deserves this as much as i do. >> back in december, the 34 year old diagnosed with stage four non hodgkins lymphoma. >> how tough was that? >> it wasn't an easy thing to hear. but i think the hardest thing was telling my wife. >> by april, following rounds of chemo, the closer announced what his team and fans waited to hear, he was cancer free. and in the stands last night, this sign said it all. >> it has to hit you in a special place. >> without a doubt, that is the one thing that has hit me throughout this entire process, how many people have either been affected or are dealing with cancer. in some form, some way. it is unbelievable how many people have reached out. >> last night's game saw the angels come out on top. but for fans everywhere, liam showed what a champion really looks like. >> i do not take for granted any single day for the rest of my life. for the rest of, i will be a survivor, not really a survivor,

i will be a thriving and i want to make sure that i passed on to anyone and everybody i can't going along this journey. >> not just surviving, but thriving. a healthy lima hendricks takes us off the air tonight. and on that, no i wish you a very good and very healthy night. from all of our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you for staying up late, i will see you at the end of tomorrow. tomorrow >> thanks for joining us this evening. for the past several months we've watched the far white wing of the american party hold congress hostage. meaning major concessions from the biden white house or else they will blow up the fragile u.s. economy. they would tank the stop market and push hundreds of thousands of people onto the unemployment line. so, a potential catastrophe of

their own making. now there is a deal on the table to stop the catastrophe from coming to pass. over the weekend president biden and house speaker kevin mccarthy hammered out an agreement to raise the debt ceiling and avoid default. and republicans, they got some of what they wanted in a. unspent covid relief funds clawed back, creating new hurdles for some people trying to access food assistance and other federal programs. and it cuts funding from the biden administration's plan to go after rich tax cheats and make them pay the taxes they owe. perhaps unsurprisingly, none of that was enough for the far right wing in congress that demanded the standoff in the very first place. >> absolutely and completely unacceptable. trillions and trillions of dollars in debt, for crumbs. >> if you're out there watching, this every one of my colleagues, be very clear, not one republican should vote for this

deal. it is a bad deal. >> i thought the last plan wasn't good enough. i had no idea that we would see a plan as ephemeral and as malodorous as this plan. >> this deal fails. it feels completely, and that is why these members and others will be absolutely opposed to the deal, and we will do everything in our power to stop it. >> those were members of the house freedom caucus today offering their assessments of this deal. conservatives have not been shy. they have found many ways to emphasize how much they do not approve of this plan. it is ephemeral. it is malodorous. shortly after the details of the deal will release, congressman dan bishop treated the vomit emoji to display his disapproval. that's the vomit emoji right there. congressman chip roy went on twitter and called it a toured, hyphen, sandwich, adding an unnecessary hyphen for, i don't

know, emphasis? the criticisms were not settled. these conservative members, people like scott perry, chip roy, andy biggs, none of them are likely to vote for this thing, but apparently a lot of other republicans may not vote for it either. >> i think that it will pass with about 80 to 100 democrat votes and between 140 and 160 republican votes. i think the coalition opposed to this will be like the squad and the freedom caucus and it will rock it through the senate after it passes the house. and i think that there is no serious threat to mccarthy's speakership. >> so that means tens, maybe over 100 democrats may have to pull this thing over the finish line. to be clear, there is no big list of new democratic policies

in this deal. what democrats get out of this agreement is a promise not to blow up the american economy on purpose. the preservation of almost all of president biden's legislative achievements over the past two years, and an agreement that republicans will not get a chance to do this all over again before the next election. now given everything that was at stake, that is not nothing. but this is certainly not a wish list of democratic demands, which is why it is ironic that it is likely to now be democrats who will have to pass this thing to avert an economic collapse. senator elizabeth's warren summed up the democratic predicament in this fashion after an interview with reporters this afternoon. >> we shouldn't be in this position. the problem we have got is that the republicans are willing to take hostages, and the democrats are not. we play the grown-ups in the room. and right now we are in a position where the hostage takers have said they are perfectly willing to blow up the economy, to ruin our good name around the world, to drive

up our borrowing costs for decades into the future. and the democrats are trying to calm them down and give them enough to pacify them. >> right now republican house members have been huddling for over an hour as the deal has just passed its first procedural hurdle in the rules committee. the question is, what happens next? how many republicans block their own leadership for a deal that they forced, and how many democrats fall in line for a deal they never wanted. joining us now, brendan buck, former advisor speakers ryan and boehner. also new times columnist michelle goldberg. i must first ask you, michelle, the irony of this moment that someone matt gaetz, and he's not majority whip last i checked, is suggesting that 80 to 100 democrats maybe enlisted, if you will, to get a republican construction across the finish line.

do you think democrats will get, when i see, as a credit they are due, four be in the grown-ups in the room on all of this? >> i think democrats have had a messaging conundrum in that if they either beat the drum too hard about how biden kind of made a fairly decent deal in a fairly difficult situation then they make it less likely for republicans to pass the thing so it seems like they're holding the fire a little bit. i think that the white house and democrats in general may have missed an opportunity to message on this earlier in the process, when polls were showing that the population was showing that was split on whose fault this is. and i think that maybe some republicans understand that if they pull out of this now, if they take this deal now, that it will be obvious to everybody who did that.

but no, what elizabeth warren said is absolutely true, and there is not really a way to change that unless you replace a big chunk of the democratic party with crazed nihilists, which nobody wants to do. >> and by the way, it bears mentioning elizabeth warning warren after diagnosing the problem is something created by republicans, the fact that she doesn't like what's in this is still undecided on this vote. a testament to the degree to -- which >> and aggressive caucus was still taking a vote on whether they should, on how they should vote on this and if they should vote as a block. so the opposition to this thing is coming from the party that negotiated it. the opposition from this is coming from house republicans. the question is, from how many house republicans?

>> brandon, i would turn to you on that question. we have to first acknowledge the sort of absurdity the democrats can't even ask for the credit they are due for fear of turning off the republicans who might vote for this. that is kid glove handling. it is a deference to the insanity of the republican party, which is a fact of doing business in the current congress, but it should be remarked upon, i think. how do you think, i mean, do you think it's a foregone conclusion that mccarthy loses a considerable number of republicans on this and not just the right flank of his own conference? >> i think there's a pretty sizable chunk that are gonna vote no, but that's the reality of house republican conference. . any thing this bipartisan is going to lose a lot of people. nobody likes to vote, but i think the greatest trick kevin recurrences pulled off is generating so much anger from progressives that it makes it seem like republicans should be voting for this, but in reality this is a small deal and there's been so much time in the effort and anger directives process. when you look at the substance of the matter, republicans didn't get a lot, in the white

house didn't get a lot, it's a relatively, basically, a two -year budget agreement. a two-year budget, which we're gonna have to do. anyway work requirements, yeah, they're gonna affect a number of people about this ceo came out today more people are going to be on food stamps because of the work requirements. so this is not a win for conservatives. that's why they're coming out. that's the reality of anything or democrat touches, republicans are gonna say. no they're gonna lose votes but it looks like he's going to get the majority of his conference, not a great feat for a republican speaker of the democratic vote. >> i think we can talk about the details of this, but i would hazard to say, i think we should be careful not saying this is a small deal because the catastrophe that was on the horizon, which is, by the way, like june 5th is the deadline, the threatening the full faith and credit of the united states, i mean, there have already been, there will be repercussions for

the degree to which we edged to the end of the runway, if you will. michelle, there are people overseas and in this country that are not worried about whether america can be fully functioning or as a done democracy, and that's to a no small part to the gamesmanship that the republican party wanted to play in congress. >> i was worried. i was quite worried. i feel more sanguine over the last couple of days, and after today's committee vote, but yes it felt like we might be barreling towards an entirely self inflicted calamity. i do think that brendan is right, that it's a small deal, relevant to the kind of size of the hostage. >> sure. >> that the republican party took. they were not able to extract major concessions from the democrats. and he's right that that is why the far-right and not just the far-right is angry about this. kevin mccarthy did not get that much out of this entirely self created standoff.

>> i am of the mine, and i agree, it's complicated, because there's a short term analysis of this and then a longer term analysis. yes, kevin mccarthy did not, there was not a republican wish list that was extracted from these negotiations over a very serious thing. at the same time, a precedent has been set, once again. >> the negotiations themselves where the concession. >> and the fact the democrats are bailing out republicans from a catastrophic scenario of their own creation. what is, brendan, what is mccarthy's, what do you think, if this does pass, with 8200 democratic votes, 130, i'm not doing the math right, if it is bipartisan, what is the lesson for mccarthy and all of this? >> i think it's going to be bipartisan. the reality is, the honeymoon is over for kevin mccarthy. i think we can accept that. everything that he has done up to this point, to be speaker,

was about this moment. this is the biggest thing he is going to do his entire first two years as speaker, get through this moment. the debt limit is the hardest thing that you have to do. she's gonna lose a lot of people. a lot of those people who voted for him on the floor, on the 15th ballot to become speaker said i trust you, you're never gonna let me down, are gonna feel like they let him down. so everything from here on is going to be harder. the president said back in 2011 we had this for a standoff with obama. this is been tried a few times. each time the returns are smaller and smaller eye. don't know if kevin mccarthy would be able to run this again and get anything out of it. when we did it in 2011 it was a much larger scale deal than what they're doing now. but there are still challenges ahead, but mccarthy can, i think, breathed easy now is speaker that his place is secure going forward because this was the only thing that really mattered for him. >> there are still calls for, still there are, as always, calls for his ouster but there's potentially a discharge petition in the wings. there are people who said, you know what? you might get the one g. o. a.

t., you might have my one vote to call for your ouster. do you think that is a viable possibility in the coming weeks? >> i have seen one person say that that's on the table. i don't think it's realistic. i think a lot of people you would look to to say all, right time to talk about getting rid of the speaker are saying that they don't want to do that. i think that is testament to the fact of how much goodwill mccarthy's buildup to this point. he knew who's gonna spend all his bolivia political capital on, this will be built up a lot of it. it's left people with goodwill around him. so that will bail him out. i don't think he's in a real trouble. if he is, a lot to talk about, but i don't think that's gonna happen. >> michelle, what is the biden strategy all that that he's then he's counting on democrats to get over the finish line? we heard -- on the ap am -- in sizable numbers. what do you think the lesson is for the white house after all, if this, in fact, does pass the house? >> i think democrats in general,

and there are certainly people that are in greedy, rightfully angry about the worker work demands which are against people who are in real crisis, but there might be recriminations about the fact that biden negotiated in the first place, but i think people are relieved about the deal that he actually negotiated, so there's a sense, i think, biden's always being underestimated and he actually is a kind of very good deeds dealmaker, he does well in these bipartisan negotiations that a lot of people on the outside here completely futile. i think this will restore measure of confidence him at a time when a lot of people are panicked about having someone of his age running for reelection. >> do you feel like it was the right strategy to say at the outset of these negotiations, i am not going to negotiate over the debt ceiling? >> it's so difficult because when you are dealing with people, not just willing to take hostages but to shoot hostages, on the one hand, yes, in principle that's the right

thing, in principle he might be able to try these various work-arounds, the 14th amendment, but good luck getting this supreme court to back him up on that. and so i think that he is the president of the united states, he is the future, not just of the current economy but the full faith and credit of the united states in his hand. it makes sense to me why he would be less willing to play chicken with that then some kind of -- freedom caucus. >> emphasis on the word -- >> redenbacher michelle goldberg, thank you very much. a lot this. evening like this evening ron desantis hoping to wrestle momentum from donald trump before too many more republicans join the presidential race. plus, trump's entourage of attorneys may be starting to turn on each other. we have more on that, coming up next. next oh booking.com,

♪ i'm going to somewhere, anywhere. ♪ ♪ a beach house, a treehouse, ♪ ♪ honestly i don't care ♪ find the perfect vacation rental for you booking.com, booking. yeah. if we want a more viable future for our kids, we need to find more sustainable ways of doing things. america's plastic makers are investing billions of dollars in new technologies and creating plastic products that are more recyclable. durable. and dependable. our goal is a cleaner, healthier planet for generations to come. for a better tomorrow, we're focused on making plastics better today. ♪ ♪ ♪♪ voltaren. the joy of movement. ♪♪

i'll always take care of you. ♪ i'm gonna hold you forever... ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ be by your side... ♪ ♪ i'll be there... ♪

♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ cargurus. shop. buy. sell. online. ♪ ♪ every day, businesses everywhere

are asking. is it possible? with comcast business...it is. is it possible to use predictive monitoring to address operations issues? we can help with that. can we provide health care virtually anywhere? we can help with that, too. is it possible to survey foot traffic across all of our locations? yeah! absolutely. with global secure networking from comcast business. >> why did you leave the former it's not just possible. it's happening.

presidents legal team? >> as i said at the time, it had nothing to do with the case itself or the client? the real reason is that there are certain individuals that made defending the president much harder than it needed to be. >> that was timothy parlatore, one of donald trump's former lawyers. parlatore used to represent donald trump in the mar-a-lago donald trump documents investigation. since he left the team a few weeks ago, we knew that there was trouble in paradise. but tonight, new reporting shows just how serious that trouble actually is. the daily beast is reporting about a meeting last month at mar-a-lago, where several of trump's lawyers threatened to leave. two sources described that meeting through the daily beast as, quote, an intervention. the outlet says that the lawyers concerns here were

twofold. number one, trump is under investigation for so many things, that is legal team is massive, and the lawyers did not all get along. but more than not getting along, the lawyers are also wondering if one of them could be a snitch. quote, what is really driving the deepest distrust is the weight jack smith's investigators have started turning up the heat on trump's own lawyers. by our count, at least seven trump lawyers had either testified to jack smith's grand jury or met with his investigators. it seems like his attorneys are starting to get worried about going down with the ship here. after quitting, timothy parlatore went on national television to say another trump lawyer, boris obscene, had attempted to interfere with parlatore search of classified

documents at trump's golf club in new jersey. it is not exactly the picture of everyone going in the synthetic shun. today, the guardian is up with new reporting about the trump reporter who is the liaison between trump and the doj. evan corcoran, that lawyer, wasn't charged overturning the classified documents through the department. corcoran reportedly told associates in june of last year that he was weight off, searching any room at mar-a-lago besides a single storage room. when mr. corcoran was looking for classified documents, he was close to check that one room and not to check in -- anywhere else. he was waved off from such in places like trump's office, which is where months later, the fbi would find the most highly classified documents. this reporting suggest again that not everyone is rowing in the same direction here, and it would also soon to buttress and potential obstruction case. a case that if you read the reporting, already seems pretty strong. so at this point, it certainly seems like a lot of trump lawyers are effectively saying, not it. and that makes sense. remember that last week the washington post and new york times reported that a trump employee turned witness has told special counsel submit that trump ordered workers to move boxes back into the storage room right before's lawyer, evan corcoran, searched

that storage room. all of that have been one day before federal investigators came to collect and the documents. so was that trump trying to mislead his own lawyers? where some of trump's lawyers also actively trying to mislead other trump lawyers? and with so many letters that the fine and the investigations, will any of them flip to save their own hides? we might not have to wait that long to find out. bloomberg reportedly last week set that special counsel jack smith will announce possible criminal charges in the days or weeks after memorial day. which was yesterday. we have lots to discuss. joining me now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama and co-host of the sister in law podcasts. joyce, thank you so much for being here tonight. i don't have a lot degree, but a lot of people do, and a lot are working for donald trump and also have testified either to federal investigators or in front of the federal grand jury. i want to pull up this graphic

we have. i think there are seven trump lawyers, by our account, who have either testified to the grand jury that the special counsel has convened or met with the doj investigators on this. that seems like an unusually high number to me, joyce. because that seemed like a lot of lawyers for you, joyce? and if you think that these lawyers are emerging as potential liabilities for donald trump? >> it does seem like an exceptionally high number, alex. to give context, and doj prosecutors are required by policy to be very careful what they are doing with someone's lawyers, especially when someone is a target. i think it's safe to assume that in this case, people are

being extremely rigorous up following those policies. for instance, you can search a lawyer's office without jumping to a lot of hoops. any sort of contact requires approval at the department. what we are seeing here repeatedly is a successful effort by prosecutors to pierce the attorney client privilege with a crime fraud exception. in essence, it means that trump is trying to aspire to criminal activities with his lawyers or using them, and the lawyers might not know what they're being used for, but the lawyers are using their advice to perpetrate criminal conduct. that really adds up to an unusual sort of situation here. >> in the same daily beast reporting, there is a list of all the lawyers working on all the cases. it is a staggering number of attorneys. first of all, the number of probes, and then the number of lawyers working on the separate

probes. give a sense on your background on the flip side of this, how unusual it is to be battling so many legal fronts with a different, uncoordinated group, a group of lawyers who are not coordinating their movements necessarily with other groups? and how complicated that would be for a defendant? >> it is sort of tough for me to do that because i have never had a case against a former president with four separate criminal investigations into his conduct. but i think the best parallel i would give you would be in a corruption case or a white fraud case. there are multiple allegations against a defendant or group of people. typically, there is a unified command structure among the lawyers. here we know that evan corcoran has done a lot of coordinating with the doj. and yet it does not appear to be the case that he has the

contact with the client that you would expect someone in that role to have. here is what you need to be able to do as the lawyer, if you are going to be certifying, for instance, that you turned over the classified material or their presidential reference material in your client's possession, then you need to be able to ascertain that from your client for certainty, and you can't be restricted in your movements or where you search. this is perhaps the worst-case reading, but boxes are being moved in and out of storage areas, before corcoran was permitted to search. someone, maybe the president, was going through the folders, removing material. it was only after that whole level of shenanigans that material was turned over to the doj. that is not any position that you would expect any lawyer and a functional team to be placed. >> and now that the attorney privilege client has been tired from corcoran and trump. i had to ask you on the account,

does it matter that trump was personally directing corcoran in all of this, whether he was waving him off? how much does the direct involvement of this matter as he built the obstruction case? could walk -- waving evan corcoran off to search the office space and just search that one room in the storage area? does that matter? >> yeah, so i think it's unlikely to a lawyer like corcoran will be able to take that sort of guidance from someone involved and not's position. this is the presidents about, a former military assistant, not the kind of person as a lawyer that you will let to find the scope of your search. but to the real point of your question, if the doj as evidence that trump is directly involved in manipulating the concealment at these documents, that the doj case, which is already quite good becomes a

much stronger, may open up additional sorts of charges or counts that prosecutors may wish to indict. that sort of tarik evidence is what you are hoping for here, the smoking gun. >> can i ask you a question on timing, joyce. we've been told about the position coming now-ish after memorial day, which has now passed. what would be the order of operations? what would be looking for next, as far as all of that? >> alex, i am pretty sure that we had this conversation over that meaning adored imminent in connection with the georgia prosecution, and we agreed that prosecutors work on a funky timeline. but the reality is that because this case involves classified material, and that doj will have to work out with the intelligence community and other people with equities precisely what information will be available as evidence at trial, that process can take a little while.

i would expect this meticulous team of prosecutors to take their time in advance, to dot their i's and cross their t's, to make sure that they know what evidence that they will have available, and what classified information the intelligence community feel strongly about holding on to. i would say eminent would be more in terms of weeks and months and not days. but we're all just guessing here. >> but they have to allow trump to come in in the same way that the a bragg invited the trump legal team in to make their case? what a similar thing have been here? >> they can certainly offer him the opportunity to testify in front of the grand jury. his lawyers would be out of their minds if he was delayed and do the testimony in front of a grand jury under oath. i think we won't see that happen here. >> all right, we know what not to look up for. joyce vance, it's always a

pleasure to talk to you, thank you for your wisdom this evening. >> thanks, alex. >> we have still more to come tonight, including what donald trump reportedly wants to do if he wins back the white house, and here is a hint. it involves a witch hunt. but first, florida governor ron desantis has the campaign trail. first stop, iowa, and he is about to get a lot of company. that is next. [interpreter] preter

paradontax blood when you brush could lead to worse over time. help stop the clock on gum disease now. parodontax toothpaste... ...is 3x more effective at removing plaque bacteria, one of the main causes of bleeding gums. parodontax. the gum experts. (water splashing)

hey, dad... hum... what's the ocean like? ♪ are there animals living underwater? ♪ is the ocean warm? yeah, it can be very warm. ♪ you were made to remember some days forever. we were made to help you find the best way there. ♪ introducing the limited edition disney collection from blendjet. nine exciting designs your whole family will adore blendjet 2 is portable, which means you can blend up nutritious smoothies, protein shakes, or frozen treats, just about anywhere!

recharge quickly via usb-c. it even cleans itself. order yours now from blendjet.com and bring a little disney into your life. after advil dual action back pain. what? my back feels better. before advil. new advil dual action back pain. fights back pain two ways for 8 hours of relief. rafael: they're called community schools.

cecily: it's the hub of the neighborhood. grant: in addition to academic services, we look at serving the whole family. cecily: no two community schools are alike. john: many of our classes are designed around our own students' cultures. kenny: it's about working with the parents. david: the educators, the parents, the students. rafael: we all come together to better meet the needs of our kids and our families. jackie: it's been really powerful. terry: i'm excited to go to work every day. narrator: california's community schools: reimagining public education. >> if you nominate me as a

presidential candidate, set your clocks to january 20th, 2025 at high noon on the site a decouple, because i will have this left hand on the bible, and i will have this left-hand in the air, and i will be sworn in as the 47th president of the united states. no excuses. [applause] i will get the job done. >> that was for governor and newly minted presidential candidate ron desantis kicking off his presidential campaign in iowa tonight, where he hopes to be a credible alternative to donald trump. trump, if you recall, in the past two months, has been indicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records to conceal hush money payments and find lovable by a jury for defamation and battery. despite all of the, a majority

of republicans still believe that trump will be the strongest nominee in 2024. according to a new mom poll, nearly half of republican -leaning voters think trump is definitely the strongest candidate to beat president biden in 2024, while another 18% think he is probably the strongest candidate. if you do the math there, that is 63% of republican and republican-leaning voters who think that donald trump is probably or definitely the strongest candidate for 2024. the moment poll was conducted as governor desantis geared up for his official candidacy, but it remains to be seen whether the official entry into the race will fend off potential challengers because, so far, it has not. the ever expanding field already includes trump's you an ambassador, former south carolina governor nikki haley, asa hutchinson, south carolina senator tim scott and a handful of other lesser conservative

personalities. the list goes on though. the new york times reports today that ally governor chris christie creates a super pac to support chris christie in the republican primary, and that he is likely to kick off his campaign in the next two weeks. over the holiday weekend, new hampshire governor carson said he would decide whether or not he what there is hat into the ring in the next week or two. also in the next week or two, according to the wall street journal, governor doug burnham is supposed to announce his candidacy at an event in fargo a week from tomorrow. then there is former president bike pants, who said in april, that he will make a decision what before late june, which i guess is now early or late june. a decision on whether or not to enter the presidential race. at this point, the presidential 2024 primary is starting to feel reminiscent of the 2016

republican primary, which had 17 major candidates that spotted the bow and handed the nomination to donald trump. there is that. trump has been extremely clear about what he plans to do if he is back in the oval office again, and it is all about revenge. we will bring you the details on that coming up. getting inspired! volunteering! playing pickleba...!

how can you sleep on such a firm setting? gab, mine is almost the same as yours. almost... just another word for not as good as mine. save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. only at sleep number. meet the portable blender we can barely keep in stock. blendjet 2 gives you ice-crushing, big blender power on-the-go. so you can blend up a mouthwatering smoothie, protein shake, or latte wherever you are! recharge quickly with any usb port. best of all, it even cleans itself! just blend water with a drop of soap. what are you waiting for? order yours now from blendjet.com before they sell out again! >> right now, speaker kevin

mccarthy is wrapping up a meeting with the house republican conference on that bipartisan debt limit deal here brokered with white house.

the bill is headed for the full house for a vote tomorrow after cleared its first procedural hurdle this evening, passing the house rules committee by a vote of 7 to 6. punchbowl news reports that going into the republican conference meeting, speaker mccarthy got a standing of ovation, and that he told republican members, quote, there is nothing in there for democrats. i've never seen a bill that you can point to one thing that the other side got. joining us now is ryan nobles nbc capitol hill correspondent. ryan, thank you for joining us. i know this is an ongoing situation. is there any sense that the democrats are going to block bawk at voting for this in large? numbers >> i guess it depends on your definition of large numbers, alex. -- if you will notice, there have been a lot of conservative republicans that have declared their new votes, and hardly any, if any, democrats have come out and said no. i do think that is because there is a degree of loyalty to

the white house, and they are judging how many republican votes kevin mccarthy can deliver, and then a lot of how much we see democratic democrats support rise and fall will depend on that. hakeem jeffries, who is the, of course, leader of the minority told us that he believes kevin mccarthy can deliver as many as 150 votes, and that democrats will fill in that gap, whatever that may be. so, you are only talking about 70 or 80 democratic votes to get this over the finish line. i think it will end up being a lot more than that. but there is no doubt, when you have divided government, you have to come up with a compromised piece of legislation. so that means, you are going to lose progressive democrats and you are going to lose conservative republicans, and that is how it gets over the finish line. i do end up thinking that's how this will turn out. >> yeah. i guess i was asking that in part because mccarthy is so gleefully saying that there is nothing in there for democrats, and then also expecting that large democrats will vote for something that -- ideal that he put in motion.

to that end, mccarthy getting a standing ovation reportedly in the house republican conference. can you tell me about his standing inside the party? you mentioned conservative republicans who are not happy with this. but is there any price that he will pay for this? >> alex, i think we don't talk about this enough. that these voices that are critical of kevin mccarthy within the party, they are very loud. they have the ability to command a microphone. they do a very good job of getting their message out, specifically to the conservative base. but they are not large in numbers. the overwhelmingly large majority at the republican party within the house of representatives is supportive of kevin mccarthy. it played out in a dramatic way because of the speaker contests, but it took a few only a few of them from the conference to deny him that speakers gavel. in aggregate, most republican members are supportive of kevin mccarthy, so it's not a surprise that he would go in that room and get a standing ovation, because they do support him. and i do you think that will

play itself out with a great deal of specificity tomorrow. you will see most republicans vote yes on this legislation. do they all love it? no, but they understand that a compromise was necessary to prevent the country from defaulting. and the fact that they got joe biden to negotiate at all, when his original stance was that there was no negotiation related to a debt ceiling, indicates that mccarthy made some inroads in the conversations. mccarthy is not beloved by any stretch of the imagination, but he does have the support and he has been able to kabul this group together, and 20, 30, 35 people, that on are very loud on the right and complaining about him do not indicate the overall sense of this conference in any way, shape or form. >> ryan nobles in the center of the action, thanks for the update, ryan, appreciate it. >> thanks, alex. >> when we come back, we have new reporting about donald trump's plans for revenge, if he takes it back to the white house. we will talk to someone who has

experienced the wrath of trump firsthand. that is next. at is next what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

(wheezing) asthma isn't pretty. it's the moment when you realize that a good day... is about to become a bad one. but then, i remembered that the world is so much bigger than that, with trelegy. because one dose a day helps keep my asthma symptoms under control. and with 3 medicines in 1 inhaler, trelegy helps improve lung function so i can breathe easier for a full 24 hours. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy contains a medicine that increases risk of hospitalizations and death from asthma problems when used alone. when this medicine is used with an inhaled corticosteroid, like in trelegy, there is not a significant increased risk of these events. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase risk of thrush and infections. get emergency care for serious allergic reactions. see your doctor if your asthma does not improve or gets worse. ♪ what a wonderful world. ♪ ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for asthma - because breathing should be beautiful.

we moved out of the city so our little sophie ask your doctor about oncecould appreciate nature.a - but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like? well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity... and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? >> donald trump currently faces what, we have a ton of mulch.

legal peril on multiple fronts, and the strategy he often uses to tackle these issues is not a secret.

he makes his enemies the enemies of his followers. he text them in public, he tries to ruin their careers, and sometimes, he even defamed them. that is the trump playbook, and it has been four years. but now that his legal troubles have piled up considerably, trump is making his fight against his enemies more explicit. and new reporting today, rolling stone magazine details how trump is trying to go after the fbi and justice department agents currently investigating him. quote, in recent months, the former president has asked close advisers, including at least one of his personal attorney's, if we know all the names of senior fbi agents and justice department personnel who have worked on the federal probes into him. trump has done privately discussed that should return to the white house, it is imperative his new department of justice quickly and immediately purge the fbi and doj's ranks of these officials and agents who led the trump related criminal investigations. during some of the conversations this year,

including at trump's florida club mar-a-lago, some of trump trump's close political allies told him that they are working on figure out the identities of the fbi and doj staff and forming lists. so the time tested trump play bookies operational here in a big way, but some things, at least, are different this time around. like this. the justice department is not making it easy for trump. according to rolling stone, the doj appears to be stonewalling trump's allies, who are at asking for the names of the special counsel investigating trump. and the justice department is also obscuring the names of the special counsel lawyers and personnel on official emails according to a source with direct knowledge of the situation. joining us now is someone who knows exactly what it is like to be a personal target of donald trump, former fbi agent peter strzok. not only was he removed from the special counsel's russia investigation in 2017, but he was later fired by the fbi after more than 20 years of service.

peter, it's great seeing you. thanks for being my guest this evening. there's no better person to speak with. does this reporting feel like vindication for you in your search to find out exactly what happened here, and get to the bottom of your firing? but is it proof that trump has a kill list? >> alex, i don't know that i would call it vindication. it's certainly confirmation that what trump did in his last administration, he is absolutely going to come back with full vengeance the next time around. it is hard for me to overstate what an assault on the rule of law at this. it is essentially someone who is running for president, saying, if you dare investigate me, i am going to fire you. there is nobody out and america -- this is something out of a banana republic. there is no person about the law, but this is something that trump is saying trying to proactively identify people who are working on investigations related to him and saying years out from his presidency, i am going to fire these people as

soon as i can, if and when i regain power. so, it is absolutely we saw something we saw him doing -- with folks like me, director comey, deputy director andy mccabe, other folks fired, very much saw this in action, and trump has doubled down saying, yes, i've done it, like he frequently does. he's up to the line, where he sees no resistance at the line and pushes forward. so, i am deeply worried about what happens in a future trump administration, for all these folks who are working day and night, especially special counsel jack smith and others, to hold trump to account for his potentially illegal acts. >> yeah, i think it's probably not just about a second trump term as well. it could be marching orders for the republicans running committees in congress. we know effectively doing trump's bidding, our jim jordan, chair of the house judiciary committee, trying to get alvin bragg to the hill. we know the oversight committee chair has decided to hold the fbi director, trumps fbi

director christopher wray in contempt of congress. there are very real consequences for trump targeting these folks in realtime. right now. and i would ask you to be an investigator in the fbi or doj, what is it like working under that pressure in that spotlight? >> that is absolutely right, and look. when i was working with special counsel mueller, we were all very well of the statements come out of trump's mouth, the statements coming out of congress. did that make anybody afraid to do their job? no. where investigators and attorneys certainly aware of it? and alex, you are right. this is not a future intentional -- not only is trump threatening these people with their jobs and livelihood. more, if you look at what is going on now, the fact of the matter, physical threats of violence that are coming into fbi agents, including the names of individuals who took part in the search warrant down at mar-a-lago, attacks on fbi facilities, including the field

office in the midwest, this is not just the future of your job. this is a current threat of violence simply based on trump and those around him trying to identify people, trying to intimidate them and prevent them from doing their job. >> what does the department need to do to protect investigators and agents? we know that they are masking email addresses. we know they are refusing to share the names of those working on the special counsel 's probe. when else should they be doing to keep folks safe as they do their jobs? >> well, think about what you just said. there are people -- the department of justice, the fbi, the nations preeminent law enforcement agency, is having to take steps to shield its people from the wrath of the current republican from her for the president of the united states in 2024. i think there is some question in my mind at what point does this activity cross into the gun of obstruction or in terms of trying to temper with investigators, intimidate

investigators. so, i think there is some question if this activity goes far enough, whether or not trump is beginning to encroach on in those things, which might actually represent violations of law. i think what needs to happen right now, the leadership of the fbi and doj need to make it very clear -- internally, to the workforce, but i believe externally to the public that no one in the doj, no one in the fbi is going to be deterred from doing their jobs by the threats of this former president. >> yeah, it's an important message, not just for right now before the institutional integrity and the safety of its workforce. peter strzok, it's great to talk with you about this. thank you making time tonight. >> thanks, alex. >> that does it for our show. we'll see you again tomorrow. now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. good evening, lawrence we have -- sure senator sheldon joining us tonight, you know that? means that means there is more to say about clarence thomas