this was one small victory but the idea that a woman can go into a court of law with a crime that happened privately, there were no actual witnesses 30 years later and still be believed is a victory for the movement. >> absolutely. there was a republican on that jury, at least one republican on that jury. more men than women. >> and people who buy their own a mission like they don't really watch the news, they don't have strong opinions on donald trump, that is a remarkable cross section of workers to get that they successfully did. great to have you both here. thank you. that is all in on this tuesday night, and good evening alex. >> i just want to know who the new yorkers are. who do not have an opinion. now. >> i watonight to know who the new yorkers are who don't have an opinion.

>> i also take judge kaplan's instruction to them today seriously, which is you guys should not reveal your identity because of what this guy will do to you. >> jurors, if you can hear us, we're cure wrs but we don't need to know who you are. also a lot happier the people who don't know. hats offeo to you, you new yorkers. all right, buddy, thank you as always. and thank you at home for joining us this hour. quote, no one is above the law not even a former president of the united states. that is how roberta kaplan, the lawyer for writer e. jean carroll, that is how she began her statement after the verdict was read in the case against former president trump. carroll herself said, quote, i filed this lawsuit against donald trump to clear my name and to get my life back. today the world finally knows the truth. this afternoon a jury of six men and three women in manhattan

found former president donald trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation. the decision was quick and it was unanimous. for years now trump has been not only denying ms. carroll's allegation that he shoved her against the wall and raped her in a dressing room of a luxury department store in the mid-'90s trump has also been attempting to smear ms. carroll's reputation. jurors believed there was enough evidence to hold trump liable for sexually abusing ms. carroll that day. and that c alone is a very big deal. it is a big deal not just for e. jean carroll but for society at large. trump is a public figure who has beenli accused of sexual misconduct by more than a dozen women, but no one had ever taken him to court based on their allegations and won until now. i should note that this was not a criminal case.

trump has not been convicted of any crime, nor will he face any prison time, but this is still very much accountability. a former president and the current republican front-runner in the 2024 presidential race has been found liable for sexual abuse. now, president trump's lawyer in the case, joe tacopina, he told press outside the courthouse today that, quote, he was found not liable for the rape and that's it. we're already starting to see that narrative, the narrative that only focuses on that one finding by this jury, we are already starting to see that narrative take hold in the fringes of right-wing media. and former president trump is, of course, calling the trial unfair and a witch hunt. but check out how fox news reacted to this today. >> a witch hunt is sort of an obsession that you go on forever in investigative fashion chasing after a case that doesn't really

exist, whereas in this instance people brought forward evidence and it was presented to a jury not to like a panel of democrats, and they unanimously found that he's liable. >> you're being arrogant if you think that this is nothing. this is not nothing. this is sexual battery, a $5 million finding by a jury. yes, he will appeal it and then appeal as it goes up the food chain, will bring it back to the front page, back again again and again, trump "access hollywood," i canmp touch them anywhere i want. >> plenty of grounds which to appeal. what are they? >> i don't really see them right now. yes, donald trump has the right to appeal. i'm very dubious that's going to be successful. >> fox news of all the places seems to at least at this point understand the reality of the situation, a former president

being found liable for sexual abuse is easy to understand, and it is plainly awful. but because the jury didn't find him liable for rape narrative is already forming on the political fringes, i want to show you exactly what the jury did find trump liable for today so you can see it for yourself. question one, did ms. carroll prove by a preponderance of the evidence that mr. trump rape ms. carroll. answer, no. question two, diz ms. carroll prove by a preponderance of the evidence mr. trump abused ms. carroll, answer yes. if yes insert a dollar amount that would fairly and adequately compensate her for that injury, and then you can see the jury has written in $2 million. was mr. trump's conduct willfully or wantonly negligent? yes. how much should mr. trump pay carroll in punitive damages? $20,000. so that's the first part of the sexual abuse, and then there is

this half about the defamation about trump denying carroll's claims and trying to publicly trash the reputation. quote, did ms. carroll prove by a preponderance of the evidence that mr. trump's statement was defamatory? yes. didfa ms. carroll prove by clea and concise evidence mr. trump's statement was false? yes. was ms. carroll injured as a result of mr. trump's statement? yes. did mr. trump acts maliciously out of hatred, ill will, spite, our wanton, reckless, or disregard of the rights of a another? yes. and then a the jury lists three more dollar amounts for damages. $1 million, $1.7 million, and $280,000. for those of you doing the math at home, that brings trump's tab here up to $5 million. now, trump's lawyer has vowed to appeal this verdict, but today

is clearly a landmark moment in american history, so what does all of this mean now? what does it mean for trump's future? what does it mean legally? what does it mean culturally? we have a lot to unpack. joining us now is lisa rubin. thanks for joining me on this very, very big day. lisa, you've been through it all, andve i've got to say when you're a lawyert for a defenda and you have to say they didn't get him on the rape thing, that seems like a thin defense given everything else they got him on. >> otyes, it is a very thin defense. and he knows what the impact of this liability finding is because even though it's not a criminal trial joe tacopina in his closing saidop to the jury not condemn this man as a rapist. in other words, he understood full well while this is a civil trial the impact of the finding

would almost be tantamount to a criminal conviction even that's not what it is. it would be a jury of his peers unanimously finding that the conduct itself happened even if the punishment wasn't jail. thee the fact they found unanimously he sexually abused e. jean carroll is astonishing. >> you were there, and there was a lot of talk about the composition of the jury, the expectations of the jury. men outnumbered women. i mean what can you tell us about what you observed being in the roomou there? and what were your expect asians how long it was going to take? >> my expectation was it was going to take a long time, and i'll explain why. i thought at least it would be a fewbe jurors who would and therefore they'd have to hash it out for a few hours. i also thought given the question on the verdict form even if everyone was in agreement that too would take a time to weigh what is the

quantification of damages, what do we owe this woman in punitive damages, but how much do we want to punish donald trump, right? so i thought these deliberations were going to take a while. when i was sitting down and told the jury had reached a verdict my jaw dropped and i didn't know whatnd to think, but joe tacopi essentially what he said is everyone has strong feelings about donald trump, and that's okay and there's a place for that at the ballot box. it looks like even the juror who listened to tim pool by his own admission as a far-right maga podcaster. he upheld the rule while he put his political opinions at the courthouse l door, and he listed to the evidence and found where the evidence took him, which was

a liability for donald trump on both of the counts, both battery andun defamation. >> rebecca, we're going to talk a lot today and many days to come about the implications on this as far as donald trump and the republican party, but what should not be lost here is what this does for victims of sexual assault, what its does in term of women's narratives and whether and how we believe them. i mean if you had told me ten years ago, 20 years ago charges were decades old, she remember what happened, she didn't scream, she didn't even know or understand what had happened to her hours after this assault, obviously there's no way you can lit dpat that in court, there's no way, and yet e. jean carroll won. how are you feeling about what happened today? >> i'mt amazed. as lisa said the speed of the decision, the fact it was unanimous, i mean it's been a startling day, and i wrote a column last week before the

decision obviously that was talking about how long these things take, right? the point you just made even ten years ago something like this would beli hard to imagine. one of the things i wrote about in my column is the way e. jean carroll herself focused on her age andon so much has happened where m victories have built on losses and losses have come after victories, and the kind ok sinuous decades long, lifetimes long set of changes that have happened around gender and power and the ability for people to tell stories and understand and recontextualize their own experiences. and that's been so much of what we have seen here. in terms of what you said about victims, i think it'sai importa to note it is this unusual circumstance, a civil trial, not a criminal trial, and it happened within this one-year window that was opened when kathy hochul, the governor,

signed a law perming people for whom the statute of limitations on criminal charges to run out to open these civil proceedings, and that law was made possible by victims advocates who worked tirelessly to push for this window tohi open. all of this came in the wake of the me too movement that sort of crested in the fall of 2017 with reporting about harvey weinstein but really goes back a year early was the release of the tape in which donald trump bragged about being able to grab women against their will, and that was aai revelation that caused a storm of other revelationshe from people who sd they too had been grabbed, and thenth he won an election after that. there's no easy -- there's no straight path here, and that's one of the things i'm thinking about is just how long this history takes to make, how long social progress takes and how the path toward progress and towards days like today is very winding.

and keep in mind that this is a man who is a candidate for president again. he could very well be the president again. there is no victory the end of the story but also no loss the end of the story. that's something i thought abous a lot. last summer during the amber heard and johnny depp trial there were a lot of funerals for me, too, the end of a story, an end of the lot of progress and social movement forward. this is a lesson for me we shouldn't be taking the temperature and announcing the endser or beginnings. we're in a long, long, generations long process here. todayng is a very big day in th process. >> it's such an important -- i read the story before the verdict. and i was girding myself like this is how people are going to process a loss in this trial, but in fact it ends up being a win which in some ways also makes the point in a slightly different fashion. i think we have a full screen of the article you're mentioning,

rebecca, but it is such an important point that movements don't -- progress doesn't happen in a linear fashion. there arein ebbs and flows. the ark may be long but it bends up and down, up and down. the damages awarded to e. jean carroll, $5 million, i did not realize the jury could assign a number to -- to the dollar figure, if you will, to the wrongs that had been done to a plaintiff. can you talk to me a little bit about how unusual it was for e. jean carroll to defer this decision to a jury and not file for a particular dollar amount, and also whether the sum seems unusually high to you or -- how do you think of the $5 million price tag? >> well, first of all, i think juriesf like to find round numbers and work backwards to allocate them.

one of the things i found unusuals here is that e. jean' lawyers in her closing made a big deal about the fact for her this wasn't about money. and they did that for two reason. one, they were trying to undercut joetack pena's narratives they conspired to make up a story, first to bring trump down, and second to sell books, and third to be famous. yes,o we're suing for damages t we're not going to put a price on it, that's up to you. by saying that they were trying to take the narrative away from joe tacopina's narrative, but it's also principally true.o for e. jean carroll it was about getting herrr name back, gettin her reputation back. no one has said through monetary form how much e. jean carroll must have lost through mental loss, through her fear, and yet the jury assigned $2 million to

the assault itself separate and apart fromit the reputational losses she suffered when he defamed her. thatwh to me was really notable. >> rebecca, when you talk about the price that trump will pay for this, a lot of people are saying this has beena litigate before, in the "access hollywood" tape, the tape as you mentioned. i'm not calling it that but that was the excuse of the tape come out days before the election and be found liable to the tune of $5 million in sexual assault in a court of law,ss and i know if that's also the case where one sort of inflection point on sexualon assault may not have resulted in the justice some victims would have liked to have seen which is to say the 2016 election. this one i feel like it's going to -- i think it's different to be a republican squn to have to find something to say on this.

>> well, it's interesting because there are a bunch -- first of all, the money matters because we know that donald trump hates paying people, right, in general. and so money is something that he uses and throws around in terms of status and power. and he now owes money in a public way, right? i think that actually matters in termsin of even his own self-presentation as a powerful man, which has always been tied very closely to his often i think exaggerated sense of his own wealth. right, that matters.t, i think it also matters the defamation matters. because one of it things that has been a topic and a real issue for donald trump and for the contemporary american right is the weaponizing of untruths, right?hs here he has been held legally accountable forle defamation, f lying, i think that matters. ashi to whether it's going to matter the clips you play from fox news are really interesting because it is clear at least in

this immediate shockat of the moment there is someho distanci happening. i would, however, point to the fact, there was distancing tha also happened after the "access hollywood" tape, and we forget that. there were ae, lot of republica who condemned him in the immediate wake of the "access hollywood" tape before it sort of became clear he was going to barrel forward. so i wouldn't -- i wouldn't read too much into the i political t leaves about what this is going to meanut for his candidacy. i just don't know. i don't know that we can predict that. i definitely agree with you this matters. it matters to have it litigated through the federal system, in a processed case by a jury. all of those are very different from the kind of politicized fighting that takes place on fox news or, you know, ideologically who can be accused of being coming from the left or coming from the right. this is jury and we know -- lisa has been talking about this and reported it was mixed

ideologically, it was a majority of men. i think that really does at least temporarily or i mean forever change the nature of how this has been litigated, literally. but iga wouldn't make any guess about how it'san going to affec his political future as far as thepo 2020 election. i don't think we can predict that. there are legal battles coming. this sets the stage for what could be many more legal challenges he's about to face. >> yes, i agree with you it's impossible to know, but regardless of what happens, it matters. it matters for, victims. it matters for women. it matters for american culture and society that this happened. lisa rubin, thank you for your time and rbrilliance. and rebecca whose piece what if e. jean carroll doesn't win, we knowt the answer but importanto read this piece because of the larger movement towards progress. thank you for your time tonight, ladies. we have so much moret, to come

this day of breaking news including a federal criminal indictment for serial fabricator george santos. and donald trump's loss in court today is making it complicated for people especially republican people. that is next. for people especially republican people that is next

i'm jonathan lawson here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too.

if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information.

i know there's conflicting information about dupuytren's contracture. i thought i couldn't get treatment yet? well, people may think that their contracture has to be severe to be treated, but it doesn't. if you can't lay your hand flat on the table, talk to a hand specialist. but what if i don't want surgery? well, then you should find a hand specialist certified to offer nonsurgical treatments. what's the next step? visit findahandspecialist.com today to get started.

may 9, 2023, will go down in

history as the day nine jurors in new york city unanimously found a former president of the united states civilly liable for sexual abuse and defamation. that former president is donald trump who also happens to be the favorite to win the 2024 republican presidential nomination. it puts his fellow republicans in an awkward and unusual spot. governor asa hutchinson running against trump for that nomination he thinks trump is a liability for the party. so far that republican outcry has been mostly limited to asa hutchinson. then there are other presidential hopefuls like nikki haley and tim scott all saying nothing at all, literally silps. then there's mike pence who said a lot of different things without saying much at all. >> i think that's a question for the american people, but i -- i really can't comment on a judgment in a civil case. i have no knowledge of those

matters, and i'm sure the president will defend himself in that matter. >> for you personally do you feel comfortable with someone who was found liable in this case serving as president? >> well, i would tell you in my 4 1/2 years serving alongside the president i never heard or witnessed behavior of that nature. >> mike pence appears to still be courting trump supporters even though they erected a gallows on the capitol and wanted to hang him. but who knows perhaps his discretion on the sexual assault case will bring them all back up. joining us now is former missouri senator and current msnbc political analyst claire mccaskill. claire, it is great to see you. help me if you would, claire, help me understand what do you think mike pence is doing here? >> he just is a cowered. you know, listen, we can spend

hours and days talking about how bad donald trump is, but this guy is something else. i mean, how do you know what he knows about this man, the fact that he can't tell the truth, the fact he has no moral character, the fact he changed wives like some people change their shirts, like adultery was a way of life for him. how can this evangelical guy so pious and all about his faith really not just say what they said today. this is not a man we want to hold as an example to our children, and this jury just made it official. so the fact he is around and won't say anything and tries not to talk at all, i mean this is what people hate about politicians. they just hate it, and pence he has no shot whatsoever, and it's frankly just discouraging to see him not have the guts to just say it like it is.

this man was found to have assaulted, sexually assaulted a woman by a court of law in the united states of america, and he has no business in the oval office. >> yeah, i completely agree with you. i don't understand why -- why run for president, right? first of all, if you can't say -- if you can't talk about something like this, like how can people depend on you to talk about the stuff that's actually really difficult? secondly, if you think trump's going to survive it, why are you running because that seems to be the bedrock sort of foundational principle and all these ham handed i can't really talk about it or dead silence you're hearing from republican candidates. after the "access hollywood" tape trump survived it and he won, so why are they running? it's very difficult to understand the logic of not saying anything against someone you are running against. >> yeah, all these candidates are handcuffed by the math, alex. what's going on here they see

there's about 25% of of america that's brought 25% of what trump is selling. they believe trump won the election, that he's capable of telling the truth. he has defrauded about 20% of america, and they're locked in. they are handcuffed to donald trump. and by the way, it has nothing to do with america, but guess what? it's the majority of republican primary voters, so they have to try to not offend those people that are locked in with trump, at the same time convincing them they're kind of like trump and not really kind of like trump. so they want to tread very carefully and very lightly to not really turn away those voters. they have to have if they have any shot of winning the republican primary. all of them are cowards. nikki haley is just as bad. she can't decide whose side she's on on on any given day. >> there's some really weird

data we have from "the washington post" and says on average 55% of voters feel trump should face criminal charges for scandals on mishandling classified documents and january 6th. but the same poll shows if the candidates for president in 2024 were trump and biden, 44% or voters would definitely or probably vote for donald trump, which is more than those who would vote for joe biden. how do you at once think someone should face criminal charges but also on the same hand want to vote for him in the to24 election? do you understand that psychology, claire? >> no, i don't, but i will tell you this poll has gotten a lot of attention, and it is just one poll and it was weird. it was very strange. and i do think that the majority of america does not want the chaos that is donald trump. they do want someone that they can be proud of and want their children to emulate. but the majority of the

republican party doesn't feel that way. they have been led down a path of ugly, and they're perfectly comfortable staying there. >> well, that's what the big question is. there's a question of what happens to trump in 2024, but then what is the republican party that leading figures up the gop cannot say what happened in this courtroom is devastating for the country, it is devastating for the office of the president, and this person who's found liable of these things should not be president again. what does it say about the gop? >> it says a lot, and frankly if you really step back from this this jury of mostly men, six men, three women in a break neck speed determined that credibility of the witnesses. and they determined that jean carroll was credible and donald trump wasn't. and it's an a subject matter -- can you imagine what they would

be doing if a democratic candidate for president had this happen to them? they want to focus on the president's son instead of the president because the president has been a loyal and ethical and moral man all of his life. so it -- you know, it is crazy to me the double standard the republican party is engaging in now, and i don't think it's going to work for them in the long run. i don't know when they recover from this, but if they don't i do think eventually, not anytime soon but eventually they will fade into a third party in the united states. >> i will then, they are one of our two parties, and we're all in the same boat. fix yourself, gop. claire mccaskill, thank you for your time tonight. >> you bet. when we come back, a new mystery around republican congressman george santos who's now facing federal criminal charges. that plus the return of tucker carlson who says he has a new platform where he can spread

his particular brand of let's call it analysis. that's next. s particular brand call it analysis that's next.

wake up, achievers. you're making the most of every hour of your life. except the hours that you're sleeping. so why do we leave so much untapped potential on the table? this is a next level bed, for a next level you. my circadian rhythm is kicking your circadian rhythm's butt! it's not a competition. i know, but i'm still winning! so, it is a competition. of course. save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. only at sleep number.

bridgett is here. she has no clue that i'm here. she has no clue who's in the helmet. are you ready? -i'm ready! alright. xfinity rewards creates experiences big and small, and once-in-a-lifetime. at the most basic level the news you consume is a lie, a lie of the steltiest and most insidious kind. facts have been withheld along with purpose and purpose and perspective. you are being manipulated. >> if you are wondering what

might be next for recently fired tucker carlson, we have news for you, that is if you can believe us. earlier today mr. carlson announced a new version of his show will be launched on twitter. tucker carlson one of the most watched cable news hosts in america delivered that job update while railing against news outlets. in fact, this video was warning his people are being manipulated and all of this is a dark cave of misinformation. as a reminder tuck carlson was booted from fox news at least in part from information uncovered during the dominion defamation lawsuit against fox news. domennian claimed that fox including tucker carlson pedaled misinformation and fox settled. and tucker carlson now says the news you consume is a lie and that he, tucker carlson, and here to presumably tell the truth. so that's the business plan.

the idea at the center of that business plan, that the media and journalists are lying to their consumers except for people like tucker carlson, that idea has been on prominent display since a 33-year-old shot and killed eight people as federal and local law enforcement continue to investigate his motives. they say they suspect the shooter was a neo-nazi sympathizer. a major reason for that suspicion are the countless social media posts that journalists identified on a social media profile believed to belong to the shooter. the account is littered with rants against women and black people and jewish people. there is language praising hitler. there are photos of people giving nazi salutes, and there are shirtless pictures presumably of the shooter that show fresh ink, ss lightening bolts, and a squats cu. but despite all the keeply

researched about the shooter's social media presence, misinformation about the shooter has proliferated online. the dallas morning news has been tracking the false claims the shooter was an undocumented immigrant, that he was a gang member, that he yelled all whites must die during the rampage. none of those things were true. the shooter was born in dallas county, texas, and his apparent white supremacist ideology arb that was not subtle. but all of those lies, they spread on tucker carlson's platform of choice, twitter, including this tweet from marjorie taylor greene who took the anger and fear surrounding the shooting, and she focused it on migrants at the southern border. again, the texas shooter was an american citizen of hispanic heritage. this is misinformation spread on twitter. the idea that tucker carlson is trying to sell you and that news outlets and journalists are the

ones purportedly lying to everyone, that is dangerous. over the years we have seen this idea bolster right-wing violence and by the way insurrection for which we are still seeking accountability. the stuff poisons the well of our democracy, and it is very hard to cleanup. and since elon musk took over we have seen twitter become a place where a lot of these lies and misinformation can spread virtually unchecked. and that is where tucker carlson is apparently headed now. what could go wrong? when we come back, republican congressman george santos has been under scrutiny since journalists from his home district began exposing his lies, and today that scrutiny took a serious turn with reports of impending criminal charges. that's next. urn with reports of impending criminal charges. that's next.

(woman) oh. oh! hi there. you're jonathan, right? the 995 plan! yes, from colonial penn. your 995 plan fits my budget just right. excuse me?

aren't you jonathan from tv, that 995 plan? yes, from colonial penn. i love your lifetime rate lock. that's what sold me. she thinks you're jonathan, with the 995 plan. -are you? -yes, from colonial penn. we were concerned we couldn't get coverage, but it was easy with the 995 plan. -thank you. -you're welcome. i'm jonathan for colonial penn life insurance company. this guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance plan is our #1 most popular plan. it's loaded with guarantees. if you're age 50 to 85, $9.95 a month buys whole life insurance with guaranteed acceptance. you cannot be turned down for any health reason. there are no health questions and no medical exam. and here's another guarantee you can count on: guaranteed lifetime coverage. your insurance can never be cancelled. just pay your premiums. guaranteed lifetime rate lock. your rate can never increase. pardon me, i'm curious.

how can i learn more about this popular 995 plan? it's easy. just call the toll-free number for free information. (soft music) ♪ just moments after a jury found donald trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, republican house speaker kevin mccarthy left capitol hill and walked over to the white house for a meeting with president biden about the debt ceiling. so when speaker mckrgty came out of that meeting and took questions from reporters he was probably expecting this question. >> mr. speaker, a jury just found donald trump liable of sexual abuse. >> you know what, i've been in this meeting. >> clever. but just as speaker mccarthy

tried to push the conversation back to the debt limit negotiations, the reporters in the gaggle all got the alert there was yet another breaking news story involving another high profile republican in legal jeopardy. >> last question. >> congressman george santos has just been charged by federal prosecutors. do you believe he should be removed from congress? >> i'll look at the charges. >> i'll look at the charges. that was very likely the moment speaker mccarthy found out george santos had been charged by federal prosecutors in the eastern district of new york. you're probably familiar with the strange saga of santos. it was quickly deserved mr. santos was and considered to be a serial fabulist, a liar of the highest order. over the course of several months it was discovered george santos lied about his work history, he had lied about being jewish, he had lied about his college volleyball career, he

had lied about his mother being in the south tower on 9/11, and the list goes on from there. during that period they also uncovered a whole host of shady practices related to his campaign. hundreds of thousands of dollars of campaign money had gone somehow unaccounted for. and now prosecutors appear to have found something in santos' past they believe they can charge him with. he's expected to appear in federal court to face those charges tomorrow afternoon. and that is, yes, a problem for george santos. but it is also a problem for kevin mccarthy who has been dodging questions about whether santos even belongs in congress by saying this -- >> are you going to take any action against him at this point? are any of these allegations acceptable to you? >> what are the charges against him? is there a charge against him? in america today you're innocent until proven guilty. >> joining me now is brenden

buck, press secretary to speaker john boehner. i bet you're glad you're not working in the speaker's office today. how is kevin mccarthy going to handle this? i mean he's on the record saying show me the charges. well, we're going to have the charges tomorrow. >> well, mccarthy is probably going to be concerned about one thing which is the precedent. and unfortunately we've had a number of instances where we've had members both republicans and democrats who have been indicted while in office. and the typical course is you remove from them committee but they still remain in the house it will there is a commission, and then at that point they typically resign. the problem is mccarthy has already removed santos from his committee because of all the other things you just outlined, so he doesn't have any real options to punish him at this point. at this point there's probably not a lot of consequences he's going to bring. the difference with george santos is this a person has no goodwill with any of his

colleagues, he's a pariah and any of his colleagues i think would gladly have him gone tomorrow. it would not surprise me if he say trying to bring santos in and let him know how bleak his future is and probably in his best interest to scram. i don't know if he would listen to that, but that's probably what the prevailing sentiment of the house republican caucus is right now. >> i should update our viewers. we have a little bit more from kevin mccarthy on george santos. he's invoking in this clip -- i think we have the sound -- of nebraska congressman jeff fortenberry found guilty of lying in front of a federal grand jury about foreign campaign donations. this is what mccarthy had to say. >> in america we'll always follow the same pattern we always have, right? if a person is indicted, they're not on committees, they have a right to vote just like we had a member we have the same ability i removed him from committees but he was found guilty and

needed to resign. that is my policies and principles on this. >> there, brenden, it sounds like maybe he's going to let santos wait this out while this case moves forward irn the court system. i just kind of wonder what the optics at the very least are going to be for the gop on this given the just fantastical number of lies that santos has apparently told, and of course today's news that the titular head of the party has been found civilly liable for sexual assault. >> and in mccarthy's defense republican and democratic speakers you wait until there's a conviction to actually remove somebody. to your point, yes, this is an incredible distraction that i think everybody would love to have removed. the problem is george santos as we have seen is not a stable person, and most people who get in these situations when they see they're going to be convicted, they say they have no future they get the message and

they leave. i don't trust george santos is going to see that. even if he gets convicted it wouldn't surprise me if he resists that. keep in mind we've only expelled five people in the entire history of the house of representatives. it never comes to that. people have resigned countless times because of trump but they always realize they have to go. i don't think we can count on that. at some level mccarthy doesn't have the ability to push him out unless they bring that almost unprecedented vote to the floor. it may end up being a situation of peer pressure. this is someone deeply unpopular, members are sick and tired of having to answer questions about it. george santos is nothing about anival around their neck, so i'm sure they would love to find a way to push him out, but i doubt this is someone going to be rational enough to leave.

>> don't they need his vote i mean given the razor thin majority by which mccarthy holds the speakers gavel and the looming debt ceiling. the hostage taking crisis that's been manufactured by the republican party visa vi the debt ceiling, don't they need all their republican soldiers to fall in line including george santos? >> well, it's a good point and certainly something they're going to think about. i actually don't think it's that big of a problem at this point. he certainly needed george santos to be there on the floor when kevin mccarthy was trying to become speaker. whatever they do on the debt limit is not going to get every republican anyway. that's going to have to be bipartisan and i don't think that's going to have the material impact. are there other things they're going to want to do, yes. but the one thing that matters this congress is the debt limit, and that's going to end up being bipartisan. while that's a consideration i think the cost of having george santos around is pretty quig and might be worth losing that vote

for a little while, having a special election and trying to get another republican in that seat when they fill it. >> the longer george santos is around in the public eye, the longer we have to discover the absolutely insane lies he's been spinning about his life, his background, his charities, whether or not he was a landlord or volleyball star. the list goes on. we literally didn't have time to detail all of them, but the night is young. brandon, thank you for joining us this evening. when we come back the historic verdict against the former president of the united states does not necessarily mark the end of that particular story. will there be an e. jean carroll versus donald trump part two? stick around and find out. two stick around and find out.

and this is ready to go online. 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.

so while a jury today found donald trump liable for sexually abusing and denaming e. jean carroll, it may not be the last time trump and carroll's legal teams face-off in court. there is still another pending lawsuit over allegedly defamatory statements trump made against carroll while he was president. back in 2019 days after e. jean carroll came forward with her claims donald trump sexually asulated her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s, this is what then-president trump first had to say about in an interview with "the hill." totally lying, i don't anything about her. i know nothing about this woman. i know nothing about her. she is -- it's just a terrible

thing people can make statements like that. i'll say it with great respect, number one, she's not my type. number two, it never happened. it never happened, okay? carroll filed this first lawsuit against the then-president a few months later in november 2019. now, that case remained stalled for years over whether or not trump could be held liable or if was immune from liability because he made those comments when he was president. but then last month the case was sent back to a federal court here in new york, to the same courthouse where today's proceedings took place and before the same judge. same courtroom, same judge. keep an eye out for round two. that's our show for tonight. we'll see you again tomorrow. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. yeah,