does it make sense of. look back at the history of primaries, john mccain, barack obama, george bush, nobody becomes the nominee without fighting for it. >> jennifer horn, thank you very much. that is all in on this wednesday evening. alex wagner tonight starts -- >> exactly, so it just, i don't know what else to say about it. i can't agree with you more, does it make sense of. look back at the history of primaries, john mccain, barack obama, george bush, nobody becomes the nominee without fighting for it. >> jennifer horn, thank you nominee without fighting for it. >> that is "all in" on this wednesday evening. alex wagner tonight begins right now. >> i'm reminded of that old adage who needs friends if you're like this. if you're trump you're like --

come on and run. >> i mean, you know, real talk about like the sociologist teaching intro to sociology of race at 40 universities. >> stand back new college. all right, thank you as always, my friend. >> thank you. and thanks to you at home for joining us this evening. remember back in august of last year when the fbi searched trump's mar-a-lago home looking for classified documents, documents they believed the former president had knowingly stashed away? trump complained very loudly and very publicly about that, right? he also fund raised off of it, and really he took every opportunity to point out what a victim he was of the deep state witch hunt. but his first real defense, his first real justification for why he kept all those documents in the first place, that came in the form of a statement released exclusively to fox news. quote, president trump had a standing order that documents removed from the oval office and

taken into the residence were deemed to be declassified the moment he removed them. the idea that some paper pushing bureaucrat with classification authority delegated by the president needs to approve a declassification is absurd. so that was trump's defense. he had a standing order to declassify all these documents, whatever a standing declassification order is. cool. except nobody bought it. cnn interviewed 18 former officials from trump's own administration who called this explanation ludicrous and ridiculous and complete fission. john kelly trump's chief of staff he said nothing approaching an order that foolish was ever given. and i can't imagine anyone who would work at the white house after me would have simply shrugged their shoulders and allow that order to go forward.

a few weeks later trump sat down for an interview with sean hannity and tried a new defense. >> you said on truth social a number of times you did declassify. was there a process? >> there doesn't have to be a process as i understand it. different people say different things, but as i understand there doesn't have to be. if you're the president of the united states you can declassify just by saying it's declassified, even by thinking about it. >> there doesn't need to be a process. i can declassify at my whim. it is, poof. national security experts everywhere have found this ridiculous, but trump has stuck with this defense. this is what he said at a town hall last week. >> i was there and i took and it's declassified. let me just tell you i have the absolute right to do whatever i want with them. i have the right.

>> tonight we're learning trump knew those claims about mental declassification were bogus because he was told so in writing repeatedly while he was in office. according to cnn the national archives is preparing to give special counsel jack smith 16 records which show trump and his top advisers had knowledge of the correct declassification process while he was president, according to multiple sources. nbc news has not independently verified that report, but think about this for a moment. this wasn't someone telling trump after the mar-a-lago raid, mr. president, you can't just declassify records by thinking about them as declassified. this was trump being told the rules of the road while he was in office as he was allegedly mentally and verbally declassifying stuff or whatever it was he thought he was doing, which then begs the question what is in these 16 records exactly? cnn obtained a letter which was sent yesterday from the national archives to trump laying it all

out. it reads "the 16 records in question all reflect communications involving close presidential advisers some of them directed to you personally concerning whether, why, and how you should declassify certain declassified records." apparently during the trump presidency trump's advisers were repeatedly reminding trump of the official process how to declassify things, which totally makes sense because trump really liked sharing classified information when he was in office. remember the time president trump casually revealed highly classified information to the russian foreign minister during a white house meeting or the time he tweeted out a classified image from a u.s. spy satellite or the time he held sensitive zlgzs with north korea with the japanese prime minister in front of a crowd of on lookers at mar-a-lago? remember all that? in retrospect it shouldn't be all that surprising he was repeatedly told how the official declassification process was

supposed to work. and now those 16 written records could become a key part of special counsel jack smith's case against former president trump. according to cnn the 16 presidential records may provide critical evidence establishing the former president's awareness of the declassification process, a key part into trump's mishandling of classified documents and the records may also provide insight into trump's intent and whether he willfully disregarded what he knew to be clearly established protocols. so these records seem fairly important, is why the doj apparently subpoenaed them earlier this year. and since then trump's legal team has done everything in its power to make sure these 16 documents don't see the light of day, although for the record trump's legal team says this fight is more of a strategic fight about constitutional and presidential protections rather than keeping evidence from the special counsel, which is, okay.

we now know yesterday the archives sent the trump team a letter that basically said, sorry, these 16 records are on their way to jack smith, which is a problematic development for trump and his defense team and comes at a time when their legal problems are mounting. yesterday a top lawyer from his mar-a-lago legal team said he would be stepping down but claims his departure has nlg to do with the underlying case. joining us now is national security lawyer mark zade and charlie savidge. mark, let me start with you. in terms of the legal implications of all of this, what does trump's awareness mean in terms of the eyes of the law as far as what he knew about the declassification process and what he was saying and doing. >> well, it's very significant,

alex, because it goes to a state of mind, which is what criminal cases are generally all about. this has never been a strict mishandling of national defense information, which is what the espionage act us by way of language. every president since reagan and i dare say before that have mishandled classified information. it is fairly routine. i see it all the time in my cases. what's at issue here as you reported and cnn had reported that trump and his inner circle were told how to properly classify and declassify information, and i'll say even further because i independently verified it, that they were instructed in the days and weeks before leaving the white house for the transition on how to pack up the documents so as not to take classified information. so this really goes further to the obstruction issues, and everything that we're starting to see it if true by way of the leaks into the media, that trump

not only mishandled the information but also sought to hide it from the u.s. government and obstructed the investigation by deliberately acting on that as well as in giving instructions to others possibly even his lawyers as to where to move the documents around at mar-a-lago. >> just to follow up on that, mark, it's the obstruction charge, right? this is all obstruction or what it sounds like in full flower at many stages of this game. i shouldn't refer to it as this game, but at many stages of this legal saga trump acting as a roadblock to what is correctly to be done as the letter of the law, is that right? >> yeah, there is no doubt in my mind that if one's contacted by the national archives when it was learned documents were missing at the white house, original classified records, that if they had even after a period of weeks maybe even months said, oh, well we thought

we could take them for whatever reason, here they are back, maybe we'll fight with you about it, but here are the documents so you can protect them. if that happened, we wouldn't be talking about anything regarding this today. instead he obstructed for 18 months, and that required the search of his premises as allowed by a federal magistrate judge. i mean that is all the difference in the world. this isn't a pence case. this isn't a biden case where they both mishandled classified documents. that is normal. what is not normal is how trump and his supporters and allies have handled this case. >> charlie, i am struck by the fact as of last week president trump was still mounting this defense saying i can classify things by just saying they're declassified and thinking they're declassified knowing his legal team had received this subpoena and was fighting it in court, effectively fighting to make sure that proof that trump

knew counter to what he was saying was going to come out. does that surprise you? >> well, i'd like to say something broader in this space because this is pretty complicated topic. your introduction has conflated the sort of mystical i can declassify documents just by taking it, and the prospect a president can declassify documents just by saying it without following normal procedures, and i think there is an open question that a president -- there's a strong argument that a president can by speaking it so that everyone hears it and it's communicated to the bureaucracy declassified without going through normal procedures. it's not been tested but these procedures are setup under executive order and it is the president's constitutional authority. so there's arguments over can a president violate an executive order or regulation. it's not been tested, but there's a coherent argument a president could do that if spoken it. one of the big fights here is he

says he has a standing order which does sound lick a communicated directive. it's that no one heard it. he apparently made it up as his first stab of defense here. but if he had something like that and there were a piece of paper even if it's crazy to have a system like that, he would be on much stronger grounds. whereas i think it and it's declassified and no one knows i've done that is incoherent in term of the way the system works, because it's about the system in which the government protects information, keeps it closely held, carries it in special packages, puts it on special computers and only talks about in special rooms, and if no one knows it's classified it it'll treat it as specially held. pulling aside the obstruction issue which essentially i agree, but the espionage act which is the one about mishandling

national defense information does not speak to whether information was classified or not. because it was enacted in world war i, it doesn't matter. it doesn't matter in the eyes of the law whether something was classified or not. it just needs to be information that could hurt the united states or hurt an adversary and it was being closely held by the united states government. so even if trump in his head had magically said this was declassified and we can have this esoteric argument whether it counts or not the gump was keeping it closely held, which is the necessary element to prove that criminal defense. >> i'm going to -- yeah, well respectfully i'm going to defer to what jun kelly said and on its face dismiss the notion of a standing order as patently absurd. it was never articulated.

this was very much a confection of trump's own invention. i will not get into the legal aspects of it, but there was no proof he had declassified any of these -- i mean i'm not a legal scholar but certainly seems like shaky ground. i'll go to you, mark, in terms of what the implications are for, you know, the broader investigation as it stands into mar-a-lago and the case jack smith is building. we know now there's this piece of it, we know there are key players. they've broken attorney-client privilege object this case. there are a number of fronts where jack smith has had some significant wins. and i wonder, you know, what you make of trump's sort of exposure at present. >> sure. and i thought his participation in the town hall last week, and this has been said so many times i'm sure on your broadcast as well, was great for him politically to his base, but his lawyers must have been just shaking their head with, you know, their hands over it

because the things he said are going to come back to haunt him before jack smith. and i agree a lot with what charlie was saying, and it's a legal issue about whether the mental aspect of the declassification could occur, but there is no process. i represented two of his secretaries of defense and his national security advisor, and there is no one other than cash patel with devon nunes' as the chair and the chief of staff at the defense department he came forward and said i knew there was a standing order and he was pulled before the grand jury. we haven't heard what in fact he said, and he hasn't come back on-air anywhere to say or provide any proof that this existed. but trump has some very significant legal exposure, and it may be unfortunately politically that the biden-pence timing, bad timing of having

mishandled national defense information may cause some hesitation of the attorney general to pursue certain charges. but if everything is as we are hearing it to be with respect to obstruction, then there are looking to be some very significant serious criminal charges coming, and i would imagine we're talking weeks rather than months at this point. >> wow, that is breaking news right there, mark zaid. mark, thank you. charlie, thank you. appreciate your time. we have lots more this evening including the long awaited durham investigation may be kind of a nothing berger but house republicans are calling for congress members to be expelled because of it, congress members like adam schiff. we'll talk to the state's democratic governor roy cooper about how it happened and whether republicans may pay a price. d whether republicans may pay a

price.

abortion is a deeply personal decision. it should not be a political debate. my womb and my uterus is not up for your political grab. >> that was north carolina state representative trisha kaufman back in 2015 sharing the story of her abortion in front of the north carolina state legislature, and this is what happened in that same room yesterday. >> the house has overridden the governor's veto and the bill becomes law not withstanding the governor's objections, so be notified. >> the protesters there are

chanting "shame, shame, shame." and they are chanting that because yesterday the north carolina statehouse voted to override the veto of the democratic governor roy cooper and force a 12-week abortion ban into law. and part of what makes the legislator's move so incredible here is it came down to just one vote. it came down to a stunning about face by north carolina state representative trisha cotham. here's her campaign website. it is d.c. i kid you not tricia cotham.org. her constituents wanted a democrat representing them, and then last month she switched parties. she said she'd been bullied by other democrats and that they pushed her out.

now, we do not know enough to confirm or deny those claims, but we do know in doing that tricia cotham gave republicans a super majority, she became the deciding vote to override the governor's veto and put a 12-week abortion ban into law. as wild as tricia cotham's about face, just this month the group carolina forward pulled on the specific 12-week ban. 54% of likely voters oppose a 12-week abortion ban. only 40% supported it, so how did this all come down to her one vote? how did republicans have enough votes to not just pass this thing but override governor roy cooper's veto? how is the will of the people so far away from the work of the legislature?

joining us now is north carolina governor roy cooper. governor, thank you so much for being here tonight. i'll just get right to it. do you think republicans given the polling, given the numbers in terms of support for this abortion ban, do you think republicans will pay a price for their actions yesterday? >> yes, they will. it's pretty clear that partisan gerrymandering on steroids caused this today because the majority of north carolinians do not want -- people are angry. women feel slapped in the face with this bill that came at them so fast, and every single republican even though who promised to protect women's reproductive freedom, those republicans in swing districts, everyone one of them voted for this ban. and this shows us that

republicans are unified in their assault for reproductive freedom. now, they tried to do this really fast, alex. they passed this law in 42 hours -- it took them 42 hour tuesday turn the clock back 50 years, allow no amendments, no public input and ran it through. i have ten days to veto it. we went across the state. we held forums, we held a rally, people rose up and said we're not going to take this. but as soon as i vetoed it and handed it back to them the first legislative day they overrode the veto. all we needed was one republican to stand up and they didn't do it. they tried to do it so fast they didn't want to light a fire under democrats and independents, but guess what? too late. that fire is blazing, and you're going to see people all over north carolina come to the polls and work to make sure that we

break the super majority in 2024, to make sure that we elect a democratic governor, because i'm term limited and i can only serve for a little ever a year and a half more, and to make sure we take this state for president biden, and i believe that we can. >> it feels decide udly undemocratic the actual bill itself, but then the way in which it was passed i want to talk about something you mention, the gerrymandering which has given republicans the super majority. we know for years north carolina republicans have tried to jerry mander the state. i believe it was last month the supreme court effectively ruled in their favor. so they have the green light to do this to an even more extreme it sounds like. is that right? >> well, last year we had a supreme court that was democratic, and you really shouldn't have partisan races and this legislature turned everything bipartisan again, but

the democratic supreme court while it was a close vote on the court, but what it did was rule that partisan gerrymandering was unconstitutional in north carolina. and with fair maps we sent seven democrats and seven republicans to congress showing that north carolina is a truly 50-50 state. the supreme court reversed itself, and so they're now busily drawing maps. for the last four years i've had a veto. we've had enough democrats to sustain my veto. we've been able to hold off bad abortion bans and discrimination and attacks on voting rights. but now we are one vote short in both the house and the senate. we're going to work to bring republicans along on issues and we're able to get a bipartisan agreement to expand medicaid in

north carolina. just a few months ago we were able to get a bipartisan agreement on clean energy. those are things we're going to continue to work on, but make mow mistake north carolina democrats are going to be ready in 2024. and even with gerrymandered districts, we're going to put at the top of the list making sure that we have enough democrats elected to make sure that we can sustain a veto, which we hope to be a newly elected democratic governor to take office in 2025. that's critically important. we democrats need to pay more attention to governors races and to state legislative races. your zip code shouldn't determine your constitutional right, but that's what the u.s. supreme court has done by overturning roe v. wade. the battles have moved to state capitols and legislatures. i was chairman of the democratic association last year and we were able to end up with plus two democratic governors and in crucial states like michigan and arizona and pennsylvania, we

were able to elect democratic governors, and that's going to be important as we approach 2024 particularly in protecting democracy and protecting people from these terrible laws that maga republicans now clearly have control of their party and we know where they're going with bad legislation. it's more important than ever for people to vote and to make sure they vote all up and down the ballot because every single election is important. >> governor, why do you think republicans do this on abortion in particular? >> you know, well, i think really are gerrymandered districts have something to do with it because i think you see republicans in these very red districts only worry about primary opposition. and they look at it politically so they get as far to the right as they possibly can. you know, and this is why we need independent redistricting commissions in every state.

it's very difficult to redistrict in a fair way, but you can do it. and in north carolina they have taken -- they've taken this to a technological diabolic extreme. they can go house by house. we've seen them draw congressional districts that have ended up 10-4, and they said the only reason it was 10-4 is because they couldn't figure out a way to make it 11-3. that's the extreme they go to, and i think that affects the kind of legislation that they consider. and all of them are following donald trump, too, so clearly you have a party that has lost its way or either they found their way and we know that democrats and independents across north carolina and across this country have to come out and be ready in 2024 to fight for our democracy, to fight for women's reproductive freedom, fight for public education, health care, all of these things that we know are so critical. >> well, we know uh-uh bortion

is one of those issues that gets democrats and independents out. thank you so much for your time tonight. >> thanks a lot, alex. when we come back the durham report remember that it was supposed to be a bombshell, but it fizzled. and yet republicans still want someone to face punishment and it looked like they've picked democratic congressman adam schiff. plus we'll look at the ties between supreme court justice clarence thomas, his benefactor harlan crow and a judge who will be deciding a major case on abortion. that is next. g a major case on abortion that is next family is just very important.

she's my sister and, we depend on each other a lot. she's the rock of the family. she's the person who holds everything together. ♪♪ it's a battle, you know i'm going to be there. keytruda and chemotherapy meant treating my cancer with two different types of medicine. in a clinical trial, keytruda and chemotherapy was proven to help people live longer than chemotherapy alone. keytruda is used to treat more patients with advanced lung cancer than any other immunotherapy. keytruda may be used with certain chemotherapies as your first treatment if you have advanced nonsquamous, non-small cell lung cancer and you do not have an abnormal “egfr” or “alk” gene. keytruda can cause your immune system to attack healthy parts of your body during or after treatment. this may be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you have cough, shortness of breath, chest pain, diarrhea, severe stomach pain, severe nausea or vomiting, headache, light sensitivity, eye problems, irregular heartbeat, extreme tiredness, constipation,

dizziness or fainting, changes in appetite, thirst, or urine, confusion, memory problems, muscle pain or weakness, fever, rash, itching, or flushing. there may be other side effects. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions, including immune system problems, if you've had or plan to have an organ or stem cell transplant, received chest radiation, or have a nervous system problem. it feels good to be here for them. living longer is possible. it's tru. keytruda from merck. ask your doctor about keytruda. (psst psst) ahhhh... with flonase, allergies don't have to be scary spraying flonase daily gives you long-lasting, non-drowsy relief. (psst psst) flonase. all good.

take a look at this painting. it has become iconic on the level of dogs playing poker. everybody has a copy. it's a depiction of mega billionaire harlan crow and his close relationship with clarence thomas and a few other friends. the same clarence thomas who accepted a lot of nice things from harlan crow which has now peaked the interest of congress. the private school tuition for one of thomas' very close relatives. propublica has unveiled a whole world of gifts mr. crow has given to his supreme court justice friend clarence thomas, but there is another layer here. there is another interesting visual. this is a photo of justice thomas swearing in a judge on the fifth circuit court of appeals, a judge who's a trump

appointee to also clerk under clarence thomas, and the that room they're standing in is a private library in the home of harlan crow. and flight records suggest harlan crow perhaps even flew justice thomas in for the swearing in on harlan crow's private jet. but who's it judge getting sworn in? she's on the supreme court justice. judge ho is one of the three circuit court judges that will decide whether or not mifepristone remains in this country. if you understand in which he may be leaping on this matter take a listen to how he answered this question today. >> so in the preamble to the -- >> judge ho has called abortion a moral tragedy.

he's down-played the judge's actions before the senate and defended justice thomas' acceptance of gifts from harlan crow, the guy who hosted judge ho's swearing in. today the senate judiciary subcommittee held a hearing on justice thomas' acceptance of all these things so we have something nice to talk about. dahlia, thank you for being here tonight. >> good to be with you. >> what happened in the senate subcommittee hearing today? >> it was fairly amazing because you had a judge, a now senior judge who was a reagan appointee who worked for all sorts of conservative causes essentially come forward and say i was upset and stressed out about the failure to disclose and the weirdness of clarence thomas' both gifting situation and disclosures in 2012. >> a long time ago. >> i ran this up the flagpole

and got kind of nowhere with the judicial conference, which is the governing body of the judiciary, and he essentially said they said to him, no, no, no nothing to see here. so he after much anguish, alex, comes forward and says i don't love doing this, this doesn't feel right to me, but the reason we have both statutes that govern what judges disclose and a judicial conference which sets the rules is so we don't get in situations where all the stuff comes out, the judiciary looks terrible and then they say nothing was done and try to do something. >> it feels by virtue of having this person, this senior judge explain his moral anguish over clarence thomas' situation, the fact this is happening at a subcommittee of the senate judiciary committee and the fact the senate finance committee ron widen, sent harlan crow a letter today asking for a detailed list

of flights and yacht trips and the three georgia properties crow bought for clarence thomas, it feels like there might be some oversight and accountability here, or am i being overly optimistic what could happen? >> there was this great accidental self-own where harlan crow seems to be saying there's a separation of powers reason, that he doesn't have to disclose what he knows, so in a weird sense what he's saying is we all know the thing which is true which is there's a fourth branch of government and it's called harlan crow and he somehow has some separation of powers interest in not disclosing what he has done because what he's the boss of the other three branches. it's super crazy, but, thank you, mr. crow, for telling us. >> and i was telling you his name keeps popping up. he's like the kevin bacon of maybe judicial malfeasance or at least corruption or ethical questions.

the idea we showed that picture and maeb we can pull it up again of judge jim ho getting sworn in by clarence thomas at harlan crow's private library, this man is involved a lot in these careers of these very conservative justice, and let's talk about jim ho who made very clear he's not a fan of mifepristone or some parts of bodily autonomy when it comes to pregnancy. what do you expect from the fifth circuit and him in particular? >> i think we saw the dry run when they initially, the fifth circuit initially ruled on judge kazmierczak's order and said we're going to set the clock back to 2016 and just pretend what judge kazmierczak did was reasonable, and in some sense they got spanked by the u.s. supreme court that didn't let that stay go into effect. what we saw today was them just

acting out. they were just kind of grumpy the court had put them in the naughty boy chair and didn't let them do the thing they would have wanted to do which would have catastrophically limited access to mifepristone. and what we saw was so much kind of snark, you know, that snark you led with, which is really we're going to talk again about things just not true, about the fda not being in good faith, maybe the fda isn't going to follow instructions. maybe we should talk about how we're starving, babies in the womb, like the degree of sort of creepy bad fox news discourse cans opposed to serious judicial fact finding was really dispiriting from a federal judicial point. >> and i've got to say at the risk of sounding like palliana or rip van winkle, i've just woken up from 100 years of

slumber, i'm shocked there's this cabal from executives who feel they're above the standards of jurisprudence and can sort of make these call on their own, and they're all friends and they have all paintings or photographs with wealthy benefactors and feel they need to make no excuses about the network. from judge kazmierczak you can get to jim ho, from jim ho you can get to clarence thomas who swore jim ho in, and for all of them you get back to harlan crow. for the layman this feels like the scales have fallen from our eyes. >> it's funny because i was thinking about your dogs playing poker analogy, and it would be dogs playing poker if one of the dogs owned all the other dogs, right? that's why it's really not a poker game. it's something much, much more nefarious, and i think it's worth saying judge ho was out on the hustings giving this barn story disclaimer saying

everything he did was notable and judge kazmierczak submitted a law review article and took his name off and didn't disclose this in his hearings. judge ho defended that, too. these guys are so deep in each other's stuff that's become their defense, and that part of it is just, again, stop saying the quiet parts out loud because it doesn't make the judiciary look good. >> stop being part of other stuff and not wanting to be part of our stuff, too, just saying as a woman. always good to see you. i'm sorry we have to talk about some grim topics. to come this evening we're going to hear from republican adam schiff why a republican colleague is calling for him to be expelled from the house of representatives. stay with us. the house of representatives. stay with us am i? ya! save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, special financing. only at sleep number. your best defense against erosion and cavities

is strong enamel- nothing beats it. new pronamel active shield actively shields the enamel to defend against erosion and cavities. i think that this product is a gamechanger for my patients- it really works.

we just had a report come out from durham. what does that say about adam schiff? he lied to the american public. should he be expelled from congress as well? >> that was house speaker kevin mccarthy yesterday arguing that congressman adam schiff should be expelled from congress for leading the probe into president trump's campaign and its relationship with russia. now, both the mueller report and the bipartisan senate and intelligence committee concluded russia did interfere in the 2016 election with the sole purpose of helping donald trump beat hillary clinton and that the trump campaign welcomed that very interference. speaker mccarthy made those comments after the release of

the durham report, which was a report commissioned by former attorney general bill barr to basically investigate the investigators. that report contained no major revelations, and it failed to expose a politically motivated deep state conspiracy, but now republicans appear to be looking for ways to hold democrats accountable for the things that special counsel durham could not find himself starting with congressman adam schiff. tonight far right republican congresswoman has introduced a resolution to expel adam schiff from congress. this comes after speaker mccarthy removed congressman schiff from the intelligence committee earlier this year. now congressman schiff has a lot to say about all this, and he's going to be joining me live right after this break, so stay tuned. break, so stay tuned. sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term

policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. 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)

a few hours ago republican congresswoman ana polina luna filed for expulsion of adam schiff from congress. congresswoman luna allege said adam schiff lied to the american people. he used his position on house intelligence to push a lie that cost american taxpayers millions of dollars andbused the trust place in him as chairman. he makes clear the russian collusion was a lie from day one and schiff knowingly perpetuated that lie for political gain. joining us now is congressman schiff. what is your response to this move to try to expel you from the house of representatives in. >> as you said the durham investigation and donald trump demanded an investigation of the

investigators, bill marr was only happy enough to comply with the appointment of durham. durham spends 40 years trying to prove this deep state conspiracy theory that trump kept, you know, telling his base was going to be proven and people like brennen and pelosi and schiff were going to be prosecuted. the whole thing was of course a big bust. four years, hundreds of interviews, and nothing to show but two failed cases in which the defendants were acquitted but the prosecutor i think was criticized by the judge. so their response to his big disappointment for trump and maga crowd let's go after donald trump, let's go after the person they most view as standing up to the rule of law, standing up against the trump and magga world, leading the first impeachment and participate in the january 6th committee. that's what this is about, and now he's unconvinced when this dark chapter of our history is written it will reflect those

republican members who lack the courage to stand up to the most unethical president in u.s. history, donald trump, has sold themselves by attacking those who did, and that's what this is really all about. >> are you surprised speaker mccarthy is invoking your name? he's not technically part of the maga wing of the party, but he is a speaker of the house and appears to be above this political mudslinging. >> nothing he does surprises me. this is a guy who gave surveillance, you know, of tucker carlson. he'll do whatever trump wants him to do, and i'm sure this is about satisfying his boss at mar-a-lago and satisfying the because watching crowd that loves donald trump. it doesn't surprise me.

mccarthy has made it clear he wants to stop me from doing whatever he can. >> i'm not going to ask if you think this is coincidence because it's clearly not, but this is a day there was a move to expel george santos, the serial fabulist from congress. that fail. but do you think this is naked play to basically seek an eye for an eye, if you will? you for if george santos is going to get kicked out then so is adam schiff? >> i think a lot of what is going on is what we've seen many times in the past, which is when democrats do something for the right reason they usually use the precedent to do something for the wrong reason and attempt to draw some sort of false equivalence about it. but the confluence of efforts to expel this serious fabricator, george santos, this person just

indict, haz admitted guilt to a foreign crime to distract attention from that in the wake of the disappointment of the durham report, let's go after adam schiff. let's, you know, please the maga crowd and send a message to anyone else that stands up to donald trump and the extreme maga world we'll go after you in the way we're going after adam schiff. >> you know, i think, congressman schiff, i think a lot of people are deeply appreciative of what you're doing in congress and the fact you're not being cowed by this transparent attempts to oust you for reasons that have nothing to do but with jealousy. we'll see you again tomorrow. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. i'm confident that we'll get the agreement on the budget and america will not default. and every leader in the room understands the consequences if