might indicate he could be coming to a charging decision. ken dilanian, thank you very much for joining us. we appreciate that on the breaking news of seditious conspiracy convictions for four of the proud boys. and that's going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. any minute now, attorney general merrick garland is expected to hold a news conference on the justice department's big win in court today in its january 6th investigation. more than two and a half years since the disgraced ex-president told them to stand back and standby, a call that help to galvanize the proud boys to serve the mob that stormed the capitol months later, four members of the proud boys, including the group's leader,

were convicted today of seditious conspiracy. it's a rarely used, often difficult to prove charge. a fifth member was acquitted of seditious conspiracy, but he has been convicted on other very serious charges, including obstruction of an official proceeding and assaulting an officer. but today's verdict means so far 14 people, including members of another far right group, the oath keepers, have either pleaded guilty or been found guilty of conspireing and plotting a violent overthrow of the united states government. this victory by the justice department, while it is a milestone and a massive and hugely consequential federal investigation into that plot to overturn an election and overturn democracy on january 6th, only underscores questions about holding accountable the man, who the vice chair so memorably puts it, quote, some

in the mob, assemble the mob and lit the flame of this attack. we're talking about the disgraced ex-president himself. as "the washington post" reports, 15 weeks of trial, prosecutors allege that the proud boys on trial saw themselves as trump's army. inspired by his directive to standby during a september 2020 presidential debate and mobilize by his december 2020 call for a wild protest when congress certify the election. the men sought to keep trump in power through violence. donald trump has made the insurrections themselves, pledging to pardon them and featuring imagery of the vien lent crimes they committed a at his opening campaign rally in waco, texas. a combustible collision of forces, the rule of law and donald trump. that's where we start today.

joining us at the table we have a full house. select committee investigator marcus childress, we're happy to have you here it's the domestic violence extremists like the proud boys. also joining us is andrew weisman, a former prosecutor and host we are waiting for a live press conference from merrick garland. this is a big deal, but i think the second question after that pat on the back might be what does jack smith take from this? >> i think from merrick, you're first going to hear about the importance of the convictions today in and of themselves. there's a huge domestic terrorism problem in this country. this is a really difficult and important case for doj to have

brought and to have won. and think that's what you're going to hear about. but to your point, there's been such a call and spobs ep relationship to groups like the proud boys and oath keepers and others with the former president that everyone is going to be thinking, okay, you've gotten not justth foot soldiers, not just their leaders such as the leader of the proud boys, but what about the actual leader of what happened on january 6th, as marcus knows. it's educated all of us. and i i think for jack smith, it's not that this is evidence, it really make it is that puch more important for him, if he can get the proof that they should he be charging, yes.

>> several juries now are perfectly capable it might have been the first time i heard it in modern times. of plotting and conspireing together to carry out violence. >> absolutely. a second component of that is that you don't have to be present. you don't have to be the person pulling the trirg going into the bank and doing the robbery. if you were the master mind, you're just as responsible. this is just like in a mob case. the boss of the family is not collecting the money and threatening people and doing all of this leg work. obviously, jack smith knows that well, but it's use tofl see that

jurors have no problem with that. and it's not like the former president didn't want to be present on that day. there were other people who prevented the worst. it's bad enough when he d but dwrou had other people making it worse. he was planning to be there and leading them at the scene. but that's no reason not to be able to charge him. >> the justice department investigation into the proud boys and the oath keepers commenced around the same time as the congressional probe, but most of what was public facing we learn from the congressional investigation. what is your -- is there anything that surprises you? you know the evidence that would have been brought to bear in a criminal case, which is different from your mission, but a lot of overlap. >> we have to recognize the department of justice up front. i was a former jag prosecutor. my team leads were also federal

prosecutors. seditious conspiracy is something we haven't seen before. whenever i tried cases, i could look at a playbook and look how others argued a case. but seditious conspiracy, they had to be thoughtful in it their approach and how they presented the evidence. i think that deserves some recognition. i think some people are feeling like justice was served today. i also want to go back to what you said earlier about you don't have to be present. that was a big finding here today. one of the things we noticed was right after the tweet in december, where many folks convicted today were actually leading the plans for january 6th. i think evidence like that was probably helpful in presenting to the jury. >> in your investigation into these groups, they said it in this trial. their lawyer said it in their tv appearances. marry spouses have said it. they were there because of donald trump.

how do you think this verdict and the good work from doj prosecutors in these cases figures into the considerations of whether to charge donald trump with these crimes. >> i can't say i'm not in the room. i can say the committee found it very important that after the stand back and standby comment that we talked about in our hearings, we found evidence that the membership tripled. they were selling merchandise not just the day of january 6th. we're looking at the rise of domestic extremism and the impact the former president had in mobilizing those groups and building out over time. for me personally looking at the tik tok of the day, that context was important. i'm understanding how these groups were built, how they were created and how they were inspired. >> even more pointedly, how they

were directed. he told them when to come and he wanted to join them where he told them to go. >> there was an irony in all of this. this might be one of the few cases i covered where you see the defense and the prosecution put the blame on the actual same guy, which the prosecution is saying these people were there on january 6th because of donald trump. they were part of the seditious conspiracy and the defense is also saying, hey, they were here because of donald trump. but they are using donald trump in two different ways, but they are both saying the blame is with donald trump for what these people did. and i think when you take a step back, the context of who the proud boys are is extremely important. this is not a random organization that does not have any overlap with trump world. when you think about trump world, i'm thinking about operatives. he showed up at trump ralies in florida. this was a person on fox news speaking to trump's base. so you take who this individual

is and put him against the backdrop of trump world and there are many individuals that intersect with each other. that's not a yes. can he find the intersections of the proud boys, the oath keepers, and the people from trump world. he showed up on fox news wearing a shirt in support of roger stone. roger stone is closely aligned with trump world. so i think that's where this investigation goez now to try to find these points of intersection. >> i remember after the debate where trump says to the proud boys after that question from chris wallace, stand back and standby. i remember talking to senior trump campaign official who said, disaster of the highest agree. we all told him he had to walk it back. >> i don't think trump really walked it back. he meant what he meant. i think there was a

misperception that we understood and accepted some of the spin that he wanted everybody's votes. the truth is closer to what iowa men was talking a about. they were intersected into his political organization through people who were known spokes people and operatives for the trump campaign and candidacy and some of the darker people he's been known to be associated with. i wonder what you think this means in terms of having a real track record now a at successfully prosecuting conspiracy and now the questions have to deal with at to whether or not they can prosecute trump for the same crimes. >> that's like six questions in one. >> i saved the best for last. >> let's try to bat these out. first off, stand back and standby. there's no question that donald trump is a genius at tapping

into the part of our public that is angry, extreme, believes in taking back their government, even before stop the steal was ever coined. even before donald trump became increasingly desperate in mid-december, that he was not going to be able to overturn the election results and was going to have to resort to some pretty dirty tactics to try to block the peaceful transfer of power. the first time in our lifetimes that has happened. no question that in the debate, he recognized that these extremist factions really were the voice of a certain group of people that he needed on his side. he wasn't going to cut them back and he wasn't going to reject them when asked over and over again whether or not he wanted to dus miss white supremacy and white supremacist groups. second question i think you

raised is whether or not donald trump can be charged with a crime in the wake of now this third trial and great success for the department of justice in bringing and winning convictions for seditious conspiracy. the key in seditious conspiracy is violence. a critical element is you must be using force to overturn your government. it's a rarely brought charge charge for a reason. know skit think many of the people on your panel know the prosecutors do not have evidence this hand linking the effort of the proud boys to donald trump. they do not have this smoking gun evidence that shows that donald trump was directing an effort to violently overthrow the government.

however, that doesn't mean they aren't going to get it. it also doesn't mean that it exists. let's be careful about what we know and don't know. i would point to marcus' work and ultimately the january 6th committee's work as pointing to over and over again significant evidence that donald trump obstructed a government proceeding. you might not remember this, but it was considered extremely novel to charge people in the early days after january 6th with obstructing a government proceeding. obstruction had been used for people that got in the way of a criminal investigation, who tried to foil it. donald trump has been found by robert mueller to have multiply tried to obstruct a criminal investigation. but now that has been proven to be a very powerful charge against defendants in january 6th. obstructing a government proceeding, trying to block the

peaceful transfer of power. and the committee presented some significant evidence of this. whether jack smith reaches a charging decision on either of those cases is yet to be seen, but i couldn't agree more we just don't know, are they going to find a link in the violent attempt to overthrow the government? are they going to find a link between the aid to roger stone in his lifetime? stewart rhodes of the oath keepers, conferring with alex jones, a high-level trump advocate, for blocking the certification. are they going to find this link? or is jack smith going to say he believes that donald trump, that there's evidence he obstructed a government proceeding both of these are pretty serious. >> let me play what you're talking about, carol. some of the evidence that was

developed by the committee and marcus, who is here today. >> my name is marcus childress. >> what do you want to call on? >> white supremacist. >> proud boys, stand back and standby. >> after he made this comment, enrique said standing by, sir. it led to an increase in membership of the proud boys. president trump tweeted about the january 6th rally and told attendees, be there, it will be wild. a day later the department of justice described how they created a the chat called the ministry of self-defense chat. the proud boys established a command structure in tupgs of coming back to d.c. on january 6th. the department of justice described mr. tar owe coming

into a documentrio coming into a document we learned inn recent cay tarrio met. >> there's much really respect there. we're fighting the same fight. >> the investigation revealed it was individuals associated with the proud boys who instigated the initial breach at 12:53 p.m. >> it was, again, sort of the biggest gifts to the public's ability to understand something that's protected as part of a criminal proceeding, but pick up on carol's point, the committee developed evidence that it was the presidential detail feeding information to the white house about the specific types of weapons that trump supporters were armed with. on that pathway, it can't be drubed as other than that.

to advance trump to the capitol, to be there for all of that. how much was unanswered in terms of 9 limits the committee faced and a lack of access to all of trump's phone records? >> it was a big challenge. we don't have grand jury subpoena power. it's a congressional subpoena. normally it's a negotiation after you issue it. i'm proud of the evidence we were able to develop. we were able to interview quite a few proud boys and oath keepers, more than 20 actual defendants who weren't associated with either group, to understand the day. that's how we were able by talking and understanding what that they started at 10:30 from the washington monument towards the capitol. looking at surveillance, we were able to pick up on new folks we should meet to learn initiated the initial breach. we used the resources we had to

identify individuals who maybe willing to talk and use that information to get deposition testimony from others. it was a real success and using that limited power to do the investigations. >> and sdwrous go back to the point you all made, to give doj their due today, where was doj able to deepen their understanding? >> it's important to remember that the most powerful tool that exists is a grand jury subpoena. so hats off to the january 6th committee and to you in terms of what they were able to do. but to get as much information, but also to flip people torks get them to cooperate, the way that happens is someone has to be jammed up. they don't just walk out the door. somebody has to say, you're facing these charges. it will be interesting to see of the 14 people who are now facing seditious conspiracy sentencing, whether it's thot too late for

them to walk in the door, i do think there's some connective issue on the issue of violence. but there's some evidence of that already. but if you want to try to get into what exactly happened at the willard hotel shortly before january 6th? we don't still know from this trial. it wouldn't have been an sshl part of this trial. what was roger stone talking about? there's no way he's cooperating that's not a source for either congress or for the prosecutors. >> you think there's any chance mark meadows is cooperating? >> i can't say for sure, but think the answer is no. i think it's a small enough place we would have heard that. i think he likely has asserted

the fifth amendment and the reason you haven't seen him go is he said if he goes in the grand jury, he would take the fifth. that way the policy is to not put somebody there. >> and try and say you don't have enough proof on that. that's where jack smith's job is to build a case that's strong enough he can have a conversation where he says you want to come in and see all the evidence he's about to be charged. you want to be on the united states part of this or on the vs. mark meadows side. but you have to build a case. i haven't seen it yet, so we're sitting back and waiting. i just don't think that signs that he's cooperating. >> i agree with you. washington looks different when the people closest to trump, becauses trump can't repress a

single megs motion. he would be screaming. i want to be even handed. i want to give doj, but there's something else to nod to. what is clear is that the vigor and the brilliance with which doj pusued novel charges against the foot soldiers, there's nothing to speak of for any of the organizers, the willard hotel room plotters. there's nothing. how do you think that lands today? >> at theened of the day, nobody would have been there january 6th if it wasn't for the one thing we know. we're reverse engineering this. you can say these people were animated by the outcome of the results. they were prepared to act, but they needed a demagogue who said come on this day and we're going to fight like hell.

and i think as everyone has documented, the words of donald trump served as the demagogue. what we're waiting to see whether they can find that connected tissue. this is the ecosystem he built over years. what we have seen in other criminal cases that he's been allege involved in. all his foot soldiers, you never find that connective tissue. we'll see. >> let's listen to merrick garland. >> today the justice department secured the conviction of four leaders of the proud boys for seditious conspiracy related to the january 6th attack on the capitol. in addition, those defendants and a fifth member of the proud boys were all convicted of felonies, including obstructing congress's certification of the 2020 presidential election results and conspireing to prevent congress and federal officers from discharging their duties. the evidence presented at trial

detailed the extent of the violence at the capitol on january 6th and the central role these defendants played in setting into motion the unlawful events of that day. today's verdict makes clear that the justice department will do everything in its power to defend the american people and american democracy. since the january 6th attack, the justice department has conducted one ofrt the largest, most complex and most resource-intensive in our history. we have worked to analyze massive amounts of data,s we have recovered devices, decrypted electronic messages, try anxiouslated phones and poured through tens of thousands of hours of video. we have also benefitted from tens of thousands of tips we received from the public. following these digital and physical footprints, we were

able to identify hundreds of people who often took part in the unlawful conduct of that day. i am grateful to the prosecutors, fbi agents, analysts and others who have worked on these cases with extraordinary diligence, skill, integrity and courage. over the past two years, the department secured more than 600 convictions for a wide range of criminal conduct on january 6th and the days and weeks leading up to the attack. we have secured the convictions of defendants who fought and tased police officers who were defending the capitol that day. who crushed one officer in a door and dragged another down a flight of stairs. and who assaulted officers with

pipes, poles and other dangerous or deadly weapons. we have secured those who obstructed the certification of a presidential election as well as the subsequent criminal investigation in the events of january 6th. and now after three trials, we have secured the convictions of leaders of both the proud boys and the oath keepers for seditious conspiracy, specifically conspireing to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power. our work will continue. at my senate confirmation hearing just over a month after january 6th, i promised that the justice department would do everything in its power to hold accountable those responsible for the heinous attack that sought to disrupt a cornerstone of our democracy. the peaceful transfer of power to a newly elected government.

and as i have said repeatedly, the department will conduct all of its work in a manner that adheres to the rule of law and honors our obligations to protect the civil rights and civil liberties of everyone in this country. today's verdict is another example of our staed fast commitment to keeping those promises. the justice department will never stop working to defend the democracy to which all americans are entitled. >> attorney general merrick garland on today's successful convictions of proud boys, for seditious conspiracy. the wise andrew weisman points out there was a real emphasis on what seditious conspiracy is and

it prevented the peaceful transfer of power. do we think he's telegraphing that as a focus? >> i don't want to read too much into his comments, but what i hear him saying is at the same time the justice department was probing the foot soldiers involved in a violent overthrow. he broadened that to talk about efforts to investigate other related crimes to block the peaceful transfer of power. i don't want to get ahead of the facts that we have in our hands and in front of us in that we know through court filings and through the great work of the january 6th committee, but we can't know everything merrick garland has in hand, but also everything jack smith has in hand. we'll see what happens. but i have been told multiple times by sources there is not yet in hand that connected tissue. i want to flag one thing for everybody, which is something that enrique tarrio said from jail, about how he rejelkted the

arguments of his own defense attorneys who were blaming donald trump for this whole riot, for summoning the foot soldiers to violently overthrow their government. tarrio said that he knew prosecutors were looking at him as a, quote, unquote, steppingstone ask were trying to get to the top, get to president trump and interfere in the 2024 election. so even in tarrio's own words, he's suggesting that the top of this is donald trump. he has not blaming him in any way, shape or form other than to say that he believes he's somebody the government hoped to flip. we'll see if think of that cooperation is forthcoming from him or more likely from some of his other lieutenants, and whether or not it develops any facts that are worth pursuing. >> andrew? >> so i think carol is being

really careful about sort of what we know. it is useful to know, even if there no evidence with respect to violence, and i think there's insufficient evidence to bring a case beyond a reasonable doubt, there's still plenty of charges, as we saw that can be brought. >> these men were all charged with ten counts. we focused on seditious conspiracy, as did the attorney general. >> absolutely. people should not be thinking there's no connected tissue or insufficient connected tissue that that means donald trump is not going to be charged. i think he is going to be charged. i did want to raise a point of this is such a great day for democracy. it's really prnt to remember that the oath keepers and proud boys are not going away. the strategy now is to not be a national organization. to get off the radar screen from the department of justice and to

go local. and to burro in. so it's really important for people to remember this is a really important case. it's a really important set of convictions. merrick garland is right to tout it. i just noticed that a ray of people was the very top of the justice department who appeared today. that's signaling how important that is. but it's really important to remember these groups are here and they are here to stay. they have a strategy of how to avoid prosecution in the future. >> i don't know if it helps them in the endeavor trump put them in the campaign ads. i think that maybe a strategic decision for violent extremist groups, but donald trump can't stop talking about them. let me play this. >> and the another thing we'll do, and so many people have been asking me about it, if i run and win, we will treat those people from january 6th fairly. we will treat them fairly.

and if it requires pardon, we will give them pardons because they are being treated so unfairly. >> i'm financially supporting people that are incredible. it's very much on my mind. it's a disgrace what they have done to them. what they have done to these people, it's disgraceful. >> it's like he's an nba player signing people's arms. it was an insur ex-ist who had had her backpack. >> the myth that january 6th was not violent, these people had guns. they had lethal weapons. people kind of pretend that january 6th on fox that it was just a normal day of tourist

activities and people were just walking around. but the truth of the matter is i think we need to take a step back. you're right. the focus on the charge belittles what happens in the weeks running up to january 6th. that's what jack smith is trying to look at. we can't lose sight of the fact that there is now overwhelming evidence that is in the public domain that there was a concerted effort to overturn the election. so even if you stop short on the actual part of the violence of that day for donald trump as a charge, you have the recordings georgia, you have the fake elector scheme, you have all of this effort in arizona, it is all coming to the surface of a wider plot to overturn the election. that's what jack smith should be looking at in terms of how did we get to the the pointed of election day to the violence of that day.

there's an entire gamut of charges that are at his disposal. >> i want to deepen our understanding of what that looks like. i also want to put a pin in this idea of radicalized americans. trump make it is harder for them. but he is more aligned with them publicly than he was on january 6th. someone in the white house made him do a video telling them to go home, but he's talking about full presidential pardons for anyone at january 6th. and the art hundred dollar him of is of the insurrection. >> just be clear, that's all going to be used by jack smith. i talked about this. i look at that and i'm like seeing an exhibit. because one possible defense for donald trump was, i was surprised and shocked that they did this. i didn't think there would be violence. i wanted them to come and

peacefully protest. he's embracing now exactly what they did. he sees -- there's no denying what happened on january 6th in terms of the violence. he's say thags great. if you're about to be charged with being the head of this, what better way than to say, hey, it's the perfect insurrection. like the perfect phone call. >> these are the perfect people. the committee, i'm refocusing our conversation, the committee referred for crimes, three of them involved were intersected. the other charges that we haven't been talking about an obstruction of an official proceeding, but the evidence is so abundant and non-lawyer like could piece together exhibits. that donald trump conspired to obstruct official proceedings. do you think that jack smith can

close that loop. >> i hope. that's all i can say. we tried our best as a committee to do a presentation through our hearings. >> i think he would say you did. >> respected it who would say that by encircling the witnesses that didn't cooperate. >> i would agree with my former boss that we were able to. we use the president's own words after january 6 in our presentation of evidence during the hearings. we were trying to show some type of intent from the president. so we weren't able to interview him. i also want to talk about the violence. that's been a key theme here today. the violence on that day. that was one of the main successes of our first hearing was really bringing america to that day to show how violent that day was. because that's what all the president's words, all the lead up to january 6th, r, that's what it culminated in. our democracy was holding on by a thread. >> that was his comments last

week continue to whitewash. it's an inconvenient truth that the day was so violent and the injuries of the law enforcement officials are lasting. carol, i want to give you the last word on this broadening out of what trump maybe facing in terms of scrutiny. and that is his role in conspireing to obstruct a criminal proceeding. >> carol? >> i'm sorry. i didn't hear you. >> ayman broadened this out. the dramatic convictions of the proud boys for seditious conspiracy, but we have -- you have been the tip of the spear journalistically in terms of reporting out where pence started to understand that trump was indeed conspireing to obstruct the official proceeding and pence was the lynch pin. in terms of establishing

abundant evidence this trump could face exposure there. >> luckily, i'm not in the seat that jack smith is in in making a decision. i do feel lucky for that. i will tell you that i have a little bit of a quibble to make. a lot of the evidence was in the public eye in 2021. of course, it's built and built and built with additional reporting, but i remember colleagues of mine and i and books by some of my close friends in the fall of 2021 revealing the willard efforts, the war room where roger stone, steve bannon, roger stone was there but the war room was being operated by rudy giuliani, john eastman, they were all identified as working hard to find new and incredibly bizarre

ways, none of them legal, to get state legislatures in swing states to either block the certiication of the vote, to claim there was fraud, to create new electors, that this effort at the willard that began december 18th, an important date from my perspective, december 18th, a group of lawyers move into the willard to help the trump campaign figure out how to block the peaceful transfer of power tin colluded bullying pence. in the fall of 2021, in march of 2021, there was evidence about the fake electors revealed in public information requests. that there had been completely fraudulent separate sets of electors created out of thin air to try to claim that trump had won in states that biden had had won. the effort by trump to get brad

rathens berger to claim it was fraudulent was after that phone call by amy gardener, who obtained a recording of the call. this is stuff that's been public and available. it's been built on, but as many of your viewers have asked me, what is the accountability for a multiprong effort as marcus and andrew have described it, what is the consequence for trying four different likely illegal ways to overturn an election. because all of those had had trump's fingerprints on them. >> no quibble from me. you want to try to answer it? >> i do think when you listen, it's not ultimately merrick garland's decision, other than he could veto what comes before him from jack smith, which i

don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he would veto it, because i don't expect jack smith will prepare something so off the charts. but if you listen to what he's saying, he's saying the same thing he was saying before the appointment of jack smith, which is that everyone who was participating in the prevention or deterring the peaceful transfer of presidential power is going to be held to account. >> i think what carol is saying, though, this is evident in the days and hours after the december 19th tweet. >> i am hardly, as you know, going to say the department of justice was where it should have been at all times. i don't think that's true. i think that separating the efforts of reporters, which has been amazing, between the two of them, they have led the department to be where it needs

to be now. obviously, there's a cost to that, which is the time clock in terms of jack smith through no tault of his own is jammed up. he has got to be racing to the finish here. i think he's the right man for that job, but i'm not here to tell you that the department is as great a day as this is or an oath keepers, those are difficult cases. i want to make sure you know having been on the inside, those are not easy cases. that's not an individual who was present and gets caught on the day of in the capitol. that speaks for itself. these are much harder cases. and the department should be proud of it. but should they also understand that they were not everyone they needed to be, yes, that is true. >> thank you for stirring the pot there at the end. when we come back, incredible new reporting from

"the washington post" on some of the most violent insurrection ists are doing now in prisons. and later the relationship between a conservative supreme court justice and a billionaire. the latest drip, drip, drip revelations in their close financial i ties. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. dline whites after a quick break. ♪ good boy. adt professionals customize and install systems featuring google nest products for any kind of home.

what do you think? you're all set. when the most trusted name in home security adds the intelligence of google, you have a home with no worries. brought to you by adt. meet stephanie... goodnight! and bethany... [guhhnnaaaghh] identical twins. both struggle with cpap for their sleep apnea. but stephanie got inspire. an implanted device that works inside the body to help her sleep. unlike her sister. there's more than one way to treat your sleep apnea. if you struggle with cpap, look into getting inspire. inspire. sleep apnea innovation. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com. having triplets is... -amazing -expensive. so, we switched to the bargain detergent, but we ended up using three times as much and the clothes still weren't as clean as with tide. so we're back with tide, and the clothes are clean again. do 3x the laundry and get a tide clean. it's got to be tide.

asking the right question do 3x the laundry can greatly impact your future. - are, are you qualified to do this? - what? - especially when it comes to your finances. - are you a certified financial planner™? - i'm a cfp® professional. - cfp® professionals are committed to acting in your best interest. that's why it's gotta be a cfp®. and this is ready any questions? -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.

progressive makes it easy to save with a quick commercial auto quote online. so you can get back to your monster to-do list. really? get a quote at progressivecommercial.com. we are learning more about the twice impeached once indicted ex-the president's full embrace of the january 6th

defendants. he enthusiastically collaborated with them on a song. it's a commemoration of the insurrection. now the inspiration for their song stems from a video recorded months earlier and by some of the most violent jailed insurrectionists, who were charged with assaulting police using weapons such as a crowbars, officer sicknick's brother told "the washington post" he was disgusted by trump's glorification of the prisoners. the rallying cry is no police officer died on january 6th and they leave out inconvenient things like my brother's first stroke was put on life support and died the following day. and they do that over and over and over again. we're back with mr cause, andrew

and iowa ayman. there's a planet on which the violence that was carried out against the officers wasn't real and brutal. the first public hearing before the summer series was described as worse than anything that the officer had had seen in actual combat. harry dunn is very public about the psychological trauma that endures for every one of them. what is owed to those officers in terms of making sure that these lies don't spread any further? >> i'm happy you brought that up. a big part of our investigation is talking to those officers. you saw the first night officers you just mentioned rp who were just awarded president biden for their efforts that was a big part of the day that i hope lives on for the historical

record. and they never gave up. they were able to escort members to safety. democrats and republicans, got them to safety. and keep them safe, as rioters were able to fill the capitol. january 6th will never go away for those officers. some aren't able to serve anymore. a lot are vet rabbits of the military and said it was worse on january 6th than it was overseas. and i hope that part of the story lives on because they were truly brave that day in helping congress do its. >> christopher ray described it as a domestic terrorism attack. but if there were domestic terror attack involving anyone other than donald trump supporters, do you think this would be happening? >> so, we have talked about the

law enforcement response to what happened. it's such an ironic position because you have an attack on law enforcement, usually that is red meat for what ul call the traditional republican republican party that may not exist anymore. but that usually is something where that is owned by republicans and the democrats are trying to explain why they are just as tough on law enforcement issues. you have the reverse where law enforcement was doing yomyomen' work and didn't get assistance. many people think this was not an intelligence failure. it was a failure to act on the

intelligence. i think that it's a combination of race and thinking that this isn't going to come from these people who are white and look like us as opposed to what they saw in black lives matter, which were treated very, very differently by the same groups. and politics. that combination. these were people who were -- as trump said, it's fine for them to have weapons because they are not here to attack me. i think there's a lot of that -- to the point about as much of the department is taking credit for today as they should, there's a lot of after action about what happened on that day and before that day that led to this issue. >> the song is easy to mock. it's terrible. it's no johnny cash. it's ludicrous that trump is on it. the bigger point is that trump doesn't just end up on a song.

as inept as his organization is. the request came through and he agreed do it. he is bragging about it. he feel like, quote, elvis. >> he will monetize it. there will be albums and it will be played at his rallies. that's part of the grist. how can i use these people for my personal advantage? what he is doing is doing what he did on january 6, exploiting people to his own political advantage. promising to pardon these people and channelling the focus on trying to recast the narrative of january 6, trying to retell the story through the eyes of these so-called victims to his base. there's an irony. i will give you an example. it's anecdotal. i covered the death of roseanne boyland. she was killed by the police, until the fact that the police footage was released and you can see the footage of the police trying to save this woman. then it disappeared off of the

radar. for a long time this was she was walking peacefully going into the tunnel. then she -- the police were hitting people and beating people. that's how she died. there's a gap. what happened in those minutes between the time she entered the tunnel and the time she came back out as a dead body? what we finally saw after months was this security footage that was released that ultimately -- it was released in another trial that was not intended to be released, but it was a bulk of the dump. when people come to the footage, they see the police perform cpr and try to get her to the hospital and tried to save her. it undermines the narrative. suddenly, it disappears off of the far right wing -- >> they disappear her. >> they eliminate her. there's footage now that undermines the conspiracy theory. that's what we see with what happened with the prisoners. so long as can't see them, the

conspiracy narrative can be woven. >> you know what else erases the conspiracy theory? he could have pardoned them. he pardoned a lot of bad people. he didn't pardon them. what is your sense from telling her story and how her story was highlighted and then erased? what does that portend for the deradicalization? >> i think it's difficult at the stage we are in to deradicalize this segment of the population so long as you have a conservative and right wing echo chamber that is almost impossible to penetrate. they operate -- >> they're not going to cover trump could have pardoned them and didn't. >> when the news broke. fox was covering the border. all the other networks, the alerts we were receiving was seditious conspiracy conviction.

it's a significant deal this happened in our country. fox was not talking about it. they didn't talk about it until later in the day. it wasn't a lead story when they did. now fox is trying to redefine itself. i can't imagine what even the more extreme right wing outlets, news max, one america network, and further to the right in what is online and what they're doing in terms of covering the proud boys. i have no doubt we will see an uptick in the fund-raising and uptick in the recasting of the people as victims and the grist is going to continue. >> what does that do, andrew, in terms of our ability or our advantage in protecting the country where this intersects with the threat of domestic violent extremism? >> there's two -- if you are president biden and merrick garland, there are two answers.

one is in that it has to be the ultimate answer. it has to be taking this on in terms of hearts and minds. i don't think from merrick garland's perspective and that's my way of looking at things, it's a narrower view. there's a mission to keep the country safe. he is going to be focused very much on how these groups are now operating. as i mentioned, they are decentralizing. that makes it a harder issue. you can be sure that will not deter the department from following those. it makes it a harder thing to do. that can't be the ultimate answer. then it's like wham-a-mole. you keep on trying to take these things down. yes, it can have an affect. you have 600 convictions. that's a deterrent affect. there's peopl surmising when the president was arraigned that one of the reasons you saw zero protests of any significance was

there was a deterrent affect. it helps it's new york city. the department can do a lot. but that can't be the ultimate answer. >> what an unbelievable moment, unbelievable day. thank you to the three of you for spending the hour with us. thank you so much. believe it or not, there's another revelation in that close relationship between the supreme court justice and a billionaire. we will tell you about it next.

i struggled with cpap every night. but now that i got the inspire implant, it's making me think of doing other things i've been putting off. like removing that tattoo of your first wife's name. inspire. learn more and view important safety information at inspiresleep.com. (seth) hi, cecily. i just switched my whole family to verizon. lea(cecily)and view important oh, it's america's most reliable 5g network. (seth) and it's only $35 a line. (vo) save big during our spring savings event, and get the disney bundle with disney+, hulu, and espn+ included. all for just $35 a line. verizon so, you found the no7 then... it's amazing! 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. want a worry-free way to kill bugs? zevo traps use light, not odors or chemical insecticides, to attract and trap flying insects. they work continuously so you don't have to. zevo. people-friendly. bug-deadly.

♪ the thought of getting screened ♪ ♪ for colon cancer made me queasy. ♪ ♪ but now i've found a way that's right for me. ♪ ♪ feels more easy. ♪ ♪ my doc and i agreed. ♪ ♪ i pick the time. ♪ ♪ today's a good day. ♪ ♪ i screened with cologuard and did it my way! ♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪ i did it my way! ♪ 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.

billionaire named harlan

crow flying clarence thomas all over the world on unreported trips on the instagram model. paid for his mama's house. paid for clarence thomas' mother's house. y'all come up with something new to buy. just when you think of everything you could buy on earth, a billionaire will come up with a new thing. space rocket, twitter. this man bought a supreme court justice. [ laughter ] >> it was so good. hi, everybody. it's 5:00 in new york. before today's news broke, it was a literal punch line. the relationship between supreme court justice clarence thomas and billionaire harlan crow. because who among us doesn't have that one friend who reportedly pays without any disclosure for yearly luxury

travel, lavish gifts worth a fortune and your mother's house? now, like a bad running joke, it isn't over. there's another item to add to the list of ethics violations. harlan crow paid tuition for his grand nephew who he was raising at a son at a pair of private boarding schools. a payment at one of the two schools was worth more than $6,000. it wasn't just that month. citing former students and staff, they are reporting that the payments span the entire year at that school and another three years at another school.

before we go any deeper, i want you to know that nbc news has not independently verified the reporting. we have reached out to all the parties involved. justice clarence thomas hasn't issued a response to this development yet. previously, he insisted this. the crows are among our dearest friends and he was advised some personal hospitality from close personal friends who did not have business before the court were not reportable. harlan crow's office did respond to this story. paying special attention not only to what it says but what it doesn't say.

it is not a denial. crow's office saying, point-blank, that justice thomas never asked harlan crow to make payments. still, it's the latest in a series of revelations of drip, drip, drip discloures from the media that illustrate a secret and potentially improper financial relationship between a billionaire and conservative supreme court justice. it's where we begin the hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends.

brian fallon is here. kim atkins stohr is here. barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney, now law professor. when he thought he was out of here, we grab andrew weissmann to stay with us through this conversation. i want to say two things at the outset. paying for -- first of all, clarence thomas raising as a son a relative is an honorable thing. i don't know him, but it sounds like a nice thing to do. harlan crow paying for someone's tuition is an honorable thing. but that doesn't erase the public's right to know why clarence thomas didn't abide by the few meager disclosure and ethics laws that exist for this supreme court, and why this is another secret financial entanglement, brian, between a billionaire and the same supreme

court justice, clarence thomas. >> as that monologue suggests, this is a comedic level of corruption. at this point, we should be asking ourselves, what isn't harlan crow paying for when it comes to clarence thomas' lifestyle? let's do away with this sort of air brushing of the nature of their relationship. the statements that get released by harlan crow each time is a new revelation from pro publica isn't right. there the beginning, before they had prior relationship, it was a relationship that was based on

harlan crow cozying up to a sitting supreme court justice and extending financial benefits to him. they are compiling quite the application for a pulitzer prize. i hope further revelations don't only come from them. we need congress to get more significantly involved. we need an investigation. we need a doj investigation, i think, at this point. if we're not getting from garland or durbin, maybe dick blumenthal. >> it feels like the time is now. at this point, the congressional branch of government looks either -- you know, incapable of disinterested. clearly, investigative

journalists have done their part. i want to show you what senator blumenthal had to say about a doj investigation. >> the drip, drip, drip of these disclosures is going to destroy the united states supreme court unless there's a proper investigation. we need the department of justice to investigate clarence thomas' apparent failure to report or misreporting. these inaccuracies, if purposeful, amount to a violation of criminal law. even the highest court in the land is not higher than the law itself. that's why i think the department of justice has no choice but to begin an investigation. >> we cover our -- i covered this maybe mistakely as an ethical lap. but is it also a violation of law? >> there's a disclosure issue. as you pointed out, it doesn't matter that harlan crow does

something admirable or what he wants to spend his money on or that he paid for other tuition. it doesn't matter that justice thomas is raising somebody. that's all good and well. but there's a discloser issue about that. that's one bucket. the other bucket is, how is clarence thomas dealing with this in terms of taxes? if you pay up to $150,000 as -- that's given as a gift to clarence thomas, it doesn't matter if it's not given directly to him, it's given to his benefit and the school, it doesn't matter. the point was made by crow about, but i gave it to the school. but it was for clarence thomas and the child he was raising. the criminal issue would be, is this a dependent? is this something who he was given more than the maximum you can have as a gift before you have to declare it as income? i think it's too early to say, this is a criminal violation.

the issue for the department is, is there enough there that you should be looking at it? the department looks all the time at issues where there's enough to open but it may not go anywhere. my view is, at this point, the litany of money that was given, whether it's buying a house, whether it's these hundreds of thousands of dollars for vacations, the tuition. to put it in perspective for viewers, if you go to lunch with a responsible federal judge and you say, lunch is on me, their answer is, no. you are talking about $20, $25. they say no. you are not supposed to do something that has the appearance of impropriety. he may have been violating an actual criminal statute, depending on what is involved

here. should the department be looking at it? in my view, yes. >> kim, this gets at where i think the gaslighting on the right tends to wear people down. of course, if there were a news story about a left leaning billionaire buying the home and paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition for a liberal justice, the benghazi hearings would look like a warm-up for what the republicans would do. there's timidity to conduct investigations into actions more egregious, with facts that not in dispute, even by the billionaire in question, harlan crow. >> yeah. that's part of the problem here. that is why the fact that the supreme court does not have an ethics body, a body that is

meant to enforce ethical rules on it, is so problematic. because what you are left with is the work of investigative journalists -- i'm not going to disparage them. they do great work. this work on clarence thomas is extremely important. other things are happening here, which is one. you see the same kind of push to push out these stories about justices who are in the minority on the court. they have gone on other trips or that they have spoken at certain liberal-leaning organizations. you can make the case that perhaps they shouldn't do this. there's no equivalence here for someone who is behaving in a way that when a comedian makes a joke about them being bought, because the punch line lands. it's doing to his public perception about whether he is compromised. whether it made no difference in his rulings, that is a big enough problem for the court.

you see this being made. that shouldn't be left to journalists to do. that should be the job of an ethics body that is in charge of making sure the supreme court adheres by the rules. because the supreme court is the only body in the federal government that does not have that, that is why we are here. >> kim, you write something very smart along these lines. let me read it to our viewers. as a political matter, i think the best sort of impact or maybe the highest service done by the

hearing this week was this public education piece. i think the public intuits something is wrong. the public approval rating has plunged farther and faster than any institution in american civic life. the public doesn't understand they don't have the same ethical codes of conducts including other branchs, including federal judges. clarence thomas isn't abiing by what is there. talk about the role of congress or doj in making sure the public understands the basic functions of the court and the people who govern us. >> yeah. one thing that i took away that i think is important from the hearing this week, before the senate judiciary committee on supreme court ethics, is that judge ludig, he is the person who mike pence consulted before january 6 to ensure that he had no other choice than to certify those election reports.

he is a conservative conservative and originalist who spent his life on the bench. he said, of course, congress has a role here in being able to pass rules that enforce -- have enforceable ethics rules on the supreme court. the same way we have nine supreme court justices is because congress said so. the same reason the supreme court meets when it does is because congress says so. this idea that congress, because of separation of powers, cannot enforce this is -- doesn't seem to hold water with me, constitutionally. the problem is the political will. there's no political will in congress right now. we saw republicans unified in making it seem as if clarence thomas is being picked on, as if it's another, quote, high-tech lynching which clarence thomas called his supreme court hearing when he had to answer to allegation biz anita hill. republicans will block every effort. the people can vote in people

who believe that the supreme court should have the same ethicals standards as everyone else and congress can act. i don't see any other way. the supreme court will not do it themselves. i hoped maybe john roberts would speak on this. he chose not to. that's the only avenue here. >> barbara, let me show you what kim is talking about. here is john cornyn making exactly that point. >> i know harlan crow and clarence thomas. they are both honorable men. this is part of a 32-year smear campaign that started with his confirmation hearing. i played the video for people who don't remember it. he referred to it as a high-tech lynching. he has been targeted because he was a conservative black man to undercut the legitimacy of the supreme court. >> he is being targeted because there are failures to disclose

things. we don't know. there are other people that gave $5,000 that he did disclose. for some reason, for some reason, the secret financial relationship is one that's been created and architect by clarence thomas for some reason. do you think we will find out why? >> i don't know. this raises a red flag that this was not disclosed. what john cornyn says is think about the logical extension of that argument. he was attacked 32 years ago. so from that you can conclude that this is all just part of the same attack. does that also mean that he gets a get out of jail free card for everything he does forevermore? absolutely not. if he is engaged in miconduct, look at that. the previous attack was legitimate, the anita hill allegations from 32 years ago.

the bottom line is, if you are a public servant, you can't take free stuff. if you want free stuff, don't be a public servant. people don't want to give you free stuff when you are not a public servant. the problem is not with harlan crow. the problem is with clarence thomas who is taking too much free stuff. appears to have been bought and paid for. even if he hasn't made any decisions that are helpful or beneficial to harlan crow, it creates that appearance. if he were in the executive branch, he would be unable to get a security clearance based on this behavior. it amounts to blackmail, to compromise and to other things that could rightly cause people to question his independence. >> andrew wiseman raised the question of thomas' taxes. did he include the cost of of his mother's home, the tuition for the son he was raising as his own? it was an effort when the supreme court got involved in freeing up donald trump's

financial records. this is all knowable. this is all solvable. the most haunting thing senator blumenthal says the drip, drip, drip will, quote, destroy the united states supreme court. do you think john roberts realizes that? >> i think he might in one sense. i think he is somewhat powerless or senses he is powerless to badger his own colleagues to being more forthcoming. clarence thomas would tell him to take a hike in john roberts suggested he put more facts out there, release his tax returns. i don't think that's going to happen. i don't think clarence thomas deserves the benefit of the doubt on this. to barb's apt point. you mentioned it as you introduced the segment, in the same disclosure fa forms years earlier, he did disclose a gift payment made on behalf of this young man's tuition that he was

the guardian for. he said, i didn't think i needed to disclose it. he knew that a payment that was flowing to this young man that he was the legal guardian, he thought it should be disclosed in one instance. when harlan crow did more payments, he stopped disclosing it. that suggests bad faith on his part. we shouldn't stipulate he is an honorable man. there have been multiple reports. to your point, you said earlier, if the shoe was on the other foot and a democratic-appointed justice, the republicans would put the benghazi hearings to shame. as we speak, as this is playing out in the senate, and the senate is doing nothing, in the house you have the republican chairman of the house oversight committee who issued a subpoena

about a bribery scandal involving joe biden. when pressed about it, neither he nor grassley could articulate what the allegation is. they are blindly sending subpoenas to throw sand in the gears of the re-election campaign. you have report after record coming documenting serious instances of ethical breaches. we can't get an investigative step pursued regarding that. that shows you the asymmetry right there. >> it's how we ended up with trump. i want to ask you, it feels like too random and unrelated rocks that were turned over. one rock found that harlan crow purchased thomas' house. another rock, they found out he paid the full tuition over four years for a grand nephew. as an investigator, looking at the way money moves, those don't seem like first moves. those don't seem like the first

gifts you give. >> i agree. one point that's worth remembering, this isn't a criminal investigation. at least yet. it may manufacture be. you know who knows the answer to all of this? somebody to barb's point who is a public servant. clarence thomas. they shouldn't have to be digging for this. let's assume that it was just that he did get bad advice and he followed it. i think that's highly unlikely. let's assume that's the case. why hasn't there been full discloser? why is there drip, drip, drip? if there was -- the chief justice or an actual ethics body that was overseeing this, there would have been -- what's full story? you would get the answer. anybody in the executive branch would not just not get clearance. i try never to -- i don't think you would be employed anymore if you did this. the former fbi agent is actually

under indictment for taking bribes while he was at the fbi. those are the charges. by the way, one of the funniest things that crow says is, by the way, clarence thomas didn't ask for it. as if it's a defense to say, i took the bribe, but i didn't ask for the bribe. i just agreed to take it. >> i know we are talking down the line. do you think harlan crow has an interest in saying, i wasn't bribing him? these are serious, logical questions. >> they are. you don't have to -- i'm using bribe as an analogy. to me, the one that i would be most interested in as an investigator to go back to your original point, you think, it does not feel like these are the first moves. it might be that trips are the first way that you start getting somebody in your web. >> or his wife.

>> whether they had a discussion about the fact this would not be disclosed. we don't know that. you have to have some explanation why the $5,000 from a different person was paid when that was for tuition but why this wasn't. there has to be some story there as to why that didn't happen. that's something you would want to know, including does this relate to the simplest tax charges? there could be more. >> unbelievable story. it keeps unfolding. thank you so much for spending time with us on this. kim and barb stick around. how republicans in texas are targeting the state's largest county, home to millions of democratic voters. they are on the verge of passing allow allowing the state to toss out election results in that county only. it's another egregious example of the gop's assault on democracy and voting rights. later, e. jean carroll's team rests its case against the twice impeached disgraced

ex-president. trump's attorney not putting up any defense. it will go to the jury next week. we will have the latest from the courthouse. courthouse 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. ♪ 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. >> woman: why did we choose safelite? and with our price lock >> vo: for us, driving around is the only way we can get our baby to sleep, so when our windshield cracked,

we needed it fixed right. we went to safelite.com. there's no one else we'd trust. their experts replaced our windshield, and recalibrated our car's advanced safety system. they focus on our safety... so we can focus on this little guy. >> s sometimes, the lowsepair, of bipolar depression feel darkest before dawn. with caplyta, there's a chance to let in the lyte. caplyta is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, caplyta treats both bipolar i and ii depression. and in clinical trials, movement disorders and weight gain were not common. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements which may be life threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects.

caplyta can help you let in the lyte. ask your doctor about caplyta. find savings and support at caplyta.com.

one of the stories we have covered extensively is the big lie and its connection to the active work at eroding voting rights. right now, as the republican party struggles to win elections and obtain power the legal way, they are restricting and trying to manufacture whose votes will count at the polls, when people do vote. this week, texas, one of the

perpetrators of restricting voting rights, has taken another step. it's advancing a bill that would allow the secretary of state to essentially re-do elections in harris county. the largest county in the state and one that has become a democratic stronghold. if this is enacted, it would allow the secretary of state to toss out election results in that state' largest county. call for a new vote if there's, quote, good cause to believe that at least 2% of the polling places ran out of usable ballots during voting hours. joining our conversation texas resident matt dowd. matt, the floor is yours. >> i mean, this is -- what's unreal about there is, they wrote a bill. they never mentioned the county in the bill. they wrote a bill that said, we're going to do this. but it only applies to counties over 2 million in population.

it's only one county. harris county. in the state in the elections had the largest margin, one of the largest margins for democrats in the last election in the last couple of elections here. i think this is such a telling sign for the republicans of what they think is happening in the urban areas of texas. it used to be when i ran campaigns here -- i did democratic campaigns here. you would say, we will lose harris county by x. they have become more democratic. what's the republicans' answer to that? how do we behave different or? what do we use to persuade people? no. we figure out some way to overcome the vote in those counties by this maneuver that we're doing. i will add one other thing. i was thinking about this the other day. this is all based on a faux controversy. they base it on this controversy

from 2022. they were able to fix the problem and then carry on the election in harris county. there's been no proof of election fraud. there's no proof that people's votes weren't cast. in texas, you can vote in any precinct. somebody had a problem, just go a mile or two miles away and vote in another precinct. here is a fact that's telling that these kinds of things are coming out of it, these solutions. there's been more women who have had credibly accused donald trump of sexual assault than there have been voters convicted of voter fraud in the last four years. in the entire country. think about that. >> it's perfect because one is credible and the other isn't. i guess the conversation is,

we're doing a lot over the fake pile of allegations. right? there are 470 odd voter suppression laws racing through 48 states. you can't out organize against voter suppression. it's so operationalized. it's so brazen that the remedy to just vote them out is something that republicans are trying to make impossible. >> i mean, we can see two contrasting things going on. i think the republicans understand this. i will give you two examples, texas and michigan. michigan made it easier for voters. gave voters more access, increased turnout not only of democrats and independents but of republicans. what happened? the entire legislative and politics of the state changes. republicans understand that in texas. texas in the mid '90s, before republicans took over complete power, which they hold complete

power in texas, ranked 15th in the country on ease of voting. 15th in the mid '90s. today, texas is 50th in ease of voting. before this instance of what they have done in texas, before what they have done on harris county and other things they have done, we were already last. i don't know how much further you can go than last but that's where we are going. >> real quick, allred v. cruz, you want to make a prediction? >> this is exciting for the democrats. he is a moderate. i think he will be able to raise money. ted cruz, for voters in texas, is unpopular in texas. all he has to do -- think about this in this race. i tell people this. ted cruz lost to beto by 2.5%. he got 8% of the republicans.

if allred gets 10% of the republicans and 54% of the independents, he wins the seat against ted cruz. >> sounds very doable. matt, we will stay on it. thank you for spending time with us on these stories today. it's nice to see you. ahead for us, the e. jean carroll civil rape trial against donald trump is nearing its end. her legal team rested today after a final day of witness testimony. we will get to all of it after a quick break. l get to all of it a quick break. - how'd you get here? - kayak! they compared hundreds of travel sites to find a great deal on my flight, car, and hotel. - kayak. search one and done.

so, you found the no7 then... it's amazing! 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. ♪ 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. power e*trade's easy-to-use tools make complex trading less complicated. custom scans help you find new trading opportunities, while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. e*trade from morgan stanley. (vo) if you've had thyroid eye disease for years and you can't get any shuteye and stay on top of the market. because you can't shut your eyes, or...if your itchy eyes have you itching for a fight, it's not too late for another treatment option for thyroid eye disease, also known as t-e-d. to learn more, visit treatted.com that's treatt-e-d.com. when people come, they say they've tried lots of diets, nothing's worked or they've lost the same 10, 20, 50 pounds

over and over again. they need a real solution. i've always fought with 5-10 pounds all the time. eating all these different things and nothing's ever working. i've done the diets, all the diets. before golo, i was barely eating but the weight wasn't going anywhere. the secret to losing weight and keeping it off is managing insulin and glucose. golo takes a systematic approach to eating that focuses on optimizing insulin levels. we tackle the cause of weight gain, not just the symptom. when you have good metabolic health, weight loss is easy. i always thought it would be so difficult to lose weight, but with golo, it wasn't. the weight just fell off. i have people come up to me all the time and ask me, "does it really work?" and all i have to say is, "here i am. it works." my advice for everyone is to go with golo. it will release your fat and it will release you.

today marked the last day of witness testimony in e. jean carroll's civil rape case against donald trump. her team rested its case. earlier, a former journalist and a friend of e. jean carroll's recounted her telling her about the alleged rape. martin testified she described fighting and that the more she spoke of the assault, the more upset she became. martin testified that carroll told her that her friend urged her to go to the police. advice she disagreed with at the time. martin testified that she told e. jean that trump could bury her with his attorneys and financial resources. she also told the court that she regretted giving that advice many times over the years. carroll's lawyers played a tame of trump's deposition. trump confused a picture of e. jean carroll with one of his

ex-wived while maintaining she was not his type. wow. later he was asked if the three women he married were his type and he said, quote, yeah. end quote. closing argumented begin monday. lisa rubin joins us from the courthouse. lisa, this feels like a dramatic culmination reading it on paper. how is it in the flesh? >> reporter: it was dramatic testimony, i think, from carol martin today. in part because as you said, she has regrets about what advice she gave to e. jean carroll. there were also moments where carol martin expressed trepidation about this case and being involved in it as a witness. from my vantage point, that made her more credible. she thought it might have gone too far. she said in private texts that for e. jean this had been a

lifestyle. she had become narcissistic. she said, i didn't say anything in these texts i wouldn't say to her face. i was worried about my friend and becoming too involved in her lawsuit. the rest of the afternoon was sort of anti-climatic. we heard from the former editor and chief of "elle." spoke to how beloved e. jean was by the readers and then as you noted the plaintiff rested. i should note, joe tacopina intended to rest, too. >> tell me about the issue of the photo. donald trump -- he said this about -- he said his defense was to say, she's not my type. that was his explanation for why he wouldn't have done it and didn't do it. there was this issue in his own deposition where he confused a photograph of e. jean carroll with one of his wives, marla maples. >> reporter: that's easily one

of the most powerful pieces of evidence in this case. when the plaintiff's lawyers opened, that picture was the last thing that they showed the jury. they told the jury that they would hear from trump in his own words that he had mistaken that picture of e. jean carroll for his wife -- i'm sorry, his second wife, marla maples, who was just his type. no question, that's extraordinarily powerful evidence. i should also say that during that deposition, one of the things that i found powerful was when he was asked whether he owns the "access hollywood" statement about when you are a star they let you do it, he was asked, is that true? rather than back agway said, historically, for a million years, that's been the case. fortunately, or unfortunately. then she asked the damaging follow-up. is it fair to say that you are a store? he said, that's fair to say.

yeah, when you are a star, they will let you do it. i'm a star. >> my god. i think i threw up in my mouth. take me through your legal assessment of these -- it's an extraordinary admission of conduct that we know about because he said it to billy bush. how do you think that will play before this jury? >> one of the things unique about sexual assault is that jurors are allowed to hear about price incidents to make inferences about whether this person engages in this type of behavior. in a bank robbery or drug deal, you don't hear about that. but there's a rule of evidence that says you hear about them of someone who engains in sexual assault. this idea of i go up to women and kiss them and grab them, that's consistent. it was not just e. jean carroll who said this happened but two other women testified about how

this same skep ar yo played out. this admission about they let you do it when you are a star and i am a star, i think tells a consistent story. i think jurors like to figure out what happened and a consistent story helps them to make a decision when there's one person saying something happened and somebody says it didn't. i think this is a strong case. one other point i want to make, because i heard from people who say, if she didn't say no or tell him this was unwelcome, is this still a rape? the claim here is battery. that's an unwelcome touching. he burst in, kissed her, grabbed her without asking first is a battery. this has made a strong case for the jury. no doubt left to say that this was in any way some consensual situation. his defense isn't that it was consensual but that it didn't happen.

>> kim, very much in the backdrop -- lisa made this point. this is the first and highest profile rape trial in a post-me too or after the earliest me too revelations. you have seen joe tacopina question why she didn't scream. it feels like the way a normal good rape victim should behave has been on trial this week. >> i think that's absolutely true. i heard a lot of old, tired tropes when it comes to that about how a victim is supposed to respond in that case. as we have discussed, she was dealing with somebody who she knew was powerful, who she knew -- it would be very difficult to bring a complaint against. her own friends were informing her of that fact in real time. anybody who has been a suggest of any unwanted touching, let

alone a sexual assault, knows it is not that cut and dry. i think it shows just a really disjointed way of presenting this case on the part of attorney tacopina. i think it's also important to know that in this case, it's important to remember, donald trump's testimony in that deposition is the only witness that was presented in the defense. there was an expert witness that was proffered who couldn't attend. an important thing to donald trump's comments is the fact that when asked, have you cheated on one of your wives? he said, i don't know. there's something about -- there's something called witness credibility that is important in a trial. when you say to someone, you do not know, if someone says they don't know if they have cheated on a spouse. i have never cheated but i would think if i did that would be something i would remember. i think jurors would, too. it's things like that that go to

the credibility of the only witness that they presented in their defense. i think that makes this a very difficult case to defend. we don't know what the jury is going to do. all of these things are important in considering this case. >> lisa, you have written a great post about the echo of me too. i want to dive into it with all of you. i have to sneak in a quick break. i have to sneak in a quick break. ♪ 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 ] ♪ ♪ - why are these so bad? - if i would've used kayak to book our car, we could have saved on our trip instead of during our trip. ughh - kayak. search one and done. (seth) not to brag, but i just switched to verizon. ughh (cecily) wow! (seth) and i got to choose the phone i wanted. for free. (cecily) not that you're bragging. (vo) choose the phone you want, on us. during our spring savings event. (cecily) on the network worth bragging about. verizon so, you found the no7 then... it's amazing! 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.

if you're turning 65 soon or over 65 and planning to retire... now's the time to learn more about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare and get help protecting yourself from the out-of-pocket costs medicare doesn't pay. because the time to prepare is before you go on medicare. don't wait. get started today. call unitedhealthcare for your free decision guide.

lisa, kim, barbara are back with us. lisa, i will read from your new piece. post me too, not only were sexual assault victims empowered to go forward, lawyers understood they had new tools. carroll's lead lawyer was especially attentive to me too. there were too methed as of corroboration, finding paralleled stories of women previously unknown to each other, and the accusers who say they confided in realtime. carroll's lawyers imported into the courtroom the most sympathetic -- presentation of a pattern. all it takes the diligence, shoe leather and the influence of dogged lawyers who journalists never knew. full piece go into the work jodi

cantor and megan tooey did. people they confided in at the time as well as victims who didn't know they were victims of the same crimes from alleged perpetrators. explain. >> i think that jodi and megan knowingly or unknowingly created a template for lawyers. because at the time they were doing their reporting on weinstein, some of the people they were reporting on settled, for example, with the weinstein company and there w papers they could look to to corroborate they were sexual assaulted. how could you confirm dated back to the 1970s were telling the truth? they found people they told at the time. who did you tell? when did you tell them? can i talk to that person? and that was a way of establishing without any other evidence that these women have some credibility, and then through their reporting they collected the stories of almost

08 women, and that's a lesson i think the plaintiff's lawyers here have learned very well. they obviously had testimony from women who allege assaults by donald trump in '79 and 1995, and then the person e. jean carroll told when she was outside on the sidewalk the day of the assault, and then her coworker in whom she confided two days later in martin's kitchen. those are the lessons from me too we've seen imported into the courtroom. >> it leads most people to analyze these cases are very hard, very hard to try and very hard to win. what do you see in terms of not just e. jean's experience, the story her lawyers have told, but where we are? >> i think this case if successful could be inspiring

for a lot of other women and survives of sexual assault to come forward, because historically there has been this concern about being victimized. we have seen that happen taking e. jean carroll here. why didn't you scream, report, et cetera. but her lawyer has done a masterful job preparing her for that and having evidence to abut it. i'm hopeful this could empower other survives to say, i'm willing to take a shot at this. i do have witnesses i told at the time and perhaps we can find other survives who have had similar experiences. this could be a pivotal moment in the history of these kind of cases j just the extraordinary bravery to want to do that in the name of justice, it is incredible. thank you for being here through the whole hour with us. another break for us. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. with the money we saved, we tried electric unicycles. i think i've got it!

doggy-paddle! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here 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. so, you found the no7 then... it's amazing! 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. - double check that. the uk's #1 skincare eh, pretty good! (whistles) yeek. not cryin', are ya? let's tighten that. (fabric ripping) ooh. - wait, wh- wh- what was that? - huh? what, that?

no, don't worry about that. here we go. - asking the right question can greatly impact your future. - are, are you qualified to do this? - what? - especially when it comes to your finances. - yeehaw! - do you have a question? - are you a certified financial planner™? - yes. i'm a cfp® professional. - cfp® professionals are committed to acting in your best interest. that's why it's gotta be a cfp®. find your cfp® professional at letsmakeaplan.org. and finally we bring you an update on the international mystery of the week, the enduring question of those explosions over the kremlin. moscow is now claiming without any evidence that the united states was actually behind the alleged drone attack. that accusation comes less than 24 hours after russia made another unsubstantiated claim ukraine was bean it because they were trying to assassinate vladimir putin. while the u.s. and ukraine

vehemently deny the accusations there are more questions than answer about the incident as russia continues to wage its el lyle and brutal war against ukraine. we'll be right back. tal war aga ukraine. we'll be right back. when it comes to reducing sugar in your family's diet, the more choices, the better. that's why america's beverage companies are working together to deliver more great tasting options with less sugar or no sugar at all. in fact, today, nearly 60% of beverages sold contain zero sugar. different sizes? check. clear calorie labels? just check. with so many options, it's easier than ever to find the balance that's right for you.

more choices. less sugar. balanceus.org ♪ ...i'm over 45. ♪ less sugar. ♪ i realize i'm no spring chicken. ♪ ♪ i know what's right for me. ♪ ♪ i've got a plan to which i'm sticking. ♪ ♪ my doc wrote me the script. ♪ ♪ box came by mail. ♪ ♪ showed up on friday. ♪ ♪ i screened with cologuard and did it my way! ♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪ (group) i did it my way! ♪ (vo) if you've had thyroid eye disease for years and things are a no-go because you keep seeing double, or...your bloodshot eyes have you seeing red, it's not too late for another treatment option for thyroid eye disease, also known as t-e-d. to learn more, visit treatted.com

that's treatt-e-d.com. 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.

thank you so much for letting substance abuse your homes during these extraordinary times. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. hi, ari. >> hi, nicolle. thanks so much. welcome to "the beat." i'm ari melber. today, may 4th, marks one legal conclusion in a quest for justice began on january 26th, 2021. today federal prosecutors won their big case against a key militia that first breaches the