annihilation, you are not trying to feel bad. you are not going to insult. it would, essentially, dissolve the ability to engage in anything like democratic discourse. it dissolves the ability, and to exist in a society as equals. it is an equal relation to the people around me. >> it is one phrase that i think the law professor coined the second amendment meeting but first. >> the second amendment eating the rest of the constitution. >> one of my favorite writers, and thinkers on all matters, and public affairs, thank you so much, come back anytime. that is all in, on this typical wednesday night. alex wagner, tonight, starting right now. tonight, starting right now. coming in the studio come back any time that is "all in" on this typical wednesday night. alex wagner tonight starts good evening, alish. >> i've got to say you had a good hour of television. >> i had a pretty good hour i thought. >> take it from hme. you had a great hour of tv. a thoughtful hour. >> rachel maddow and the great

janelle buoy. >> good job, buddy. thank you for joining us this hour. this morning new york congressman and serial fabulist george santos surrendered himself into custody. congressman santos is now out on bail, but he has been charged with 13he felonies, and if convicted he canphasy up to 20 years in prison. and that's just for the most serious felonies. which ones are the most serious felonies, you ask? congressman santos had had so many scandals it would be genuinely difficult to talk about here. it's not about mr. santos inventing his entire résumé or about inventing spiderman, turn off the dark. it's a weird lie, or not even he was a college volleyball player or that his mother was in the

southt tower on 9/11 or steali money from a veteran's gofundme, though the fbi is looking into that one, too. today is about how santos made his money. santos reported a salary of $55,000. by 2022 santos reported a salary of $750,000 a year plus a million dollars in dividends. he'd somehow made so much money in those two years that santos was able to loan his own campaign more than $700,000. so where did all that money come from? well, prosecutors allege a certain chunkge of santos' newfound wealth came from unemployment assistance. despite supposedly having this incredibly lucrative job he applied for and received nearly

$25,000 in covid unemployment benefits, which were meant to help people who were out of work and having a tough time during a deadly pandemic. so class act, mr. congressman. but that's still just 2,500 out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. as it concerns that bigger pot ofer money, prosecutors allege . santos devised and executed a scheme to defraud campaign donors through what appears to be a shell company, a shell company that was controlled by somethingat called the devoelde organization. to understand the devoulder organization entirely, we have to back up a little bit. of all the jobs congressman santos claims to have had, the one we know was real was his work for a group called harver city capital. it was, quote, a fraudulent ponzi scheme that victimized hundreds of investors across the united states.

weeks after that alleged ponzi scheme got in trouble with the sec, but mr. santos incorporated a new organization called, drumroll where, please, the devoulder organization. in his own words it was to help all the people left adrift in the alleged ponzi scheme he was a part of, harbor city capitol. in other words wherein tose made this new organization as a way to find a new drift for people part of the old alleged ponzi scheme. and nowe federal prosecutors a alleging the new organization, t devoulder, that was created from the ashes of an old fraud, the new organization also committed fraud. who would have guessed? prosecutors allege the devoulder organization controlled a political fund and that political fund was one big grift. he convinced investors he needed money for a political fund and

they could donate unlimited amounts of money to get those ads on the air. prosecutors allege once donors sent in their money it would just get deposited into bank accounts controlled by george santos himself, and that santos used that money for, quote, things like luxury designer clothing and credit card payments, which the last time we checked is not ads for a congressional campaign. today congressman santos pleaded not guilty to the charges, and he denied all of these allegations. >> the reality is -- is it's a witch hunt. >> it's a witch hunt. that was george santos after posting bail this afternoon. if this all feels very trumpy to you, there is a very good reason for that.re one of the big questions here after all is when republicans will decide this is all too much and just ditch these guys. yesterday former president trump was literally held liable in court for sexual abuse and defamation, but even that does

not appear to be a red line for most republicans in congress. and while house republican leader kevin mccarthyre hasn't kicked congressman santos out of his conference or called on him to resign, we did finally see some reaction from him today. speaker mccarthy told cnn he will not support george santos for re-election. the speaker has no issue with george santos right now because right now he needs george santos' vote, but next year -- next year congressman santos is on his own you better believe it. but until then george santos is still in the republican conference, he's still a reliable vote, and he's still a necessary convenience to remain in power. there's another reason his indictment today feels trumpy, it's the legal end of things because the thing that could amount to the most actual prison time for santos is wire fraud. if there's one thing that is super cut and dry for prosecutors is the act of using

wire communication to commit a crime across state lines. wero learned last month that special counsel jack smith's office is looking at trump for doing an eerily similar thing to congressman santos. prosecutors areco trying to determine whether mr. trump and his aides violated federal wire fraud statutes as they raised as much as $250 million through a political action committee by saying they needed the money to fight to reverse election fraud, even though they'd been told repeatedly that there was no evidence to back up those fraud claems. so prosecutors right now are alleging mr. santos defrauded donors, claiming they were giving money to support his campaign when really the cash wasmp allegedly just going into george santos' own bank account. and they're saying mr. santos did that via e-mail across state lines, which could be wire fraud. and jack smith's office is also investigating trump for

potentially defrauding voters, using false claims about election fraud to kwens them to donateel via e-mail across stat lines, which could also be wire fraud. and by the way that one will be defrauding to the tune of $250 million, a quarter of a billion. so as we watch george santos' case play out, it's worth remembering a lot of what he allegedly did is pretty similar to what trump has reportedly done himself. it'srt not nearly on the same scale, but it could be prosecuted in the very same way. george santos is accused of all theseus crimes that at the end inday is about him lying to individuals and the public. trump's legal trouble is that times $250 million. trump's lie was the big lie, the conspiracy that the 2020 election was somehow stolen, that among other things led to an insurrection. tonight at a town hall in new hampshire trump was asked if he had any regrets about his

actions on january 6th. he said that people were there that day, quote, because they thought the election was rigged and that they were proud. they were there with the love in their heart. it was unbelievable, and it was a beautiful day. that's what he said to an audience that appeared to be mostly filled with trump supporters. and then the former president was asked about his promise to pardon january 6th defendants. >> will you pardon the january 6th rioters who were convicted of federal offenses? >> i am inclined to pardon many of them. i can't say for every single one because a couple of them probably they got out of control. what they've done to these people, they've persecuted these people. and yeah, my answer is i am most likely if i get in, i would most likely -- i would say it would be a large portion of them. you know, they did a very -- and

it'll be-- very early on. and they're living in hell right now. >> so when itn comes to pardons -- >> and they're policemen, and they're firemen, and they're soldiers, and they're carpenters and electricians and they're great people. many of them are just great people. >> just great people. joining us now is maryland democratic congressman jamie raskin, and mary mccord, and co-host of the podcast "prosecuting donald trump." thank you both for being here. congressman, i just want to get your reaction to the president's comments about january 6th being a beautiful day and the january 6thbe rioters being great peopl. >> well, he told a pack of lies tonight about january 6th including the fairly new claim that somehow he tried to make 10,000 soldiers or national guards available to defend the

capitol when, in fact, he was in hiding, essentially, for three hours while the violence unfolded and did nothing other than further exacerbate the violence and inrange his followers, tweeting out that vice president pence did not have the courage to do what needed to be done. but he's now repeating these promises to pardon the january 6th rioters. he makes no distinction between violent insurrectionists and those whoen may have been convicted for nonviolent offenses, and he also said he would conceivably pardon the proud boys. he said he was uncertain about that but obviously didn't want to commit to pardoning the proud boys or oath keepers at this point. so, look, i think he's running on an explicitly authoritarian program. he is recycling the big lie in a big way. and the whole gop at least by the evidence of the republicans in that room, seem to be

wrapping themselves around the package of lies and propaganda and disinformation that he wants to run on. >> yeah, despite the hour of propaganda, lies, and disinformation that american audience wheres, those who tuned in were subject to, mary, the fact remains the big lie was a lie and that the big lie was used to solicit money to the tune of $250 million by trump affiliates, if you will. jack smith may be looking at that action to basically grift the americanly public with the g lie as evidence of wire fraud. and i wonder how exposed do you think president trump is given the factpr he is out there minus ago again talking about the big lie that he used to fund raise. >> right, this is new part of the investigation we just learned about i guess a few weeks ago, and as you said at the top of the hour, alex, wire fraud is the bread and butter of a federal prosecutor. and the investigation jack smith is doing does look, you know,

very similar to what we've just seen charges brought against george santos for in record time i'll say. i mean that investigation began i think right after the election and already we have an indictment with 13 charges against santos. so with respect to trump we're not only talking about soliciting donations based on a lie about election fraud but potentially also lying about ho that money was going to be used, which might actually be easier to prove than based on solicitingd a lie about electi fraud. which he can say like so many has done and george santos has done i was exaggerating, i was in campaign mode, i was, you know, soliciting based on exaggeration, which sometimes politicians do. but there were also potential lies about what that money was going toat be used for.

one, it was going to be put explicitly in an election fraud fund to be use in bringing challenges against the election, for recounts, for audits, and the second being it was actually going to be used for those things. and there's no evidence that i'm aware of that the fund was created or the money was actually used for recounts and challenges and audits. so there's a number of bases where the fraud might have occurred that could be the basis for wire fraud. connecting it to trump will depend on, of course, what he knew about that scheme to solicit these contributions. >> do you think that helps plain his willful denial of reality that multiple investigates some fromst his own officials reveal the 2020 election to be free of fraud? do you think that's potentially why he keeps beyond the ego and the political expediency of insisting he's not a loser, do you think there's a legal aspect to all of this, and he's trying to basically cya? >> i do think he's a complicated

individual and i would not want to spend anytime in his brain, but i think it could be multiple things. i think he hasn't stand being a loser, he can't stand admitting he lost. but i think at this point and you heardbu it -- i was in the greenroom watching that town hall you were talking about. you heard it there doubling down on there being a rigged election because i think in his mind part ofis his defense is this is whai truly believed. i truly believed it was rigged, and yes, i had various advisers telling me it wasn't, but i had other people who were agreeing with me that it was. so, you know, he was corrected -- he was attempted to be corrected several times tonight, but he stuck with it, and i think he's got multiple reasons he's doing that. >> yeah, congressman, i'm not going to comment on the utility of allowing president trump a platform to broadcast over and over, again, lies that have been debunked over and over again, but i do want to get your thoughts on what the president said about the vooeps, which you

alluded to at the beginning of our show, and whether or not he owed mike pence an apology. i think we have a clip of that if we can roll that now. >> the person at the capitol that day who was, you know, your vice president, mike pence, who said you endangered his life on that day. >> iid don't feel he was in any danger. >> mr. president, do you feel you owe him an apology? >> no,an because he did somethi wrong. he should have put the votes to the state legislatures and i think we would have had a different outcome. i really do. >> congressman, your thoughts on that especially in light of the fact mike pence has now testified against donald trump to federal investigators. >> well, victim denigration is a way of life for bullies, and it's certainly a way of life for donald trump. hefe did it with ms. carroll th evening where he said what kind of woman goes into a dressing rooms with a man in new york, d then he did it with mike pence saying he was wrong, it was his

fault, the mob was essentially on the right side. the mob that i heard chanting hang mike pence, hang mike pence. and he has never done anything to apologize to mike pence, or he's never really done anything other than try to excuse and apologize for thecu violence. but this was just a fraction of the lies he was telling. for example, he said that under roe v. wade the supreme court guaranteed you could have an abortion up h to the ninth mont. anybody who knows anything about roe v. wade it's the trimester -- the woman's choice in the first trimester, there can be some regulation in the interest of maternal health in the second trimester. in the third trimester the procedure can be banned completely, which it was in most of the country. so he was just lying about that and refusing to answer question about whether or not he would sign a federal abortion ban, which of course he would. he was lying about china and his approach on covid-19. he defended general xi and the chinese communist party more

than twoco dozen different time talking about how wonderful xi's leadership was and how he was in such close contact with them aboutct covid-19 and now tryingo claim he's some sort of whistle-blower about china, but all ofwh that is a cover up for his own murderous reckilousness in terms of managing covid-19, with his own covid advisor debra burkes saying we lost about 140 or 50,000 people because of the decisions. oh, by the way, he also refused to stand up for ukraine against russia's filthy, bloody, imperialist aggression against a democratic society, trying to equate russia and ukraine as if, you know, equating the aggressors in world war ii with the victim nations, and he refused to say that he would continue to arm and defend the

democratic resistance in ukraine against russia's invasion, which is just scandalous, and outrageous. inda that case he said he doesn believe in winning and losing, which is certainly the first time i've ever heard him say that before. and when he gets into office, the war would be over in 24 hours, and we heard a lot of promises like that before, but i don't think he's going to get back into office because i think the vast majority of the country understands he's an absolute liar and a con man, and now he's been found by a jury of his peers also to be a sexual abuser and a defamer of women. >> yeah, i mean the title "the hurricane of lies" is almost difficult to annotate. you did an admirable job, congressman. mary, before we go there's trump's web of lies in which heh exists, and then there is reality. and reality is what dictates our judicial system. and the reality is trump may be thinking he's in a position to pardon both keepers and proud

boys, but it seems like jack smith may be weighing seditious conspiracy charges for donald trump himself. do you think that's at all likely? >> i mean, i certainly think it's on the table. and if there's evidence to -- for which jack smith believes he can prove every element of seditious conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt,di i think tha they will strongly consider bringing that charge. just like, you know, one of the criminalne referrals from congressman raskin and the house select committee was for, you know, giving aid and comfort to an insurrection, which again that has not been charged yet with respect to any of the other january 6th -- or any of the january 6th rioters, but i think anything is on the table.ng it's all going to depend on what the evidence is to support it. i don't think they're going to take risks and bring any charges that they think are dubious in terms of the ability to be proved. first of all, that would be against department of justice, policy, but they don't want to take risks, but i do think they will not hesitate to bring charges if they think they've

got the evidence. and, you know, that's why this has gone on for as long as it's gonen on. that's why we're seeing so many people go into that grand jury that are very high level advisers to they former president, including, of course, mike pence, to see if they can make those connections to bring all the charges that, you know, they feel they can prove and that should be brought. >> proud boys are going to jail, oath keepers going to jail, mike pence has testified against donald trump. donald trump is potentially looking at a summer of criminal indictments. he may be living in his universe, but the truth is out there and comingth for him. congressman raskin, mary mccord, thanks to both of you for making time tonight. we have a lot more to get to this eveningre including the latest on the fulton county investigation into efforts to overturn the election, and how one of the fake electors is now proclaiming his own innocence while pointing a finger at trump's lawyers. but first, congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez will be joining me live, and we have so

much to talk about. she's here coming up next. o much to talk about she's here coming up next.

tonight former president and current presidential candidate donald trump answered questions about the verdict that found him liable for sexual abuse in the defamation of writer e. jean carroll. cnn's kaitlan collins asked trump whether he believes the verdict will deter women from

voting for him, he said no and interrupted himself to share something truly stomach turping. >> what kind of a woman meet somebody and brings them up and within minutes you're playing hanky-panky in a dressing room? >> they found you -- >> they said he didn't rape her, and i didn't do anything else either, you know what, because i have no idea who she is. >> mr. president, can you ask you -- >> which i never do. i have no idea who this woman -- this is a fake story. i have no idea who the hell. she's a whack job. >> in the hours since he was found -- in the hours since he found liable for sexual abuse, in the hour since he was found liable for sexual abuse and defamation, trump has not missed a chance to deny any of this. he still claims he doesn't know e. jean carroll, still claiming

she's a liar and the case against him is a witch hunt, and he did that all tonight, too, as a presidential candidate. and he did it in front of a room of republican voters who laughed. joining us now is democratic new york congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez. congresswoman, ocasio-cortez, it's a real honor and pleasure to have you here tonight. i'm sorry this is what we have to be talking about. yesterday when that verdict was read i think a lot of people felt like there was real progress in american society for victims of sexual assault. today listening to the howls of laughter as the former president of the united states made fun of a woman that he was found criminally liable for sexually assaulting, to howls of laughter in the room it felt like something far worse than backsliding or regression. i'm not sure what to call it. i wonder what you make of where we are as a culture. >> you know, i think even

yesterday what we saw was the profound courage and sacrifice that a survivor like e. jean carroll makes and survivors across it country make, many who go unrecognized in the courageous act of coming forward to tell their story of an assault. and i think what we saw tonight is a continued demonstration of the sacrifice that women and survivors of sexual abuse across the country of all genders experience, and the sacrifices that they make in order to come forward and challenge power. and what we also saw tonight was the consequence of doing that. they sacrificed their anonymity, they sacrificed their safety, and they sacrifice all of this because we continue to live in a society where an overwhelming amount of structures allow this abuse to happen and find it permissible. i know you said earlier you will not comment on the platform of

such atrocious disinformation, but i would. i think it was a profoundly irresponsible decision. i don't think that it would -- i would be doing my job if i did not say that. and what we saw tonight was a series of extremely irresponsible decisions that put a sexual abuse victim at risk, that put that person at risk in front of a national audience, and i could not have disagreed with it more. it was shameful. >> i think a lot of people are going to echo those points in the coming hours and days. the behavior of the president was -- which, you know, our expectations for it i think collectively are fairly low, but he exceeded even those low expectations. i have to ask you how you felt about -- and how you feel about the revisionism around january 6th. we have heard for months now january 6th rioters, insurrectionists are hero,

people who are treated badly because they're in quote-unquote hell. the former president echoed that and suggested he might pardon many if not all of them. you survived january 6th and i believe you said it felt like you were going to die. i think it's porn in this moment to champion the voices of victims. and as someone who was a victim that day, how does it all feel to you? how does the narrative feel to you? >> you know, i made a statement about two weeks ago, and in that statement i stated that january 6th was just a dress rehearsal for some of these folks. and i believe the former president really echoed that sentiment tonight. why else would you pardon people who perpetuated a terrorist attack on the united states capitol other than for reasons to support the person in a potential effort to do it again. we also saw that he refused

tonight to say and commit that he would not only recognize the results of the 2020 election but also refused outright to acknowledge any outcome and respect any outcome of a 2024 election. this is a profoundly dangerous moment. what we saw on january 6th was a dress rehearsal because what we are seeing is that being set as an example in state legislatures across the country in the ability to really suspend democracy in states like tennessee and montana where they are following the president's example, and they are committing truly unprecedented acts and attempts to either expel, censor, or generally bar duly elected legislative officials from entering their legislative bodies in which they've been

elected to. this is profoundly dangerous moment. to see someone deny it, for him to also be platformed in the lie that he somehow attempted to call the national guard, i will tell you we were barricaded in a room with the lights off, and that entire day hearing the screams from outside our window, trying to figure out if we were going to break the glas to jump out, and if so how would we not be recognized or killed on the street. and we knew when the sun was setting that night and the national guard had -- you know, there was no indication that help was coming, it was terrifying. but that would not -- that won't even hold a candle to what donald trump is capable of. he was stopped on january 6th. let's remember that. he was stopped from what he ultimately wanted to do. and he repeated that tonight.

he said what should have happened is that mike pence should have overturned the election. that is what he said tonight. for as bad as january 6th is, i believe that the president would -- the former president -- former president trump would not have qualms about going further, without a shadow of a doubt. >> you know, i think it's hard for us to grapple with the future that trump has sort of outlined for the republican party if not the country, what he would like to see in a 2024 election. but it's very certain that trump has created a model for a new politician, and i have to ask you about george santos, because george santos is not calling for an insurrection, but i think trump established this precedent, you can just lie with impunity and you're never going to have to pay a price. he may end up paying a price, but george santos seems to have learned a lesson at the knee of donald trump, which is that the truth doesn't matter. what is his future in congress?

what do you think can and should happen? he's part of the new york delegation. can you give us any insight into how it is this person is still acting -- emphasis on the word acting as an elected representative. >> i mean your point about donald trump setting a model is a very astute one. even what we saw today and yesterday -- after yesterday's announcements of -- of these charges and these counts this morning, the counts in the indictment being unsealed, 13 counts of criminal activity varying the spectrum of different offenses, george santos publicly declared it a witch hunt. he went on twitter and decided to take whole sale a page out of donald trump's book and decide to attack the courts, decide to attack a potential investigation, claim political -- claim, you know,

that that his breaking of the law and the acknowledgement of that, that the indictments of that could be a political persecution and act of political persecution. all of this is truly cut fruf the cloth of former president trump. and it is not -- it's not a coincidence whatsoever. we are seeing this that any semblance of accountability is deemed a witch hunt. and that attack of the truth, that attack on our institutions, those attacks on our courts, the attacks on any semblance of the structures and the rules and the guides that we all, as a society will live up to, that in itself is the gain to attack any narrative or any fact that conveniences you as bias and the facts that favor you as being the capital "t" truth is the

very definition and cuts at the very core of trumpism and it is what leads to cultive personality, it is how you condition your followers to not question any set of facts that may cast you in a negative light. it is a very serious moment that we all should take very, very seriously. but in terms of his future he should resign, but i don't think he will. just like president trump i don't think there's any amount of pressure that would lead an individual like that to you unless, of course, it became -- unless they were in custody, frankly. >> that's the new -- that's the new bar, a democracy if you can keep it. some days, some moments, these years, it's not sure whether we can actually keep it. congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez, really a pleasure to have you on the show tonight. thanks for your thoughts. >> still to come this evening, despite trump losing georgia in 2020 by about 12,000 votes, 16

fake electors certified their state's vote for trump anyway. about half of them have now gotten immunity deals, but one of the ones who didn't get an immunity deal are now arguing if anything they did is illegal, look to trump's own legal team. we'll talk about that just ahead. l talk about that just ahead.

it has been a pretty busy week, so it is totally okay if

you miss this little headline here. quote, georgia gop chairman says he was just following orders from trump lawyers. that gop chairman is jordan shafer. to fulton county d.a. foun ae willis who's investigating trump's efforts to overturn the election results in georgia, to fani willis mr. schaffer is key. he's been singled out by the judge overseeing this case for the unique role he played on the day those fake electors met. and when fani willis offered immunity to a group of fake electors in exchange for collaboration, mr. schaffer was reportedly not included in that group. faced with this reality, schaffer's legal team sent a letter to d.a. willis, a letter trying to ward off an indictment against mr. shafer. the lawyer's argument was that everything mr. shafer did was

based on legal advice provided by trump lawyers. quote, every action by mr. shafer as a presidential elector nominee or contingent elector -- that's what they're calling the fake electors, contingent electors. every action was specifically undertaken in conformity with and reliance upon and repeated detailed advice of legal counsel. in it mr. kaufman tells david shafer it is imperative mr. shafer carry out that fake elector meeting. quote, david, i'm reconfirming the importance and our collective advice that our slate of delegates -- again, the fake electors -- they meet and cast their ballots for president trump. i believe this is still the most conservative course of action. that's in case you missed it team trump offering its collective advice the fake

electors meet and cast their ballots for donald trump on december 14th, and the lawyers add if the fake electors plot was somehow used in nefarious fashion to i don't know try and steal an election, well then mr. shafer had no idea about any of that. media reports have suggested certain high level members of the then president trump's legal team including john eastman and rudy giuliani may have developed subsequent plans to attempt to persuade vice president pence to count these contingent presidential electoral votes, fake elector votes, as the valid electoral votes. mr. shafer was not involved in and had no such knowledge of any such plans. mr. shafer was not involved. but you know who was? team trump. joining us now is the former district attorney for decalb county in georgia. it's great to see you in person on this night of nights.

>> thank you. >> how does this letter ring to you? is it plausible? >> i think it's one method the defense attorneys want to get their story out early. obviously we've seen or heard from some of the grand jurors what the testimony was. and defense wants the opportunity to get their story out even though there are no indictments yet, so that is a little bit of an odd thing. >> or an indicator, maybe. >> possibly. obviously d.a. willis has indicated she's willing to make an announcement somewhere between july and september. i think that will be a real game changer. there are key differences here i think fani or members of her team will raise as to the case they're relying on for this legal theory. really causes some concerns, i think. >> in the sort of course of making their argument i don't know to the public, just in case there's an indictment there's a -- i think the term is throwing people under the bus.

like there is literally -- if anything bad happened with these fake elector votes involving mike pence and trying to play fuzzy math with the 2020 election, that's rudy giuliani and john eastman's fault. i mean does that ring -- how damaging is that for team trump, the fact that someone who was part of this plot is saying look this way? >> i think it creates an interesting dynamic, right? and sometimes it'll let you know how desporous things are starting to shape out on the other side. again, prosecutor is always going to have to prove intent. one of the reasons it could have put out this way is to demonstrate at least shafer did not believe he had the intent to violate the law. the case in hawaii that the whole legal theory is based on, there was an active court ordered recount going on, which is what created the uncertainty. we did not have that in georgia.

the election was certified seven days before the electors gathered. the other thing is that it was only a difference of less than 200 votes. here in 2020 we're talking about almost 12,000. >> 11,780. just for people who aren't following along at home there's so much legalese in all this. they were saying in case this goes trump's way we need to basically have our ducks in a row because in hawaii in 1960 a similar situation played out, they didn't, and look what happened. but you're saying there is a difference. huge differences between what happened in hawaii in 1960 and what went down in georgia in 2020. >> exactly. and two of the other key differences is that in the hawaii situation the governor signed off on the contingent electors if that's what you want to call them. >> we call them fake electors.

>> that happened in 2020. the other thing in hawaii the ceremony was public. and in 2020 there was at least testimony and evidence that they were trying to keep it hidden. >> i think complete secrecy is in what is in the e-mails. david shafer does not have immunity, and there are eight fake electors maybe nine that have immunity. how meaningful are these immunity deals at this point in time? >> i think it's critical, and those are folks in the room part of the back door conversations and know who approached them and convinced them as to the strategy, how they would go forward, and that gives the d.a. and the team a behind the scenes look what they were thinking and what they were trying to achieve. again, all of this was sent to the national archive tuesday be able to create uncertainty about the certification on january 6th. >> fani willis is the prosecutor here, a woman very much in the spotlight. governor brian kemp of georgia has signed a bill last week

making it official a law that creates a commission with powers to investigate, sanction, or remove local prosecutors. do you think she's worried about being able to see this case through? >> i don't think so. she's been a true professional for decades and certainly for as long as i've known her, and i think she's continually -- you can see it. she's being step wise and deliberate how she's delivering her case. she's not being rushed by all the call tuesday try to bring an indictment or force her on a different time line, and i think her team is really trying to put things together, which why we're starting hear about grand jury deals and took so much time to listen to 75 witnesses. again, she is doing what every good prosecutor should in making sure she has her evidence and law together before presenting it to a grand jury and wait and see what happens. >> maybe why some people, david shafer, are getting a little bit nervous in trying to preemptively establish the narrative what went on. thank you so much for your time and wisdom this evening.

still to come tonight with the presumed republican presidential front-runner facing challenges like i don't know a multicount criminal indictment and a multi-million dollar civil judgment, and multiple investigations, is there such thing as traditional campaign politics? how democrats will have to navigate these unprecedented times with jen psaki. that is next. psaki that is next by your side, by your side, you get to. you also get to trim this, edge that, and blow everything away. isn't the outdoors great? it is great. because you made it that way. get the job done right with craftsman. we build pride. there is a better way to manage diabetes. the dexcom g7 continuous glucose monitoring system eliminates painful finger sticks, helps lower a1c, and it's covered by medicare.

before using the dexcom g7, i was really frustrated. all of that finger pricking and all that pain, my a1c was still stuck. before dexcom g7, i couldn't enjoy a single meal. i was always trying to outguess my glucose, and it was awful. before dexcom g7, my diabetes was out of control because i was tired, not having the energy to do the things that i wanted to do. (female announcer) dexcom g7 is a small, easy-to-use wearable that sends your glucose numbers to your phone or dexcom receiver without painful finger sticks. the arrow shows the direction your glucose is heading-- up, down, or steady-- and because dexcom g7 is the most accurate cgm, you can make better decisions about food, medication, and activity in the moment. it can even alert you before you go too low or when you're high. oh, the fun is absolutely back. after dexcom g7, i can on the spot figure out what i'm gonna eat and how it's going to affect my glucose! when a friend calls and says, "hey, let's go to breakfast," i can get excited again.

(earl) after using the dexcom g7, my diabetes, it doesn't slow me down at all. i lead line dancing three times a week, i exercise, and i'm just living a great life now. it's so easy to use. it has given me confidence and control, everything i need is right there on my phone. (earl) the dexcom g7 is so small, so easy to use, and it's very discreet. (dr. aaron king) if you have diabetes, getting on dexcom is the single most important thing you can do. (david) within months, my a1c went down, that's 6.9. (donna) at my last checkup, my a1c was 5.9. (female announcer) dexcom is the number one recommended cgm brand and offers 24/7 tech support, so call now to get started. you'll talk to a real person. don't wait, this one short call could change your life. (bright music)

the white house pool, the pres pool traveling back from new york city to washington,

d.c. this evening with president joe biden reported that as they boarded air force one tonight, as former president trump was participating in a cnn town hall in new hampshire televisions in the press cabin were set to msnbc and not cnn. joining me now is my esteemed colleague jen psaki. jen, thank you for being here, my friend. it seems not -- i mean god bless everybody who watches -- >> such a fun detail. >> yeah, but i think it's an important detail, too, not just god bless everybody who's an msnbc viewer but that the white house does not want to deal with the headache that was or perhaps further expose people to the nightmare that was president trump spouting lies largely uncensored for 75 minutes. is that -- i mean is that part of a campaign strategy? there are no accidental decisions in something like

that. what do you think that represents? >> that's true and now i want to know more about that. but i would say, alex, they don't -- from the officials i still talk would there they don't underestimate trump. when there was a whole theory of trump would be the easiest to run against, oh, biden would clean his clock, that was not something i ever heard from a former colleague over there. they ran against him before and he almost beat biden. so they are not the ones from my experience or engagements with them who need a kind of a wake up call. i will say that given tonight was one of trump's biggest returns to the national stage in a while it should be a pretty big wakeup call for democrats. i mean he lied about a lot of things. he said some crazy things like the country could default, he couldn't answer whether he would sign an abortion ban. maybe he's on the side of russia. he said lots of crazy things about january 6th. all of that is true, but he also

had a command of that town hall meeting, and he has the evil charisma that people can hate, but it is happening. and hopefully it was a wakeup call for people out there about the reality this guy is currently on the path to be the nominee and maybe likely give the president a run for his money. >> yeah, i think you're absolutely right about the evil charisma. he was owning the room and perhaps more disturbingly the room was eating it up. >> that was the most -- i mean there was a lot of disturbing, but the laughing when there were insane things, offensive things, things that e. jean carroll being said, the laughing in the room, that was disturbing. >> you know, and the tafact of the matter is as we talk about the evil charisma, trump's owning of the room, the audience laughing it up, this could be a summer of indictments against the former president. and as concerning that should be, it could also tliterally strengthen trump, and i wonder -- amongst his people

from a biden standpoint what is your sense of how the white house talks about potential criminal indictments, how much they weighed into that? >> well, there is a tradition as you know, alex, of not weighing in on criminal indictments, and they're going to try to abide by that is my bet. that becomes harder and probably less strategically to their advantage. they're going to have to find a way to talk about it. they don't have to comment on the case, but it is about values, what you're trying to defend and the contrast between the two candidates. yeah, i think it changes a little bit if there are other indictments on these other issues. >> do you think president biden is ready to go ham, because it feels like he's ready to do that. >> ready to go ham? >> i'm going to rephrase for those of you not following at home, but is he ready to throw punches because it feels like trump is in the ring?

>> i think so as he did in 2020. i think he has to here. it's probably going to be on fighting about the issues, abortion access, democracy, the economy that helped him win the first time, so i think he's going to be very specific about where he throws his punches. >> we are going to -- we'll see what station the airplane televisions are tuned to in the coming days. >> we'll see. stay tuned. >> hopefully msnbc on sunday at noon for your program. jen psaki, my friend and colleague, thank you for your time tonight. that is our show for this evening. we'll see you tomorrow. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. the question to you is will you pardon the january 6th rioters who were convicted of federal offenses? >> i am inclined to pardon many of them. i can't say for every single one because a couple of them probably