he signed an abortion law and taken on disney. and neither are doing him any political favors. i can only assume that he thought that by doing both of those things that he would win over trump supporters and win over the conservative base of the republican party. but polls don't suggest that it is working out for him. >> and we don't spend a ton of time on desantis here and his political fate, but maybe we should take a minute to say two things.

one, there is a lot of time, it is early, but everything that he has tried has been a political catastrophe. his trip abroad was a debacle. his war with disney is a joke. he has alienated the state athletes. i've never seen a more catastrophic first inning of a republican candidate for president. >> no i mean, the hype balloon was overinflated. but a pretty spectacular fall. but what is also exposing is the fact that republicans who wanted to move on from donald trump really didn't have a plan "b." right? they were hoping that somehow the great ron hope from florida would bail them out and now they are flailing around. and so you are seeing one after another preemptively surrendering again to donald

trump. so if they thought that it was sticky and embarrassing watching ron desantis flail around with disney, wait until they see what they are good to get the next year and a half. there may be a brief moment where donald trump seems more reasonable than ron desantis, but i think that we know what we're in for. i think that this is a republican party that can't come up with someone that is not ron desantis and it speaks to how deep and enduring their dysfunction has become. >> and part of the reason i haven't covered a ton of the desantis political fortune stories, but i like you am confused. like who am i rooting for? two tarantulas in a bowl. if they kill each other, who

cares. republicans are now pro authoritarian tool book party trying to work out who their leader is. and it is interesting though that only trump ask do these things and not loose support among his base. i'm sure distance is thinking that trump does all these things and his numbers are solid. but why are mine collapsing. >> i think that that is the question. i mean, as long as we don't interrogate the fundamental move that is at the heart of trumpism and that is there is this idea that there are more white voters who are not voting who we need to appeal to and the way that we get them to the polls is appealing to hatred and grievance and fear, to excite them to come to the polls. trump mass political hay of that as it were. and as long as that is the strategy, people are trying to figure out how they can do that, we're in trouble. and so sdas can't do it. maybe glenn youngkin might be

able to do it. but if you appeal to hatred, we're still in trouble. and that is the heart of the problem. >> and i think that we're right to spend more time talking about that. but the political story is on a day like today irresistible. thank you for having this conversation with me. and when we come back, a dear friend of this network and colleague part of the nbc family well-known to viewers, luke russert will be here at the table to talk about his new book called "look for me there, grieving my father, finding myself ". g myself "

(cecily) you're looking pleased with yourself. (seth) not to brag, but i just switched to verizon. (cecily) so you got an awesome network... (seth) and when i switched, i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. not bragging. (cecily) you're bragging. (neighbor) oh, he's bragging. (seth) who, me? never. oh, excuse me. hello, your royal highness, sir... (cecily) okay, that's a brag. (seth) hey, mom. i gotta call you back. (vo) switch and choose the phone you want, like the incredible iphone 14, on us. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about. verizon as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those...

...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ get 2.9% apr for 36 months plus $1,500 purchase allowance on an xt5 and xt6 when you finance through cadillac financial. ♪ our customers don't do what they do for likes or followers. their path isn't for the casually curious. and that's what makes it matter the most when they find it. the exact thing that can change the world. some say it's what they were born to do... it's what they live to do... trinet serves small and medium sized businesses... so they can do more of what matters. benefits. payroll. compliance. trinet. people matter.

. viewers of the program know that we have tried to talk about what we as a country and society have had to deal with the last few years. an immense amount of collective and personal grief be it from the pandemic, troubling nature of the state of our country and our politics. as well as any of our own pain, things that come up just from living day to day as humans. on this show we've tried to tell some of the stories, we've tried to normalize talking about grief and mental health in the hopes that we make it a little bit easier to deal with the stigmas associated with all the conversations. mental health and the process of

grieving. to maybe begin the conversation about how we start to heal. and today we have someone who literally wrote the book about it, who knows about his feeling respect his own loss and who has gone on a massive years long healing journey. and he is a dear member of the nbc family. and luke russert is out with a really special new book "look for me there" grieving my father. and how he found himself after the crushing loss of his father, the legendary "meet the press" moderator tim russert. luke discusses in the book the beginning of his journey which took him from nbc to a more than three year long odyssey across several continents. started just days after his father's passing when he gave a moving eulogy at his dad's memorial service. >> when i hold this up, some of you see a glass half empty.

some of you see a glass half full. for tim russert, his glass was always half full. and in my 22 years, i've never met anybody filled with so much optimism who not only loved the good parts of life but also its challenges. the ability of the human spirit to withstand tragedy always interested my father. and he firmly believed that with faith, friends, and a little foley, anybody could withstand anything. well, that is certainly being put to the test this past week, but i believe that it is working. >> luke is joining us now. i can't read much of this without crying. do you know how you did that? >> no. i go back and i look at

22-year-old luke and so much courage, so much unbridled optimism. and i tear up looking at that because that kid was trying so hard and he was trying so hard for his dad, he was trying so hard for his friends and family and to some degree the country. i really felt that at the time when thousands of people came to my father's wake. and it took me years to really process that, grieve that. and at the time, i wanted to honor him and make sure that his legacy was preserve to the best of my own ability. that is what i thought my duty as a son was. and in the process of doing that, i never really got to know who i was. and i looked back at that video, man, you are good. i don't know if i could do that now. but that is what is good about being 22. you are young and dumb and trying your hardest. >> and your love for him, and you read the stories of people

who can lift a car up and that is what i feel like watching you do that. >> i agree. >> but it was reciprocated. i talk to people today who your father thanks and loom so is large over this building. we try to see if we can approximate anything that your father did. what he did was perfection. so when you talk about trying to honor him, do you see it now as something that wasn't your load to carry by yourself? >> i think when you are thrust into that position, and you think this is my last name and i know the man better than anybody else and i just want to make sure that flame is still lit, it doesn't ever -- it is never distinguished, you take on that burden by yourself. over years i realized that when there are folks helping here at nbc or even outside the nbc family i probably should have

done more. it wasn't until i left the peacock that i saw all these folks that said that your tad is still in the building and lives in what we do. and that meant so much. i almost maybe tried to forget about that because it would bring back the burden of xwraef. being away from it, it help need process it more. >> this idea that grief is a thing and you just made room for it? >> everybody has their own way of dealing with it. there is no ah-ha. you have to figure out what is good for you. i threw myself into hard work. i got a fortune cookie that says the greatest thing for misery is hard work. and you will forget about it. but you can't outrun it and it will creep up in certain ways. and i didn't know that the

anxiety i would feel, the times where i would have trouble sleeping and perhaps just feel sick, normally sick, oh, gosh, i'm going to have a heart attack like my father, i didn't know that that was traced back to his passing. and it was when i was able to confront that away from nbc is when i got to someplace of peace. but it is interesting since this has come out, i've gotten so many incredible messages from people. and they said thank you so much, i've lost a friend, a father, a child, and we're looking for inspiration. and the thing that i tell them is that you may not ever accept it, it took me a long time do that, but the best thing you can do is to learn how to live with that. and if you can learn how to live with it in your own way, doesn't bring harm to you or other, you are doing a good job. >> and some things that are so sad, you don't get over them. learn how to live with them. >> yeah. >> and you write about it in the

beginning of the book. the first 40 pages i read with my heart in my stomach. will you tell us about how the book starts? >> the prologue is me actually driving the truck with my dog thinking about leaving nbc. but the first chapter of the book is actually the day my father passed. and i got the phone call and i saw the number popping up from nbc and i thought it was him. i was in europe with my mom celebrating my rad graduation from college. it was actually a blessing because we could sfend the day to grief. and they said is your mom there and i said no, why, well, your father fainted. and i knew right away he was gone. >> how did you snow. >> he didn't faint. my grandfather worked a garbage job and hard work with us so engrained. and he would play through any injury. one of the last years of his

life he severely hurt his ankle and he would go and not take any painkillers. just go through it. so i said this is not good. this is not good. and you go through the process of finding out and then alerts your family and then you come home to this, oh, my gosh, he is really gone. and that is one of those moments where for me, it really hit hard when i came into the kitchen at my home. all my high school friends were there with tears in their eyes. and so it is something as difficult as it was to write about it, it was shred cathartic. and i was happy to get it out. >> difficult to read. i was going to try to read some of it but i don't think that i'll get through it. you write about the days at the wake. and i worked on the mccain campaign and i know that

everybody important wanted to try to lift your family up. did that help or were you -- was it too big of a loss? >> in the time, i think that it really helped. one of the things that i remember from the wake was thousands of people came from all around the country. and they said to me, you know, you only have to be here about 10, 15 minutes and you can be back with your own family. and every single person that i met brought me some sort of comfort. and president bush was so kind before he stayed for an hour and met all these members of my family. john kerry waited in line an hour and a half. all these wonderful stories. but what makes me tear up is this short order cook from a late night dinerner my home in washington, d.c. and he was an immigrant who sierra leone. and he said i'd see you from ll hours of the night and your father i always watch him because he taught me american politics and he taught me the

politics of this new land. and i'm so thankful that i could connect with him. so many stories like that. >> and i want to ask you about the journey and the rainbows. can you stick around? >> please. >> we'll be right back. n you std >> please. >> we'll be right back it's ama! hydrates better than the expensive stuff i don't live here, so i'm taking this and whatever's in the back. it's already sold in the us. but i'm not taking any chances. the uk's #1 skincare has crossed the pond. for copd, ask your doctor about breztri. breztri gives you better breathing, symptom improvement, and helps prevent flare-ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain,

mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vison changes, or eye pain occur. if you have copd ask your doctor about breztri. when the davises booked their vrbo vacation home, they didn't know about this view. or the 200-year-old tree in the backyard. or their neighbors down the hill. but one thing they did know is exactly how much they'd pay. because vrbo is different. you see the total price up front. of course, it's good to leave room for some surprises. boo! ♪ family is just very important. she's my sister and, we depend on each other a lot. she's the rock of the family. she's the person who holds everything together. ♪♪ it's a battle, you know i'm going to be there. keytruda and chemotherapy meant treating my cancer with two different types of medicine.

in a clinical trial, keytruda and chemotherapy was proven to help people live longer than chemotherapy alone. keytruda is used to treat more patients with advanced lung cancer than any other immunotherapy. keytruda may be used with certain chemotherapies as your first treatment if you have advanced nonsquamous, non-small cell lung cancer and you do not have an abnormal “egfr” or “alk” gene. keytruda can cause your immune system to attack healthy parts of your body during or after treatment. this may be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you have cough, shortness of breath, chest pain, diarrhea, severe stomach pain, severe nausea or vomiting, headache, light sensitivity, eye problems, irregular heartbeat, extreme tiredness, constipation, dizziness or fainting, changes in appetite, thirst, or urine, confusion, memory problems, muscle pain or weakness, fever, rash, itching, or flushing. there may be other side effects. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions, including immune system problems, if you've had or plan to have an organ or stem cell transplant, received chest radiation, or have a nervous system problem. it feels good to be here for them.

living longer is possible. it's tru. keytruda from merck. ask your doctor about keytruda. >> woman: why did we choose safelite? we're always working keyon a project.rck. while loading up our suv, one extra push and... crack! so, we scheduled at safelite.com. we were able to track our technician and knew exactly when he'd arrive. we can keep working! ♪ synth music ♪ >> woman: safelite came to us. >> tech: hi, i'm kendrick. >> woman: replaced our windshield, and installed new wipers to protect our new glass. that's service on our time. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ the real secret to success? better sleep. purple is different. soft and firm, in all your right places. the gelflex grid keeps you cool, while sleep does it's scientifically proven thing. rise sharper, happier, an overnight success.

we're back with luke, i wish we had the whole hour to sum up the book. i won't get through much without crying. this is from your epilogue. dad was so duty bound, that irish catholic civil servant, never missing a day. grandpa, too. he retired with all his days. dad bottled up any self-doubt in his diligence, preparation, and focus. i never thought about my own place in his world until dad died. i lived to please him because i believed in him and loved him so much. the boy who wanted to make his dad proud. i thought i would do what he'd want. i tried to reconstruct a world of meaning after loss, but i cannot bear the cross of a legend. that burden is too much. how did that -- you said there are no a-has, but --

>> it's not instant, though. takes a long time to get there. >> you go on an actual journey. >> i leave nbc, and i just -- i know i need some time to decompress, and my mother who was a peace corps volunteer in the '60s, she went to colombia. and it was an incredible experience for her. she encouraged me to travel the world. i hadn't done it because i was so busy all these years. soy start to travel, and when i travel it's a place of peace because i'm away from my last name, i'm away from the way of washington. i'm away from the expectations that have been placed on me either by society or myself, and i begin to deal with that voice inside my head that says, okay, who are you? what are you about? what do you want and what is going on? which is somebody i didn't want to listen to for a lot of years. and i found that as i started to

travel and i'd pick up things in different culture, and i'd be in far flung places of the globe, asia, latin america, what not, where nobody care about insider washington politics, nobody care what had my story was. it was, are you a good human being and are you going to treat us with respect, and are you going to be mindful of what we're about. once i started to pick up on those types of things, it was an incredible experience. it was so enriching and it made me a lot more confident and it made me a lot more self-assured. one thing that's not in the book but a story i like to tell is i had some reservation issues in nicaragua, which is a wild place. i ended up having to spend the night on a volcanic island, and the only place that was available was speaking on a pig farm on top of straw and dirt. and i did it and i really enjoyed it. >> now i feel like it would be an airbnb category. >> but i did it. i thought, you can handle a lot.

it taught me to reflect and journal. when i was going on these journeys i had a stream of consciousness that played out in the journals. i didn't know i wanted to write a book. wasn't until i read those about two years into it going, oh, my gosh, there's two things going on here. i'm looking for something and trying to outrun something, and those things come together. >> that's what -- >> they come together beautifully in the book. we're so happy to see you back in this building. >> thank you so much for give mega to time. this is the first time i have been back on this floor, and it's a pretty surreal experience. i spent many years here. >> sneeze from the allergies. you brought some of the cherry blossoms. do you see yourself being part of the conversations in i know by 16 you were -- from politics. >> one of the things i firmly believe and my father was so devout about was civility. you can disagree, but both sides should be willing to get to the place which is america being the

best, the possibly be, and we're a long way away from there. i hope we can be civil. that's the best we can do. >> i think that's what everybody hopes. congratulations on the book. really, really beautiful. the book is called "look for me there." it is beautiful. grab your tissue. quick break for us we'll be right back. e'll be right back i strip on sick days. breathe right instantly relieves nighttime nasal congestion. daytime, too. helping you breathe easier for up to 12 hours. breathe right. strip on. (cecily) you're looking pleased with yourself. helping(seth)reathe easier for not to brag,rs. but i just switched to verizon. (cecily) so you got an awesome network... (seth) and when i switched, i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. not bragging. (cecily) you're bragging. (neighbor) oh, he's bragging. (seth) who, me? never. oh, excuse me. hello, your royal highness, sir... (cecily) okay, that's a brag. (seth) hey, mom. i gotta call you back. (vo) switch and choose the phone you want, like the incredible iphone 14, on us. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about.

verizon ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ get 2.9% apr for 36 months plus $1,500 purchase allowance on an xt5 and xt6 when you finance through cadillac financial. ♪ and this is ready to go online. when you finance through caany questions?al. -yeah, i got one. how about the best network imaginable? let's invent that. that's what we do here. quick survey. who wants the internet to work, pretty much everywhere. and it needs to smooth, like super, super, super, super smooth. hey, should you be drinking that? -it's decaf. because we're busy women. we don't have time for lag or buffering. who doesn't want internet that helps a.i. do your homework even faster. come again. -sorry, what was that? introducing the next generation 10g network only from xfinity. the future starts now.

thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these truly extraordinary times. we are so grateful. "the beat" with ari melber start right now. hi, ari. >> hi, nicolle. thanks so much. welcome to "the beat," everyone. i'm ari melber. the top