basically, his downfall. either way, all of this reminds us of someone else around the world that silvio berlusconi set the standards and proved to other politicians around the world that you can get away with anything. >> and the prime minister the prime minister of the country, made today a national holiday for the country. claudio lavagna, thank you, that's going to do it, it's only wednesday, "deadline: white house" starts right now. ♪♪ hello, everyone, it's 4:00 in new york. i am ari melber in for nicolle wallace. we're covering right now the day after. defendant donald trump has now been indicted, arraigned, booked

and fingerprinted a federal court appearance captured by a sketch artist. you're seeing one such example. these moments you're looking at here are that which donald trump has blatantly tried to overshadow with this is own series of events and speeches and recent pr programming. well, we can all see how this case is different right now. the early reporting is focused on how it will follow a traditional trajectory. "the new york times" puts it that way. next up we have a date for trump codefendant walt nauta to enter his plea, june 27th. and then traditionally, the status conference hearings that you would see over a course of couple months, the government supplying evidence to the defense. and that material can then inform the defense lawyers' strategies. trump's lawyers may try a kind of more serious investigation of this odd defense that trump has been publicly mounted that the

de -- the classified documents he says were secretly or magically declassified before he left office. there's also the idea that they could quote accuse trump of misconduct, like prosecution. and trump's lawyers could have damaging evidence excluded or try to get the government to disclose information that it wants to keep classified, end quote. and a legal argument, sounds obvious right, a legal argument, a legal piece of it, but it's not only lawyers making legal claims. there are also factly claims here like what trump did in the past and what the evidence shows he did. that is a reason that trump's improvised public defenses or the tax, whatever you want to call them, sometimes outright lies, that may hurt his own defense lawyers' plans or box in the strategy. it may take options off the table or hand prosecutors

incriminating statements that undercut the very future defenses that trump's lawyers might want to make in this case. and that brings us to last night where trump tried to turn from arraignment day to pep rally. and then floated the argument that he had the boxes because they. full of his personal stuff and clothing. >> many people have asked me why i had these boxes. why did you want them? the answer, in addition to having every right under the presidential records act is that these boxes were containing all types of personal belongings. many, many things, shirts and shoes and everything. >> shirts and shoes and everything. it's a veritable dr. seuss top secret story. that is the defendant speaking in court, he's presumed innocent. and in public, he has his free speech rights, he can say whatever he wants, some of what he's saying, though, can also be

held against him. that's the defendant's side at the doj. today, we had brief remarks from the attorney general who spoke out about this very special counsel he hired. >> mr. neft is a veteran career prosecutor. he's assembled a group of experienced and talented prosecutors. and agents, who share his commitment to integrity and the rule of law. any questions about this matter will have to be answered by their filings in the court. >> and there you have it. the justice department continuing to emphasize it is speaking through its filings in court, including that damning now unsealed indictment part of the record. the defendant who did not speak a single word in court, his lawyer entered his nonguilty plea continues to speak in public. i want to bring on some of the experts we have on "deadline." unfortunate, nicolle is out

today, fortunately i'm here and fortunately we have the trusted legal eagles, katie phang in miami, charlie savage and former prosecutor glenn kirchner. katie, your view of the very careful remarks we heard from the attorney general and the way that the trump statements can be used. >> well, you got to hand to merrick garland. he's going to preserve the idea that special counsel jack smith is acting with full and complete independence, not only in the continuing investigation that jack smith is doing into january 6th, but any of the investigations that may be going on about which we are not privy. but specifically regarding the classified documents case, garland very smartly reminded the american public that any type of statements that are going to be made are going to be made through the filings in this case which are about to get very complex and very detailed. all of that being said, when

have we ever had federal criminal defendant who is running for the presidency of the united states, that does not not only rallies galore, but press conferences, as well as stops in coffee shops to do prayers. at the end of the day, he as in donald trump, is going to step in it. he's going to step all over the case that he has, in terms of the defense which is why being the defense attorney for somebody like donald trump is a nightmare. this is a very technical case and prosecution. but it also needs that the defense, ari, has to be just as technical and just as surgical. and if you have a client like donald trump who runs his mouth, he's going to back his attorneys into some very tight corners. >> glenn. >> yeah, i agree, you know, when katie mentions donald trump's statements, i don't think any of us suspect he will stop talking, even if his attorneys advise him to stop talking.

and you know, it may feel good for donald trump to make all of these statements many are which are self-contradictory, you know, in the public square. the thing is those statements will only be admissible in a court of law if the prosecutors choose to introduce them. a defendant cannot introduce his own hearsay statements, his own statements that he made outside the courtroom, to prove the truth of the matter asserted. so, for example, ari, prosecutors will take two of donald trump's statements and they will play them for the jury back to back. they'll play the first statement where donald trump said i automatically declassified all of the documents i took with me from the white house. and then they will immediately thereafter play the statement, the audio recording that we all learned about recently, in which donald trump said, i took these, but they're still classified. and i don't have the ability to declassify them. now, that was about six months

after he left the presidency. so when you can play those self-contradictory statements all out of the mouth of the defendant, that's the kind of evidence that tends to really impress a jury. >> yeah. charlie savage, you work for a serious paper. you have serious accolades and we're in a serious time. but people are exhausted, drained, fatigued, deadened. i want to ask you about, you know, how you like to party or if you party, but i will say it's been established that if you're used to tequila and heroin, right, a cigarette doesn't do as much. and i wonder about the legal, lawful media version of that which is your readers, our viewers, the country writ large, has had its share of information tequila and political crisis. so, with you as our reporter here, in a week like this, which if you were in journalism school or first day, you got an

assignment in the newsroom, you said espionage charges against a former president, special counsel, it's big. is it playing out that way? does it feel as big as it should be? walking us through that broader context about how you and your paper tries to deliver the facts of what is a big story when some people are saying, i don't know, what's the difference this week. >> well, it's certainly been an intense week. it's been an all hands on deck week among many different people who have a piece of the trump legal, political saga, at my organization which is a large organization. everyone's been working together. people have been going down to miami, coming up with different stories to write. we've been trying to focus on predicting with informed analysis where this is going. there's several deep pieces on how this trump-appointed judge aileen cannon who is not very experienced and ruled in his favor last year, and now to

oversee the case, how she got appointed. the various ways she could, if she is inclined to continue to help trump. maybe she won't be inclined. i just got have to add to two points, one of them about trump's public statement. i don't know if i agree with him saying he declassified the documents. i don't think they want the jury to hear that unless he goes on the witness stand and says under penalty of perjury that he did that. normally, his lawyers would not repeat the claims in court because they could suffer consequences for lying in court. that could be a long tell for the fact there's no credible evidence, anyone credible ever heard him say i'm declassifying them out of the oval office. i don't know they'd play that statement. they'd want him to say it out of his own mouth after being sworn

on the witness stand. the thing what i think is more interesting what he says outside of court, he keeps making sure he knew he had the documents, i've got every right to have it. bizarre wrong, obviously wrong, even bill barr said, that somehow they became his personal property. i knew i had them, they were in my boxes with t-shirts and shoes, blah, blah, blah. the point is he's taking it off the table for the lawyers to say he didn't have the requisite intent here because he didn't know they were there. every time people should stop bothering him about it because they were his, he underscores that he knew he had them, thereafter, he takes off the table to believe it's a mistake. he's remoing one of his dwonss by bragging about what he knew. >> right, which is sort of

damning. you had two points. glenn, why don't i let you respond because your name was invoked. why don't we play down the shirts and shoes clips of donald trump because of the legal analysis of it. before i do that, go ahead, glenn. >> i appreciate charlie's point. ordinary little prosecutors do not introduc exculpatory statements. when i can introduce one statement that he makes publicly that i declassified everything with my mind, or they were automatically declassified. and then i can introduce another recording of donald trump himself behind closed doors, whether or not he knew he was being recorded, saying i didn't declassify these.

they're not automatically declassified, that's why i can't show them to you. that is the kind of devastating evidence. and it shows consciousness of guilty guilt and i think the probative value of that tends to outweigh the possible prejudice of your case introducing a lie by donald trump. >> then to charlie's other point, because we're doing the reporting and we have a little bit of time today, you're analyzing what donald trump said, we were careful, rachel and others explained to viewers, we monitor this, we take some parts of it, we're not just running it all live when it's a pack of lies. but in the spirit of the claim, charlie, you're drawing people's attention to what he said and what he seemed to have confessed. so, let's take a look. >> many people have asked me why i had these boxes. why did you want them? the answer in addition to having every right under the presidential records act is that

these boxes were containing all types of personal belongings, many, many things, shirts and shoes and everything. >> charlie and then katie, go ahead. >> right. well, so, he's saying he knew he had the documents. and he puts forth a silly theory, the presidential records act, he's referring to the idea under the presidential records act which was enacted after watergate to make clear that documents from the white house are public property when a president leaves office but allows the president to say this is not my official record. this is my diary. this is my personal property but under some extreme version of that, the president can just declare every piece of paper in the white house personal property, classified documents produced by the defense department, or cia, whatever. saying these are mine now and i can take them and store them in my bathroom if i want to.

and bill barr, again, i go back to, his attorney general said on fox news on sunday, that's just absurd on its face. but, you know, they're kind of left putting forth these series, because what else are they going to say. the point by invoking it he's implying he had the right to have those doubts. i had every right to have the documents i knew i had. he's not saying, no, i made a mx take. he's taking off the table the ability to say i didn't have the intent to keep these documents that were marked top secret. >> katie, go ahead. >> even more so, to add to what charlie said, proximity is very important. and if you are having classified, top secret, you know, sensitive intelligence information right next your underwear, right next to your baseball glove, right next to your, quote, personal effects. if you're donald trump does that

mean you put it in a box and you never saw it for the next year and change. obviously, hi admission by donald trump that classified documents and materials were in that close quarters and close proximity with personal effects, nil-affects the case. and beyond each and every element of the crime, charlie's point is well taken. if donald trump admits that he had these documents, that he had these materials and he knew about them, the government can just check that element off, in terms of the knowledge of the retention of the documents. that's counts 1 through 31 of this federal indictment. so, the more that donald trump speaks, whether or not it's using the government's case in chief, whether or not it's never introduced by the government, it still helps in favor of the government in terms of being able to present its case to any potential jury.

>> yeah, i think that's all grist for the mill. the other thing i want to ask you about, glenn, is the rather damning lawyer notes that show donald trump basically poking around or questioning how he could commit new crimes. destruction, destroying evidence. this is what we believe from his lawyer corcoran. and people that have seen this, he said, oh, well, i don't want anybody looking through my documents. what if we don't respond at all and don't, quote, play ball with them. item "c," it be better if we told them we didn't have anything. "d," isn't it better if we told them we don't have any documents. and i've said in public this week, which is that you could absolutely find these kind of damning questions or other machinations about other people who were never convicted of any

crimes but were affording themselves which is generally a sacrosanct right which is private discussions with your own counsel, robert ray, he put it on air this week, plenty of folks ask their lawyers these kind of questions. and whether you get to what happened which will be litigated here, did he then go forward and dot bad thing? there's evidence he did. but before you get to that, in fairness to any evidence, the fact that they ask their lawyer, can i, mr. ray argued, isn't very damning or probative, he argued. and shouldn't be allowed in the first place. in all fairness, what you do say to that argument? >> yeah, i mean, there are lots of candid conversations with all sorts of hypothetical scenarios discussed between lawyers and clients. some of them might sound nefarious to sort of the outside

person. but that's why there was litigation on the crime fraud exception. and there had to be a showing made to chief judge howell in westerly court in d.c. that donald trump was using it in furtherance of activity. she determined that she was and guys like evan corcoran were having to go and say we're deeply and sharply incriminating, i think donald trump team will continue to relitigate in front of judge aileen cannon. if you look at the witnesses detailed in the indictment, so many of them are referred to as sort of trump allies or people that were once trump allies. trump attorney number one, trump

attorney number three. there is trump employee number one, trump employee number two. it's going to be hard for donald trump's team to paint the witnesses against them, as example, a group of angry witnesses. and who are the witnesses are will make the points against donald trump all the more powerful. the whole gang stays, when we come back, charlie mentioned the presiding judge, that and more when we return.

the chase ink business premier card is made for people like sam who make...? ...everyday products... ...designed smarter. like a smart coffee grinder - that orders fresh beans for you. oh, genius! for more breakthroughs like that... ...i need a breakthrough card... like ours! with 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more... plus unlimited 2% cash back on all other purchases! and with greater spending potential, sam can keep making smart ideas... ...a brilliant reality! the ink business premier card from chase for business. make more of what's yours.

♪♪ when you're a small-business owner, your to-do list can be... a lot. ♪♪ [ buttons clicking ] that's why progressive makes it easy to save with a commercial auto quote online, so you can take on all your other to-dos. already did. see if you could save at progressivecommercial.com. "the new york times" is out with new reporting just this

afternoon about judge aileen cannon and her trial experience. she came to national attention last fall with that unusual ruling which would have created an extra long reviewing of the documents that was diseased from mar-a-lago but that ruling did not stick. the appeals court actually reversed it. today's story is that cannon's been on the bench three years since trump gave her a lifetime appointment since she lost her election. on 124 criminal cases assigned to her, the "times" found only four went to trial, each with a matter, like a child possessing a gun. all told, the case time added up to about 14 trial days. cannon is a duly appointed federal judge in good standing. no one knows if she will approach this case by a book or issue the kind of rulings which can be reversed again. the kind of that has context of

history here that she'll not only be learning on the job in the first time unique case of the former president, that may apply to any judge but in the case she will be learning quite clearly on the job how to oversee a lengthy trial at all. our guest here, charlie is one of the authors of that report. charlie, i'll read a little bit more on that context and let you walk us through it because you also quote that several lawyers who appeared before her in those cases described her as competent, straightforward. and a notable contrast to rulings, in the doj search does not have a reputation that is unusually sympathetic to defendants. at the same time, you spoke to lawyers who said she's, quote, demonstratively inexperienced and can bristle when situations

arise. charlie, tell us what you know. >> of course, everyone knows aileen cannon was appointed by trump. she's done nothing remarkable that brought her to anyone's attention, still, she was assigned to hear the lawsuit with the fbi search of mar-a-lago last august, in which they found all of these classified documents. and thousands of unclassified documents that also belong to the government, by the way, which we never talk about, all now going back to the national archives. she surprised legal experts across the ideological spectrum by ruling in trump's favor, appointing a special master, blocking the justice department from access to that evidence. and societying up a schedule that would maybe hobble the investigation for four months or more, entertaining novel theories that had no supreme

court, and that officials could be blocked to that evidence under executive privilege. we know they're also part of the executive branch. and that cuts against supreme court rules in the watergate era. and as you indicated she was shut down in two scathing rulings in the 11th circuit, all consisted of two appointees, two of were trump appointees. and she never had legitimate authority to intervene and trump had special attention as ex-president that a normal american would have is wrong. so that's her image heading into this. when she received to many people's surprise the assignment apparently randomly, as the clerk of the court told me, to have this actual case, just a coincidence, that the computer spit her name out again, it raised the question of how she's going to handle it but her inexperience with criminal trials is a whole different

dimension. whether or not she continues to act in a way that many seem to think last year was biased in trump's favor, as you recounted, she just doesn't have much experience running trials at all. of course, most trials in the federal system don't happen because the defendants plead out 98% of the time. she's only been there 2 1/2 years. so, we've identified four cases all very basic routine things. a fellow who had a gun. tax evasion, a guy smuggling illegal immigrants in on a boat. a guy who threw a chair and got charged with assault. two days for the shortest trial, the longest trial was five days. none of them raised the complex issues that this case is going to raise. nothing had anything to do with classified evidence and none of them had evidence classified under the procedures act. none of them had anything to do with suppressing or not

attorney/client privileged information. it doesn't mean she's bound by that decision for the separate question what can be talked about to the trial jury in open court. she's going to be on the receiving end of all kinds of prosecutorial misconduct allegations from trump and his legal team. they already went to the justice department to complain about the supposed wrongdoing by jack smith and his team. that is surely coming into her court. it happens in every case. prosecution was mean to a witness. judges who are experienced know that's routine, they look at it and move on. will she take it seriously, not because she's biased, but box oh, i've never heard that before. we better have a hearing about this. let's put jack smith on trial. it's just something on perhaps the most extraordinary high

profile and one of the most complicated cases in american history is a real mismatch with the judge before whom it has landed. >> and that's a lot of the factual background. glenn, that outcome is implicated and ordained by our system that we don't have some assignment system that, in this case, for example, favors experience. there are certain areas where you have specialized judges, but that's the exception. the fisa court for surveillance being one example. but this is sort of how the cookie crumbles, right, glenn? and you add into that her allies or defenders would add that she has experience as federal prosecutors like you do. that this "times" story, while perfectly accurate and fair, it speaks to the fact that she's a less experienced judge. she's got your type of experience in knowing at least her way around the courtroom,

no? >> yeah, she does. and i don't think questioning her competence or her experience is really a winning argument for anybody. i think it's interesting, i think it's relevant to kind of assessing how she handles these issues. but it's certainly not qualifying or disqualifying. i think the more important question is will she sort of strictly apply the federal law that talks about when a judge must disqualify themselves. 28 u.s. code 455. you know, it's actually a very low bar because it says that a judge shall mandatory disqualify himself or herself, in any proceeding, in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. importantly, that is an objective standard. it's not that there has to be proof that she cannot be impartial. it is that if her impartiality can reasonably be questioned. and i contend it can. and based on some of what charlie was just discussing

concerning the scathen opinions of the 11th circuit. >> look, she got overruled, we covered that. that ruling didn't hold. it didn't stick. it's not precedent anymore. on the other hand, if your standard for removing a federal judge is getting overruled at all, or reasonably questioned becomes public criticism, then you would knock out judges all the time. >> yeah, ari, judges often get it wrong. if we didn't, we wouldn't need appellate court. but they rarely get it lawless. and she abused her discretion and which we all know is temporary to law and the criminal justice system. this is more than a judge making a mistake in my assessment. >> that's interesting to draw out of you, katie, go ahead. >> so, i'm going to disagree with glenn on his first point about lack of experience. lack of experience in and of

itself is not disqualifying. but in this particular instance because it indicates classified documents issues. if you have a federal judge who is so inexperienced, the next question who is her mentor or mentors, plural, all judges, state or federal, usually have mentors. our federal judges for whom they defer to for advice. you know that's going to happen, ari, in a case this complex or this big. you ask yourself who could that possibly be, she clerked for a judge who was short listed by donald trump. and steven carlton is a federal conservative judge. considering innuendo, she, assuming she goes tore like-minded judges there may be some insert in the way she decides on two prior occasions

on this case. second thought, in inside baseball here, federal judges are blessed with abundance of clerks to do research, et cetera. younger judges that don't have that experience. and federal clerks. what is their experience. i would assume that a federal judge has a lot. last but not least, she has the option to defer to bruce weinhart, she may do so. if she chooses to keep them, ari, it may delay the case farther than we can see. >> you can see in the reporting and legal takes here. in. wrapping up this segment, i want to thank charlie savage who has been with us. our other two legal eagles stick around. up next, the justice department's investigation are part of donald trump's

strategies. and then state cases. new judges coming online next.

♪ ♪ ♪ [typing] ♪ you were made to act spontaneously. we were made to help plan accordingly. ♪ ♪ ♪ discover the power of the gelflex grid. sleep better. live purple.

(vo) sadie switched to verizon. now she has myplan. sleep better. the first unlimited plan where she chooses exactly what she wants, and only pays for what she needs. she picks her perks, and saves on every one. all with an incredible new iphone. act now and get iphone 14 pro max on us when you switch. it's your verizon. donald trump has been criminally indicted and arraigned twice. that's two more times than any other president in american history. and he still has other potential legal problems looming. which could lead to either more indictments or other types of accountability for him and potential co-conspirators. special counsel smith was in the courtroom for trump's appearance yesterday. his other investigation also moving ahead in washington.

indeed, the grand jury heard arguments on potential charges about issues relating to elector fraud. nbc news spotting of that with fake electors going into the courthouse, weeks after testimony that show how hijack smith has gone up the food chain already, including finally mike pence himself. then there's the 2020 pressure campaign specifically in georgia where the d.a. has indicated that they continue to look at a possible set of charges, whether that hits trump aides, lawyers or trump himself, we don't know. there is a new reporting that the fulton county sheriff sent a team to miami, this is the second time they've done so, to look at how a jurisdiction deals with the particulars of arraigning a former president. as we look down in that region, we bring in political reporter for the "atlanta journal-constitution." our legal eagles are still here.

greg, what does the reporting show today? >> it's clear to me the legal authorities in miami, and manhattan was a dry run for what could happen, if they do want to seek charges against the former president and allies. remember, the cases could involve more defendants, more members of trump's inner circle. and law enforcement send commanders to moderate security because they think there could be protests of the same scale or larger than what happened in miami. >> how unusual is it for, a., to happen, and b., to be publicly you known? >> it's unusual but law enforcement always make these arrangements. this is something that's going to be unprecedented. this is something that our local officials have never before encountered so, look, they've got to make certain arrangements public than they otherwise would have done. in this case, it was better to let the public know they're

taking these precautions now. there's been an unusual level of transparency, actually, letters that have gone back and forth between law enforcement officials and district attorney's fani willis' office informing them that they're on the way. >> if you're down there what do prosecutors think, jack smith inherited a case that was operating in seven months he moved. he indicted the former president this week. doj separately on the january 6 cases have both brought and won many big cases. we're 2 1/2 years out from that event. georgia hasn't, correct me if there's more nuance, brought a single charge around the effort to interfere with georgia's results. so, at this point, it's past late, it's late approaching too late, for some of these issues. why do you think it's taking so long? what you can say about that? >> look, a lot of folks, including people in atlanta thought that fani willis' case

would be the first. now it looks like it could be the third. who knows maybe not even the third. there's a lot of moving pieces here. one of the reasons why we're today, look, there could be anti-conspiracy rico charges involved. these are very complicated charges that involve multiple defendants. we know from the put itten county special gran juries there are special names involved and very big names. and can only assume one of those names is donald trump. and several other high-profile names. and you don't have a broader set of facts. in terms of timing it's still an open question, the fulton county district attorney's office put out a statement the indictments of the fed without any impact on the investigation. that doesn't mean the timing still stays. we long thought it mid-august.

look, that could get pushed back, we just don't know now. >> and, greg, as you're doing your reporting, we have that as well, i'll read the exact statement, the federal indictments, quote, will not have any information on the investigation, the d.a., attorney's office, including ours, that exact statement. glenn, what do you see here, because it's not fast at a minimum? >> yeah, i think we should all take comfort, ari, that donald trump, a former president of the united states has now been arraigned, presented in court, into two criminal cases. and there were no civil unrests, no mass protests. each one, i think it's fair to say came off without a hitch. there was a smattering of people both pro-and anti-donald trump who seemed to be in the crowd, as we all observed it. but it feels like it's not becoming old news that donald

trump is being indicted and can be presented in court smoothly and safely. but it does feel like the next likely batch of indictments will be in georgia, given fani willis' earlier statements about asking the judges in georgia to clear their dockets or have no in-person hearings or trials for those two weeks in august. as we say, we don't know that donald trump will be among those indicted. but it does feel it's not becoming routine, but it's becoming more manageable. and it feels like each successive court appearance becomes less problematic. >> the fact that we're discussing the twice impeached, twice indicted president could be thrice indicted. tells us where we are. i want to thank greg for the local reporting for katie and glenn doing what you do on "deadline: white house," which is give insights without fear or favor. thanks to each of you. we have a lot more coming up on

this edition of "deadline: white house." the trial could run right into 2024. our friend claire mccaskill put it this way, trump's not running for president. he's running for pardon. well, sounds clever, but is also quite on point. so we look at what republican candidates running against donald trump are saying possibly trying to bail him out if they win. is that good politics, is that a good idea for america? i have one of two special guests right after this. (vo) sadie switched to verizon. now she has myplan. the first unlimited plan where she chooses exactly what she wants, and only pays for what she needs.

she picks her perks, and saves on every one. all with an incredible new iphone. act now and get iphone 14 pro max on us when you switch. it's your verizon. with the freestyle libre 2 system know your glucose level and where it's headed without fingersticks. manage your diabetes with more confidence

and lower your a1c. it's covered by medicare for those who qualify. ask your doctor about the freestyle libre 2 system. in america, we value our freedoms. and ceos, they're free to negotiate their salaries and bonuses as they see fit. president biden just wants us to have those very same freedoms. the freedom to make a good living and have a good life. that's why he's lowering insulin prices, fighting for the child care tax credit and delivering more clean, renewable, american-made energy... protecting our freedom to thrive. [♪♪] did you know, unless you treat dandruff regularly, it will keep coming back. try head & shoulders shampoo. dandruff is caused by irritation to a germ that lives on everyone's scalp. unlike regular shampoo, head & shoulders contains zinc pyrithione, which fights the dandruff-causing germ and helps prevent it from coming back. it's gentle on hair and provides up to 100% dandruff protection, clinically proven.

try head & shoulders shampoo and conditioner. for best results, use with every wash. this has been medifacts for head & shoulders. (vo) sadie switched to verizon. now she has myplan. the first unlimited plan where she chooses exactly what she wants, and only pays for what she needs. she picks her perks, and saves on every one. all with an incredible new iphone. act now and get iphone 14 pro max on us when you switch. it's your verizon.

i don't think that most republicans support the conduct that's detailed in that indictment. it's reckless. it's harmful to american national security. and it doesn't show the kind of judgment that you need to be an effective president during difficult times. maybe in the end, we're going to make a case that we have done nothing but lose since donald trump has been the leader of this party. nothing but lose. >> presidential candidate and former prosecutor chris christie there rebuking donald trump. meanwhile, republican candidates are pledging loyalty, pandering and some openly talking about helping trump, dismissing the case oar dangling a pardon which is a strange feature for a primary in what was once dubbed a law and order party. now, i'm joined by the special guest i promised, rick stengel and dallas michael. rick, what do you see here in the primary? >> well, you know, like in 2016, the reason he won is because there were actually so many candidates.

if any one of those single candidates, jeb bush one-on-one versus trump. jeb bush wins. marco rubio, one-on-one against trump, marco rubio wins, chris christie, one-on-one with trump, chris christie wins. he got a sealing, of 25%, 35% in each of those primaries. that's why he was able to win. the parties are not powerful anymore. once in a time, the party lead would have said, hey, dude, out of the race, you're out of the race, this guy against this guy. they should do that now, they should consolidate with one candidate who in the first primaries get the plurality of votes. >> is he running for right, tht have as much control. the parties don't have that kind of control anymore. mind you, a slate of candidates were disadvantaged by being part

of that happy hour debate, that second tier debate if you remember, versus the main stage debate. the hope, if you are a republican and interested in beating donald trump, does that happen again, i don't see how you avoid that, frankly, at this point, because there's so many candidates. who is going to tell who to get out? even if they indicate they could go and win and pardon donald trump, the question is, why would you? why would you continue to talk about that? if you are really concerned about moving in another direction, taking the party in another direction, there should be a vested interest in defeating trumpism in all aspects. >> rick, we know you from journalism. you have done federal government service. there's trump and then there's the rest of us in the nation. what does it tell you that it is a mainstream, non-fringe position on the right to openly talk about pardoning what would

become -- the only reason you need to pardon is if there's an espionage conviction. >> by the way, the constitution doesn't say whether a president can pardon himself. that's never been tested. your question brings up something i have been thinking about the last few days, which is that, people outside of government and people who have never served in government don't really understand how consequential the violation of the espionage act is for doing stuff with classified documents. i actually didn't understand it until i went into the state department, how important the concerns about classified information is, how dangerous to get out. that's something donald trump clearly didn't understand, tried to overrule, and something a lot of republican voters don't understand. the justice department, we as journalists, need to explain it better about why this is so important and why people get worked up about it. the reason reasons say it's just

a paper issue is because people don't understand it. >> there's been a lot of lying. i'm hoping you will stick around for the second hour. we do more than one hour around here. >> i heard that. >> nicole wouldn't want it any other way. our guests stay. we are coming back with watergate news you will only get on msnbc. app. use it to set and track your goals, big and small... and see how changes you make today... could help put them within reach. from your first big move to retiring poolside and the other goals along the way wealth plan can help get you there. j.p. morgan wealth management.

detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is for some adults who are starting hiv-1 treatment or replacing their current hiv-1 regimen.

detect this: no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. research shows people who take hiv treatment as prescribed and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit hiv through sex. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients, or if you take dofetilide. taking dovato with dofetilide can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. hepatitis b can become harder to treat while on dovato. don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor, as your hepatitis b may worsen or become life-threatening. serious or life-threatening side effects can occur, including allergic reactions, lactic acid buildup, and liver problems. if you have a rash or other allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are, may be, or plan to be pregnant. dovato may harm your unborn baby.

use effective birth control while on dovato. do not breastfeed while taking dovato. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. (dog barking) we love our pets. but we don't always love their hair. which is why we made bounce pet hair and lint guard with three times the pet hair fighting ingredients. just one sheet helps remove pet hair from your clothes! looking good starts in the dryer with bounce pet. i gave my dad the ancestrydna® kit. honestly, i saw it on sale and i was a- broke grad student so i like a sale. i think it was a good gift. it blew my mind. give ancestrydna®. now on sale for father's day. we have had a lot of news across msnbc during this news week. i did want to share something

coming up tonight at 6:00 p.m. eastern, which is we are thrilled to have the one and only bob woodward, the award winning watergate reporter and author, joining us at a time where we are thinking about history and criminal presidencies and pardons and so many of the things he was so deeply involved in. join us at 6:00 p.m. eastern tonight. keep it locked. we have these guests and more looking at law and order and where we go from here next. pinge from my family. now i can be myself again. blue-emu supports healthy muscles and joints. blue-emu, it works fast, and you won't stink.

lomita feed is 101 years old. when covid hit, we had some challenges. i heard about the payroll tax refund that allowed us to keep the people that have been here taking care of us. learn more at getrefunds.com. ♪ shelves. shelves smart enough to see, sense, react, restock. so caramel swirl is always there for the taking. ♪ the thought of getting screened ♪ ♪ for colon cancer made me queasy. ♪ ♪ but now i've found a way that's right for me. ♪ ♪ feels more easy. ♪ ♪ my doc and i agreed. ♪ ♪ i pick the time. ♪ ♪ today's a good day. ♪ ♪ i screened with cologuard and did it my way! ♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪ i did it my way! ♪

♪ ("i like to move it" by reel 2 real plays) ♪ we're reinventing our network... for total confidence and complete control. ♪ ♪ fast. reliable. perfectly orchestrated. the united states postal service. ♪ move it! ♪ ♪ this is not just a pharmacy. ♪ this is living the care in healthcare. ♪ walgreens. jackie: community schools are so important to us. this is truly what students need. cecily: no two community schools are alike because it goes by what is happening in the community. rafael: we want this to be a one-stop shop for our families that puts parents and students first. kenny: the health and wellness center is a part of our holistic approach. terry: medical, dental, vision, and mental health services. we're addressing the students' everyday needs. kenny: what we do allows them to be the best version of themselves. narrator: california's community schools:

reimagining public education.

the very prospect that what is alleged here took place, creating an opportunities where highly sensitive classified material could have fallen into the wrong hands, even inadvertently, that jeopardizes our national security, it puts at risk the men and women of our armed forces. >> hi, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. a simple message from former vice president mike pence earlier today that donald trump, by not protecting classified material, endangered our national security. before we give pence credit, listen to what else he had to say. >> i can't defend what is alleged. the former president has a right to his day in court. i know he pled not guilty. at the end of the day though, joe, as you suggested, i can't -- i just can't -- i can't believe that politics didn't play some role here.

if i had the privilege to be president of the united states, we're going to clean house at the top of the department of justice. >> despite his claim about the danger to national security, pence is defending the former president by attacking the doj, ex-president for his hearing from many in the gop. like j.d. vance who will put a hold on biden's doj nominations in retaliation. "the washington post" reports the attacks are marking another step away from the gop longtime positioning as the party of law and order. they target the doj and the fbi. cracks are beginning to show. according to new reporting by nbc news, republicans are masking private worries. the gop consternation that they could have a nominee convicted

of crimes came through. the concern was widespread. trump latest indictment could cause further pain for republicans at the ballot box. a person on the call said, is it the movement or is it the man? if the man perishes, what happens to the movement? republicans on the call, this person added, were fearful this group is going to be the face of what it means to be a republican. "the wall street journal" editorial board called trump self-destructive, saying he is hurting republicans' chances in 2024. if mr. trump is the gop nominee, he is unlikely to defend joe biden. if he did win, the document fiasco is what a second term would be like. he wouldn't be able to delivery conservative policy victories republicans want because he can't control himself. he would be preoccupied with grievance and what he calls retribution. the best people won't work for him because they see how he mistreated so many loyalists in the first term.

joining our conversation, former rnc chairman michael steele and former congressman carlos carbello. back with us, rick stengle and basil smikle. one by one, republicans,dismant what the party purported to stand for, law and order, national security. it's hard to see what unites them anymore. it's also hard to see what it is then that they are selling voters. >> they're not selling anything. it's a party without a platform. there ain't much there to sell. let's go back to the vice president's interview. i have a question. why does he act like he is so pained to answer the question. >> because he is so pained, michael. he is politically pained to have to answer this question.

>> it's so hard for me to express just how difficult. what politics? what politics? did you read the indictment? where is the politics? where is the politics, that's number one? number two, the call in which you have these operatives talking about is it the man or the movement, there's no movement. what movement? insurrection? it has always been about the man. let's have clarifying moments here as we look at what's in stark relief in front of the country. we have a former president of the united states who has been indicted on 37 counts that include espionage. right? we can't account for all the documents that they still don't have. we don't know where those documents are. we don't know the documents that we do have whether or not he -- i don't know -- sold them, gave a photocopy. we don't know. that's what the trial is going

to be about. there's more that's going to come. mike pence and marco rubio and tim scott are going to have to account for here. spare me this sort of pained expression of how difficult this is for you, boo. this is on the man. this is on the man. you back the man up. so this question about a movement is just reductive. it has always been about trump. the party has doubled down, tripled down, quadrupled down on trump. now all of y'all -- all of us, because i'm a member of the party, we're going to court today. we're going to have to work through this as the country watches and decides whether or not they want to give any of us a bite at the white house apple. >> the point that michael makes about what more we don't know happen referenced by gop operatives. this is from the nbc reporting. many of the republicans who spoke with nbc news said it

would be smart for the candidates to avoid hitting trump too hard at first but to be sure to leave room open to hit him later. that's the smart play, said nick mulvaney. the politics of this depends on whether the feds have more on trump than what the indictment indicates. he goes on to say, put another way, do we really want to throw an ex-president in jail for a technical violation of the law? if they have evidence that, say, he gave stuff to the saudis or even a foreign operative had access, that might cause even some hard core maga people to stop and say, hang on, that's a problem. i could talk about this paragraph all day. one, the fact that he is trying to say, this is just a technicality, what he did is graver than a legal technicality. >> yes. we were talking before about the fact that we haven't done a great job of explaining what the espionage act is about and why being careless and reckless with

classified information is such a dangerous thing. we need to educate the american public about that. the other thing -- >> what would you want them to know? what's the top line that would change things? >> the reason something is classified, if it got in the hands of our enemies or rivals, it would damage the united states, it would potentially kill american soldiers, it would kill american spies who are undercover. it's the most dangerous information that it's possible to have. there's a whole superstructure of laws to protect that. i have to say, i didn't really understand it myself until i went into the state department. every day, someone came at my desk at the end of the day to take out anything that was classified, lock it up in a safe, to have any kind of classified conversation, had you to go into a scif, a secure compartmented information space. all of these things -- anybody

in washington knows that. that's why people take it really seriously. people have to talk about it the way we're talking about it now. >> it seems to me in addition to the sort of ridiculousness of it being a technicality, there's also them moving the bar. this is bad but it could have been worse. >> right. the notion that they would attack -- leave room to attack him later is striking to me, because if you were serious about dealing with donald trump and making sure that trumpism is purnl purged, would you strike it now -- you would strike now, you would do it firmly that leaves no room for anything later. you take care of it now. that's clearly not going to happen. to michael's point, even though there's a focus on the man and it has been about him, we are left to deal with the movement. the individuals that are afraid to deal with the ramifications of what that movement is doing throughout our government.

that's why you are hearing all of these republican leaders be on this fence and try to walk this very fine line. it's a disservice not just to the american people but for their party. what are you doing? what are you doing? what legacy are you leaving for those that are going to come after you? >> carlos, there's more from that nbc piece i want to read this time about ron desantis' strategy. i doubt desantis will attack trump harder. i don't think he would be able to convince him to attack trump. most i have talked to are wanting civil policy differences, not name calling or him attacking trump personally, but part of the issue is that there aren't many policy differences. desantis remade himself in trump's image. they are choosing between a twice impeached, twice indicted former president or someone else. >> it's remarkable.

these republican primary presidential candidates are the best positioned in the party to lead republicans and the country away from this nightmare that is donald trump. however, it appears that a lot of them but not all of them are under the belief that they can defeat donald trump by following him, by defending him, by excusing his absurd behavior, probably criminal behavior. that will be determined in a court of law. for ron desantis to just want to argue that he has some slight policy differences with donald trump and that then republican primary voters say, okay, i will take you. if republican voters were looking for a copycat -- >> carlos, i'm losing you. i will bring you back. michael, pick up where carlos

left off. >> i think carlos is exactly right. it's about -- how do you want to extricate yourself from the mess you have created? you look around and go, you know, this is too much. apparently, it's not. i think that's the part that -- i don't know if everyone appreciates that this is where republicans want to be. they want someone who is crass and crude and rude. he is their retribution. they don't want the america tim scott is offering. everybody is rallying around, this could be the breakaway. no. ron desantis is talking about we will have a civil discourse about policy -- small policy differences. that ain't happening. do you know who donald trump is? whether have you ever heard donald trump engage in any civil

discourse about anything? what realistically do these candidates expect to happen? i really want to disabuse the american people and especially the media of this idea that this is somehow -- we're going to return to normal here and that somehow donald trump is going to behave now that he is under indictment. this guy went to a fund-raiser after he was arraigned, for heaven sakes. people were like, lining up kicking out people who were asking questions about, how do you feel about going to jail? we need to be realistic about the danger that is in front of us. that's exactly the problem, to carlos' point, the party is refusing to acknowledge. at this late date, it's almost crazy to think you will remove donald trump from this conversation, because in what world does donald trump acede to

tim scott or any of them and says, here is my infrastructure, let me help you get elected president of the united states as a republican nominee instead of me? in what world does that happen? >> i'm struck by how different the party is today. in the 1980s, ronald reagan trying to address violence in schools, decided he was going to engage the department of justice to get more involved in what's happening in schools, in local communities. that's the level of faith he put into the department of justice to fix a problem that should be dealt with at the local level. fast forward to go in and not only not believe the work that they have been doing to get donald trump to this point in time with these indictindictment in some of my debates with other conservatives, we should be urging biden to stop the justice department from doing this work.

that's where politics kicks in. it's not political if you let the law enfocement do their job. if you have worked for an elected official, they will refuse to step in when law enforcement or the courts have stepped in. conservatives are asking us to disregard everything the department of justice has done, disregard their authority, disregard the work that they have put into these indictments to say, no, you need to step in, otherwise, that's the danger that our country is going to face. the fact that they are willing do that and encourage others to do the same is -- to me, it's very threatening to our democracy. >> can i take you back in the republican party politics? our friend michael steele can comment on this later. you began by talking about law and order. law and order was the catch phrase of richard nixon. what donald trump has proved is that the republican party was they have about law and order, never about the rule of law.

law and order was a phrase that was meant to mask an antipathy to civil rights, an antipathy to hippies, antipathy to liberalism. it wasn't ever really about enforcing the law. it was a code phrase that was used to appeal to people culturally. now we are paying the dividends for it. >> because what strikes me is, we are having this as a political conversation. that's what is motivating republicans, specifically the candidates who want to be the nominee in 2024. this is a moral conversation. right? this is a conversation about a moment in history where there are roads diverged and we are waiting for leaders to step up and show a profile, encouraged to say there's a right way and a wrong way and we as americans agree upon that. people are jumping in for self-preservation. this is fundamentally about who we want to be. >> it's fundamentalfundamental.

you are right. it was about enforcing a racial hierarchy. i think his supporters would have found a way continue to vent him, not just because of the anger and feeling of loss that a lot of republican leaders have been pushing over time, but the fury and backlash at the obama presidency. bringing the two things together, we are partly -- it's partly the reason why we're in this situation that we are in now. when you have had a party that has spent their -- generations, generations focused on segregating specific communities, making sure that those racial hierarcies are maintained, they have benefitted from that all this time. now cannot control what they have want. now it's going to come back to -- like dltlike-minded indiv and democrats to try to undo that. i don't think that's possible.

we're going to continue this dive into this dangerous situation that trump didn't start, because he didn't start it, but he has taken it to a level that none of us really could have foreseen. >> no one is going anywhere. when we return, who is weaponizing the federal government sfl we will get reaction from a leading democrat on capitol hill. later, fox news has not learned its lesson after its $787 billion settlement over airing false claims. it's facing criticism after what it put on the air last night. a development to tell you about in the e. jean carroll defamation case against donald trump. we continue after a quick break. (vo) sadie's done paying for wireless bundles with things she doesn't need. so she switched to verizon. and now, she has myplan. the first unlimited plan that lets her choose exactly what goes in it.

now, she gets to pick only the perks she wants, and saves on every one. and with an incredible new iphone on us, no wonder sadie is celebrating. introducing myplan get exactly what you want. only pay for what you need. act now and get iphone 14 pro max on us when you switch. it's your verizon. ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ 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. ♪ (vo) crabfest is back at red lobster. only pay for what you need. when you can choose your crab, and one of three new flavors like honey sriracha... ...this is not your grandpa's crabfest... ...unless grandpa's got flavor. dayumm! crabfest is here for a limited time. welcome to fun dining. - elites. now that we've made travel so expensive, we have this hotel to our...selves..? - how'd you get here? - kayak! they compared hundreds of travel sites to find a great deal on my flight, car, and hotel. - kayak. search one and done.

as you know, i can't talk about particulars of this or any other ongoing criminal matter. as i said when i appointed mr. smith, i did so because it underscores the justice department's commitment to both independence and accountability. mr. smith is a veteran career prosecutor. he has assembled a group of experienced and talented prosecutors and agents who share his commitment to integrity and the rule of law. any questions about this matter will have to be answered by their filings in court. >> that was merrick garland

taking questions. as garland continues to ensure the investigation is being done properly, there's still those in the republican party who continue to wage a war on the ag and the justice department. claiming the agency has turned on the american people. one of the chief proponents that was fight, representative jim jordan of ohio, who promised to use his power to investigate the doj. in a letter sent to garland, he demanded more correspondence from the fbi about their decision to search mar-a-lago. joining us now, jerry connolly, who sits on the weaponization committee. congressman, thank you for your time. jordan, he has promised the house judiciary committee will get to the bottom of that. he has tried and failed to go after the doj in his role as chair of the committee. who do you think his plan is? how successful could he be?

>> certainly, jim jordan is himself an expert in the weaponization of tools like demonization, character assassination, innuendo. he is quite an expert at all of those tools. the problem is, he hasn't found them in the biden administration. that doesn't mean he won't continue to try to insinuate that they are there. he is just looking for them. >> "the washington post" follows up on the jordan story with this. maga republicans will expect the house to do everything within its power. it's not clear the house can do all that much. many non-maga republicans will want to. jordan's committee seems devoted to creating the impression he is striking great blows against the biden administration on behalf of maga nation and its persecuted masses and on behalf of trump himself. i understand the withholding of

funds as a potential tactic. what jordan is doing, is it anything more than theatrics to rile up his base? >> if you go back to the benghazi select committee, what was the purpose of that? it was to essentially manufacture an issue out of a tragedy to completely diminish the high public standing of the secretary of state, hillary clinton. that was kevin mccarthy's own admission. he admitted that explicitty is the purpose of the select committee. they have expertise and they have a record that if you repeat it often enough, and if you are volumable enough, you can do real damage. >> congressman, is there anything the democrats can do to undermine the mccarthy-esque

tactics? >> i think -- this is trench warfare. we have to be as tough as they are. we have to repeat the truth. the biggest ally we have is the truth. if we can present it in an effective way and repeat it as often as democrats believe that, appeal to a high plain of reason and saying it once is sufficient. it isn't. the other side knows very few boundaries when it comes to facts or the truth. we have to be ready for battle, to battle that kind of adversary in order to penetrate public consciousness, especially in a multiplicity of media environment in which we live now. >> congressman, i'm not sure if you were able to listen to the conversation before you came on air. we were talking about new reporting from nbc news about

how republicans, in private, are saying, yeah, this is serious and we are concerned about what it could mean for us politically. when you speak with your colleagues on capitol hill, are you hearing those same rumblings? >> i am. privately, even some of the republicans are taking some satisfaction that finally trump is getting his due. but they dare not say that publically. their base is so fired up about trump, so committed to trump that they put themselves at political jeopardy were they to in any way suggest that maybe these charges have merit, maybe the prosecution has a case and a fairly compelling case. >> it's not just jim jordan who is using these talking points. kevin mccarthy yesterday talking about hillary clinton, joe

biden, trying to create this. it strikes me this is their strategy, the same trump strategy we have seen, defend,d because they don't have a lot else to go on. what is the alternative for them other than simply calling him out? >> it would be -- the alternative would be to allow justice to play out and the facts to prevail and let trump take his chances in a court of law. that risk is too high for them. you are exactly right, deflect, distract, deceive are the tricks of the trade when you don't have a case to make. in fact, the case to be made is very formidable and very threatening to the leading contender for the republican nomination next year. >> deceive was, in fact, the verb i was looking for. congressman jerry connolly,

thank you for joining us. as many republicans continue to stand by the ex-president so, too, does fox news. with an egregious move suggesting they have not learned anything since the dominion settlement. we will get to that after a quick break. a quick break. hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. for too long, big oil companies have bought off politicians so they can get away with ripping us off. that's changing now. joe biden passed a plan to jumpstart clean energy production in america. it's creating good jobs that can't be outsourced and will lower energy costs. $1800. that's how much a new report says the inflation reduction act could save just the average american family on energy costs. [narrator] learn how the inflation reduction act will save you money.

ten years ago, i invented the ring video doorbell for moments like that. and ring security cameras for moments like this. [ring floodlight cam siren sounds] [bear growls] and ring alarm with professional monitoring. ten years of reinventing home security, and tens of millions of safer homes. protect your home, the way i do. learn more at ring.com hey all, so i just downloaded the experian app because i wanted to check my fico® score, but it does so much more. this thing shows you your fico® score, you can get your credit card recommendations, and it shows you ways to save money. do so much more than get your fico® score. download the experian app now. it's not too late to show summer's who's boss. do so much more than get your fico® score. and wayfair's got just what you need. they have all the top grills and gear. with smoking fast shipping. and wayfair deals so epic...

you'll feel like a big deal. yes! so get outdoorsy for way less at wayfair. ♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪ power e*trade's easy-to-use tools, like dynamic charting and risk-reward analysis help make trading feel effortless. and its customizable scans with social sentiment help you find and unlock opportunities in the market. e*trade from morgan stanley. with powerful, easy-to-use tools, power e*trade makes complex trading easier. react to fast-moving markets with dynamic charting and a futures ladder that lets you place, flatten, or reverse orders so you won't miss an opportunity. e*trade from morgan stanley

we established republican presidential candidates are trying to figure it out. so, too, are many elected republicans on capitol hill.

conservative media has made up its mind. around the same time fox news incorrectly identified trump as the president of the united states last night, the net work put these words on screen, referring to president biden. quote, want to be dictator speaks at the white house after having his political rival arrested. the statement this afternoon, the network responded with this. joining our conversation, renel anderson jones and a first amendment scholar. michael, carlos, rick, they are back. does want to be dictator cross the line from inappropriate to potentially libelous? >> what's tricky about defamation law as a tool for countering some of the statements that we see in this space is that defamation law is a really limited tool. it's a tool that is only

designed, really, to tackle falsehoods and disinformation that are pointed at particular individuals and their particular reputations. it's especially difficult for people of prominence in politics to be able to bring these sorts of suits, deliberately so, as a constitutional matter. what we see here is defamation as a particular tool that sometimes gets results in curbing the language that major media outlets use. often doesn't. often isn't the mechanism. it's often other mechanisms besides the law that changes incentives, including desires for audience and pushback from public. >> there is the statement from fox news that we may or may not learn more about, the fact it was taken down immediately, it was addressed. a lot of questions about that.

one would think that fox would be once burned, twice shy, about such outlandish claims, that people inside the building would be on high alert for putting statements like that on their air. >> yeah, i think a piece of what we are seeing is what happens in major media outlets in real time with live news. they are covering something live. presumably, there are people making decisions on the spot. internal cultural decisions at media outlets are intentioned here. one of the things we did learn from that dominion suit, from a lot of the discovery in that dominion suit, is that there was a lot of background conversation happening at fox news and presumably at other news outlets about how to cover these sorts of things, how to lean into the opinion side, and how to cast and characterize to a political base that's quite loyal to trump and that has threatened to leave

fox news for other outlets if those sort of viewer demands for coverage and for tone aren't met. we see the real time decision making, coupled with internal norms and patterns of coverage, coming together in this space in a way that is probably driving a lot of that. it is interesting to see the commentary and the aftermath from corporate higher ups that suggest that it was maybe a real time decision that didn't get vetted, as carefully as they would have liked it to, or it might have crossed a line in terms of the tone that they are seeking. i think we will see in the coming year, in the run-up to the election in particular, those sorts of tensions between seeking to meet audience preferences and seeking to sort of live within a space that is legally and politically and

civically appropriate, playing out in really interesting ways amongst a lot of outlets. >> we wouldn't be talking about it if it was a weird anomaly or outlier. you have been critical of the fact that fox news seems to very much like victor orban. you have talked about trump's infatuation with real life dictators. here is a clip from trump. >> these are top of the line people at the top of their game. president xi is a brilliant man. if you went all over hollywood to look for somebody to play the role of president xi, you couldn't find it. there's nobody like that. the look, the brain, the whole thing. we had a great relationship. how smart is kim jong-un? top of the line. people say this and that. really smart. putin, very smart. >> perhaps a different definition of top of the line.

>> he doesn't admire want to be dictators. he admires dictators. this strongman -- that's the thing he is doing. i empathize with these people. unfortunately, there's so much mirroring going on and projection. so much of what the right does and the maga does is mirroring the charges that liberals made against donald trump, calling him a dictator, calling him a strongman. they regurgitate that back at the left now. >> trench warfare the congressman was talking about. michael steele, it's not just idolization of dictators. trump, right wing news outlets look no further than january 6, 2021. this is a piece of what the select committee presented. take a look. >> we lost the line! get back!

>> officer down. get him up. get him up. >> they were peaceful people. these were great people. the crowd was unbelievable. i mention the word love. the love in the air. i have never seen anything like it. >> here is the thing. donald trump has since said he would like to pardon some of those rioters. we have this conversation about totalitarians, dictators. that seems like more of a tell than anything else. >> it is. we are living with the consequence of trump and his daddy issues. that's what this strongman thing is born out of it. it's so much related to how he views authority and how he has had to deal with authority in

other parts of his life. in that moment, on january 6, it's the culmination of a lot of that. yeah, he wants to be in the position where he forgives that behavior. why are you seeking pardons for things you said aren't bad? the rest of us have judged that bad. our court system, our judicial system, our justice system has. what does that say, that you believe that all of those institutions, including the defense lawyers who put the cases on behalf of the individuals, that that was insufficient, not meeting the standard, this belief you have about strong individuals and how strength should be exacted in a republican like ours. this is part of the consequence of the upcoming election.

folks have to consider, when a presidential candidate says, i am your retribution, even though he may not be talking to you directly, he is talking to a group of people who ascribe to that point of view, who see him that way, why would you want to give that individual power? that, for me, is fundamentally the question that every american has to ask themselves. it's not about inflation. it's not about the cost of gas. it's about whether you want to give power to a man who says, i'm the retribution. i'm the one who is going to pay back for everything that happened to me. that is what this election in my view is about. that is part of what the signaling that you see from trump in that fox interview and that we we have seen before, that's what it boils down to. >> a critical, fundamental question. no one is going anywhere. we will ask about the new development in the e. jean carroll case. back with that right after this. .

it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors. hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. if you have heart disease and are on a statin, lowering cholesterol can be hard. diets and exercise add to the struggle. today, it's possible to go from struggle to cholesterol success with leqvio. with a statin, leqvio is proven to lower bad cholesterol by over 50% and keep it low with two doses a year. common side effects were injection site reaction,

joint pain, urinary tract infection, diarrhea, chest cold, pain in legs or arms, and shortness of breath. ask your doctor about twice-yearly leqvio. lower. longer. leqvio. ♪ we see you. athletes. investment bankers. doctors. business leaders. we see your ambition. your desire to succeed. which is why we are investing in your future. ...empowering the next generation to reach the c-suite and elevating women's golf. because you may not always see yourself in the world, but we see you. [ tires screeching ] jordana, easy on the gas. i gotta wrap this commercial,

i think i'm late on my payment. it's okay, the general gives you a break. yeah, we let you pick your own due date. good to know, because this next scene might take a while. for a great low rate, go with the general. ♪ ♪ start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. (vo) if you've had thyroid eye disease for years and your eyes feel like they're getting kicked in the backside, the #1 pharmacist recommended it's not too late for another treatment option. to learn more visit treatted.com. that's treatt-e-d.com. ♪ [typing] you were made to act spontaneously. we were made to help plan accordingly. ♪ so, i got this app from experian. it's got everything i need to help my finances.

got my fico® score, raised it instantly, i even found new ways to save. all right here. free. and fast. see all you can do with the free experian app. download it now. it's not a good sign when one has to be clear about which avenue of legal peril we are talking about. to be clear when it comes to the pending defamation lawsuit brought by e. jean carroll, a new york judge approved an amendment to include an additional $10 million in damages associated with trump's appearance on a town hall broadcast on cnn last month. here is the clip that's in question.

>> you did not go to the trial and testify. do you wish you had testified? >> wouldn't have made a difference. this is rigged. my lawyer said, sir, you don't have to do it. i said, i think i should. it would be respectful. they said, sir, don't do it. this is a fake story. don't give it credibility. >> one thing you did do -- [ applause ] >> i swear. i have never done. i swear, i have no idea who the hell. she's a whack job. >> self-control. lucky for us, everyone is back. from a first amendment perspective, explain the merits of this latest amendment and whether or not trump stepped on his own foot there. >> yes. in many respected the merits of the case have been litigated in the case that happened last month. that's what the amendment complaint tees up for here. this order from the judge couples together a set of

defamatory statements that e. jean carroll alleges on the very front end of this journey, and on the very tail end. that is, this was a suit that was pending based on statements that trump made while he was president in 2019. we are now coupling with that in this same suit some statements -- the statements that were made last month on cnn at the town hall. sandwiched in between those two, however, was an additional set of defamatory statements that trump made on social media. those have already been litigated to conclusion. they were litigated before this same judge and with a jury trial. they resulted in $5 million worth of damages, both for sexual assault and the jury unanimously found there was clear and convincing evidence that trump told a knowing false

falseness. he defamed her by saying it was a hoax, it was a lie, she made up these stories. in this new proceeding that's now pending involving the 2019 statements and the new statements that trump made just 24 hours or so after the jury had found the statements to be false and defamatory, he went back on cnn and reiterated them. now the judge is going to be allowing them to move forward but coupling those together, seeking $10 million in damages, and additionally, i think importantly for the first amendment component of it, seeking punitive daniels. that is, they want not just for him to have to pay for the harm that he has done to the reputation, but also to deter him. the argument that e. jean carroll and her lawyers are making is that trump hasn't learned any lesson from the jury verdict that came down last month. he has shown there's a pattern of him repeating these same

false and defamatory statements. they have argued and the judge appears to have agreed that the cases here are all virtually identical on the key facts, that is, they are substantially materially identical on the things that have been litigated. because we have already concluded in this same court, between these same parties, that these sorts of statements are false and that these sorts of statements are defamatory, e. jean carroll says, all that's left to do here is to confirm that when trump said these things as president, he was speaking for himself and not speaking as president. he was not engaged in the scope of his employment. then, move straight to the damages. all of the rest of it is over and done with as a matter of preclusion. >> there is what it means for e.

jean carroll and other survivors and what it means politically. is this going to register with republican voters? >> it is going to always register with the types of voters who decide elections. we have seen in three consecutive elections, 2018, 2020 and in 2022, swing voters and swing states and districts all over the country reject donald trump, his indecency, his lies, his chaos. yet, a lot of republicans still want to follow that blueprint. we will see if as this gop presidential primary evolves, candidates will actually want to distinguish themselves from donald trump and will want to take the party in a different direction, which, of party in direction which of course would lead to better general election outcomes but apparently it's going to take courage, and thus far we haven't seen very much from the gop primary field. >> carlos, let me ask you about

news that developed while we were on air. "the new york times" reporting the miami mayor francis suarez filed to run in the republican primary. your thoughts on his candidacy? >> this could be a very interesting candidacy for republicans. full disclosure i grew up in miami, know mayor suarez as well. he's a close personal friend, but he's also the kind of politician who has won with bipartisan coalitions. he's one of the few big city republican mayors in the country. he led the u.s. conference of mayors. he was elected by fellow mayors to lead the coalition of mayors of the united states. this is someone who could distinguish himself. we'll see what his message is when he actually announces later this week. but this is certainly the type of candidate that would really set a new direction for the party. >> a million questions and about

a minute left, of course. that is how it goes. we're on a multilane highway where there's one lane full of all these candidates that are trying to run in the seat of trump. it would seem to me that unless someone like mayor suarez is willing to go after them the way we've seen christie and hutchinson do, he's in the same lane that's already really backed up. >> amen. that's exactly right. point one. point two, okay, great, the more the merrier? no, not really. the reality of it is i appreciate the mayor. i particularly like my buddy carlos, i have admiration for his leadership, and i think in any other political universe this guy would be like someone you go, yeah, let's get on board here. but that's not where we are. so let's deal with where we are. what has to happen is a come to jesus conversation with all of these folks. i appreciate the mayors getting in today, but you need to have

the meeting tomorrow where everybody sit down and go, okay, who we getting behind? all of us trying to vie for that stage on august 23rd, that is the worst recipe possible. you got to narrow this thing down. you got to identify one, no more than two in which you go and triangulate trump. i would prefer a mano a mano race, but i don't see that happening. we're creating a space in which trump sits there with 35%, 40% of the base vote and wait for everyone else to hit their 10%, 12%, and he wins. >> to be a fly on the wall of that conversation. thank you all so much for spending this hour with us. quick break for us. we'll be right back. be right ba. and now, she has myplan. the first unlimited plan that lets her choose exactly what goes in it.

now, she gets to pick only the perks she wants, and saves on every one. and with an incredible new iphone on us, no wonder sadie is celebrating. introducing myplan get exactly what you want. only pay for what you need. act now and get iphone 14 pro max on us when you switch. it's your verizon. when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete,

one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors. hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals

okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. my mental health was much better, but i struggled with uncontrollable movements called td, tardive dyskinesia. td can be caused by some mental health meds. and it's unlikely to improve without treatment. i felt like my movements were in the spotlight. ingrezza is a prescription medicine to treat adults with td movements. ingrezza is different. it's the simple, once-daily treatment proven to reduce td that's #1 prescribed. people taking ingrezza can stay on their current dose of most mental health meds. ingrezza 80 mg is proven to reduce td movements in 7 out of 10 people. don't take ingrezza if you're allergic to any of its ingredients. ingrezza may cause serious side effects, including sleepiness. don't drive, operate heavy machinery, or do other dangerous activities until you know how ingrezza affects you. other serious side effects include potential heart rhythm problems and abnormal movements. it's nice people focus more on me. ask your doctor about #1 prescribed, once-daily ingrezza. learn how you could pay as little as zero dollars

at ingrezza.com ♪ ingrezza ♪ ♪♪ allergies don't have to be scary. (screaming) defeat allergy headaches fast with new flonase headache and allergy relief! two pills relieve allergy headache pain? and the congestion that causes it! flonase headache and allergy relief. psst! psst! all good! an effort by house republicans to censure adam schiff has failed. the resolution sought to censure schiff and fine him $16 million. $16 million, for comments he made alleging that the 2016 trump campaign colluded with russia. democrats fended off that resolution with their own motion to table, effectively killed off the censure. during an interview yesterday he said the censure resolution against him was nothing but an effort by the gop to distract

from donald trump's legal woes. another break for us. we'll be right back. r us we'll be right back. so you can get back to your monster to-do list. really? get a quote at progressivecommercial.com. - booked our trip to vegas! really? - in this economy? what, are we rich?! ♪ ♪ are we rich? we could get a personal chef! i heard about this guy on the news that, that serves a very rare species of fish. highly illegal. he's wanted by interpol. we could have his scary fish whenever we want! - we're not rich... i used kayak to compare hundreds of travel sites to get a great deal on our flight, car, and hotel. - oh. - kayak. search one and done. it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors. hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. for too long,

big pharmaceutical companies have bought off politicians so they can get away with ripping us off. that's changing now. joe biden just capped the price of insulin for seniors at $35 a month. gave medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices. and prices are already starting to go down. the out-of-pocket cost is dropping for 27 drugs. [narrator] learn how the inflation reduction act will save you money. imagine you're doing something you love. rsv could cut it short. ♪ rsv is a contagious virus that usually causes mild symptoms but can cause more severe infections that may lead to hospitalizations... ...in adults 60 and older... ...and adults with certain underlying conditions, like copd, asthma, or congestive heart failure. talk to your doctor and visit cutshortrsv.com.

jackie: community schools are so important to us. this is truly what students need. cecily: no two community schools are alike because it goes by what is happening in the community. rafael: we want this to be a one-stop shop for our families that puts parents and students first. kenny: the health and wellness center is a part of our holistic approach. terry: medical, dental, vision, and mental health services. we're addressing the students' everyday needs. kenny: what we do allows them to be the best version of themselves. narrator: california's community schools: reimagining public education.