money, it's about justice, it's about accountability, it's about the healing, it's about closure. and for most victims and i know the victims in this case because i know them first-hand, it is about raising awareness about the effects and prevalence of sexual assault so that they can hopefully prevent it in the future. >> thank you very much, and i have a statement from cosby's spokesman andrew wyatt saying he's accusing the women of being to media attention and greed and he said we'll not allow these women to parade various accounts against mr. cosby anymore without vetting them in the court of public opinion and inside of the courtroom. that is going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now.

hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. there's brand new reporting that drives home the fact that donald trump is his own worst enemy when it comes to his many, many, many legal problems and when it comes to the indictment and the classified documents investigation turning him from a disgraced twice impeached once indicted ex-president. in that case he has no one to blame but himself. "the washington post" reports late last year team trump hit a fork in a road, a point in which trump could have chosen an option that very well may have avoided an indictment in the documents case. from that new reporting, quote, one of trump's new attorneys proposed an idea in the fall of 2022. the former president's team could try to arrange a settlement with the justice department. the attorney, chris kise, wanted to quietly approach justice to see if he could negotiate a settlement that could preclude charges hoping the department would want an exit ramp to avoid

prosecuting a former president. kise would hopefully take the temperature down he told others by promising a professional approach and the return of all documents. but trump was not interested. after listening to other lawyers who urged a pure pugilistic approach, so kise never approached the prosecutors. that's according to three people briefed on the matter. instead trump listened to the advice of conservative activist tom finten, the very same guy before election day pushed for trump to falsely declare victory and called for the counting of ballots to stop. once again from that new post reporting, quote, trump time and time again rejected the advice of lawyers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of tom finten, the head of the conservative group judicial watch and told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the justice department. trump would often cite fiton to

others. trump's refusal to cooperate, of course, sent him barrelling towards the indictment. now he faces 37 criminal counts in a case built largely on the backs of evidence provided by trump's own aides and attorney. he's surrounded now by potential witnesses which combined with trump's long history of interfering in criminal probes raises the prospect of witness tampering. from "the new york times" reporting, quote, trump is in the position of waging a presidential campaign and preparing a defense at the same time. complicating matters he's been forbidden from discussing the latter with a number of people who could presumably help him with the former. some of whom are no doubt wondering who is saying what to the government as they go about their jobs. some of the lawyers trump hired to defend him in the case have also wound up being questioned by the government and may appear as witnesses as well. a legal nightmare of trump's own making in the form of a criminal case built almost entirely by trump's own inner circle is

where we begin today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. "the new york times" doj reporter glenn thrush is here, "the washington post" congressional investigations reporter jackie alemany is also here. both bylined on that reporting i just read from. andrew wiseman is back with us, a former justice department prosecutor and former senior member robert mueller special counsel investigation. glen and jackie, thank you so much for joining us. your coverage of the last 72 hours has been nothing short of extraordinary. glen, let me start with you and some of "the times" reporting. isn't this always the case for trump? he was trying to run the country while all of his senior advisers were going in and out of the mueller team's investigative offices and headquarters. now he's trying to run for president a third time, and most of the people that surround him are either codefendants or witnesses against him. >> well, what was really interesting is at the arraignment i was in the courtroom in miami on tuesday,

and the one thing that both the defense and prosecution could agree on is that they did not want as a precondition of his bond, of his being released from the court, to have any restrictions on who he could really communicate with. it was this sort of fill in judge, judge jonathan goodman who really got kind of irked at the lack of restrictions on trump, particularly given these accusations of potential witness tampering and insisted really over the objection of jack smith's -- one of jack smith's top lieutenants to impose restrictions on any of the witnesses including walt nauta to discuss the case with trump unless it was through counsel. it was really extraordinary because jack smikt and his team knowing full well that donald trump is not one known for respecting boundaries really understood how dangerous this could be. they want to prosecute trump for

what has happened. they don't necessarily want to have this complicated by having -- revisiting the conditions of donald trump being released from custody. >> it's such an interesting conundrum for a normal person. we know he's totally -- he's not -- nothing gives him pause. i mean what we call witness tampering he calls just doing business. i mean how do his lawyers bake in sort of how he rolls with the defense they're going to try to mount, glenn? >> well, i think there's sort of a threshold question here. who are those lawyers going to be? again, one of the most consequential moments of that arraignment was when christopher kise and tom blanche, the two people representing him in court, said they intended to be permanent counsel. that kind of came as news to all of us because in the prior 48 hours we've been hearing all these rumors about trump appealing to other florida based

lawyers who might be his counsel, and i don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that there will be new lawyers introduced. but, yeah, this is an incredibly difficult -- an incredibly difficult job for any attorney representing him, and it's really compounded by the fact that boris epstein who is sort of playing this shadowy role as trump's legal counsel, political consigliere and public relations person is someone who seems to be having significant conflicts with the previous legal team. i mean james trusty quit, rowely quit. no one seems to be able to get along with boris. i think the question is and we're talking about significant jail time, are they still going

to have to deal with the complicated factor of epstein talking to the boss and undercutting them ever step of the way? >> it's interesting boris has the role rudy played sort of around the mueller probes and impeachment trials. you have some amazing reporting, though, on this dynamic. i mean chris kise has already been dissed in terms of the legal counsel he provided, counsel that may have avoided indictment all together in favor of one of trump's known pen pals that gave him advice on january 6th should he be charged there. they also have a tie to putting criminal exposure for donald trump into motion. >> yeah, nicolle, i have to give my colleague josh dossy a major shout out. he took the lead on this piece and managed to byline three different pieces yesterday on this mar-a-lago documents case alone. but it is -- there is a consistent thread here, which is when trump listens to advice from the non-lawyers and the

political animals in the room, people like tom finton and boris epstein. tom who's head of judicial watch and not a lawyer, and epstein who is a lawyer but has never actually tried a case, if you ask the other lawyers on trump's legal team and whom they all have vehemently disagreed with when it comes to boris' legal strategy. he has ended up in these predicaments, and now he's facing indictments on two different cases and these most recent federal charges. but in our story christopher kise who was brought in to become this -- to professionalize the operation, he was quickly side lined after this approach that he presented of trying to go to the doj with a more cooperative stance and resolving the situation was rejected by trump. and that shouldn't really come as a surprise to those who have

covered him for the last eight years. this is someone who has consistently doubled down in his -- and continued to engage in illegal or potentially illegal activity, shooing lots of legal voices around him at all times really no matter the topic he's faced in when he's in the white house or now, post-presidency. but it does show he potentially missed the boat. and if you're looking at the charges more broadly speaking there is a very stark delineation of the former president facing charges on all of the items that he refused to get back to the national archives, of the ones he did give back and did ultimately initially comply with from his first lawyer all the way back last february of 2022, he was

not charged with anything. >> well, it's such an important point. mary mccord is also along with us. she's a former top official in the justice department's national security division. mary, it's an important sort of small understated point in the article, but it drives home the fact that if trump should read it, he might see that the advice he got from lawyers kept him from being charged on the documents that he followed their advice about, the things that he gave back. that's not what doj came for. they didn't come for things that were mishandled which a potential crime, initially not given back to nara which could have been a potential crime. this isn't accurate from a legal standpoint but they seemed to have taken all's well that ends well and the things he's charged for are things we still don't know for sure are back in the possession of the federal

government. what do you make of "the times" and "the post" pretty amazing story that's happening over and over again. trump's lawyer roulette happens every time trump's under scrutiny, and here we go again. >> yes, and i think the approach we've now read about that chris kise wanted to take, that's the approach i would have expected really of any competent attorney who was trying to do the best for his client. he just had a client who just doesn't does not want to listen to his attorney's advice when it's not consistent with whatever he personally feels is the right thing to do. and i think that's, you know, really coming back to harm him in this instance. and it's interesting because mr. trump keeps talking about this is just about the presidential records act, and under the presidential records act i had the authority to take all of these records. i have the authority to decide what's mine, what's personal, and what's not. and there's a couple of problem. one problem with that is he's just legally wrong.

the presidential records act explicitly by statute made clear that any documents or information that refer to official business of the president are not the president's personal records. they're not the former president's personal records. they are the records of the government. and it's the archives who will decide is there anything in those boxes that is purely personal and we'll send it back. so he relies on this, but the interesting thing and to point you just raised, nicolle, was even violations of, you know, federal records like taking federal records that aren't classified can violate another provision of law. but the government wasn't interested in that. the government got involved in this to begin with because the national archives said there's a whole bunch of stuff missing that is presidential records that we need for history, we need for the archives. and it's only once they realized there was classified information in those boxes that they involved the department of justice. and this could have all ended very shortly thereafter if there

had been cooperation, and we said this over and over again. you, me, andrew who's on i know with you that this didn't have to go down this way. and i really in some strange way almost pity anybody who takes a chance to be mr. trump's lawyer because it tends to not end well, and i don't know why anybody would do it anymore, and mr. president is right in there again. >> listen, i'm not a psychologist but it makes you wonder if he didn't want this epic brawl with joe biden's administration and merrick garland's justice department. we'll put a pin on that. there is some news today on judge aileen cannon. explain to us what she did and what you read into it. >> sure. one quick point which is what kise was trying to do is something that if he had succeeded and if there was a plea, there is ample authority

within the department of justice for somebody getting no jam time. general petraeus is an example. so what he was doing was his job, and there actually was this sort of off-ramp. once he didn't take the off-ramp of turning in the documents the defense was trying to say, look, i can avoid jail for you. and that was a responsible thing to do. so donald trump again has made his own bed. so aileen cannon has issued an order today on the 15th, and what it says -- i'm first going to tell you what it says and tell you a little bit about what's potentially problematic with it. it's issued today, and it says by tomorrow, one day, on the 16th all counsel of record of which there's two right now -- >> there's mr. kise who we're talking about. >> and mr. blanche, right. all counsel of record and any anticipated counsel of record need to contact the department of justice litigation security

to deal with sort of classification. that sort of makes a lot of sense because, you know, giving them just one day for current counsel makes a lot of sense because how long does it take to pick up a phone? >> and it just means doing sort of quick background check. >> it basically says like i'm going to need a background check, and that basically gets the department of justice the ball rolling because for them to see and have access to classified information in a skiff, in a very controlled environment, they need to go through at least a temporary clearance process and you want to get that start. the part that doesn't make a lot of sense to me is anticipated counsel because that would be an anticipated counsel between now and tomorrow because there's an order that she issued that says, anticipated counsel has to do this by tomorrow. so presumably -- it's sort of badly worded, but that means any future counsel between now and tomorrow has to call tomorrow. so i'm not exactly sure how that

will work unless we now know the full panel of lawyers or someone appointed by donald trump and files a notice before tomorrow. so that's step one. the other thing she said is by the 20th of june you have to file a notice of compliance that -- and that's where it's unclear what is the notice of compliance? is it that you've called on the 16th, or is it that clearance has been given to current counsel and any anticipated counsel? and as mary knows it's likely that current counsel will probably be cleared just based on their reputation. i don't know anything in their background that would cause a problem, although obviously something that's doj would do, but anticipated counsel what the judge minds is that she's ordering that there be clearance for any anticipated counsel. that's a problem depending on who it is. >> i guess he could say rudy and boris are going to -- >> if it's boris, i think

there's reporting the reason boris is not actually taking certain roles is because he did not get clearance. so, i mean, i can imagine a number of people in the trump camp who will not get clearance. so it's a little bit unclear. i take it as a positive sign that this order is suggesting rapidity and she's moving the case along. it also means she's not recusing herself. you don't issue this kind of order, so there's a lot to read into this, but also i'm not sure it's the right word, but it's a little sloppy because i know defense lawyers and the government are going to read this and say what does it mean in terms of just counsel, what does it mean in terms of the time line, and what's the notice of compliance mean? so there's a lot that any sort of thoughtful litigator is going to be thinking we need more guidance from you. >> glenn, do you have any visibility into how the legal team is functioning?

i mean jackie and josh's reporting makes clear that it is still completely porous, open to the rantings, and, you know, the legacy of tom finton's legal jihads is decades and decades long, it actually predates the clinton years. he's not a criminal defense attorney representing donald trump, yet he is governing the things he will and will not do to avoid jail time at the end of the day. do you have any sense if that's been tightened up by the new stewards of trump's criminal defense effort? >> no, no. you know -- >> thank you for your brevity and candor. >> no. donald trump -- i disagree with the assertion that donald trump has not had consistent legal representation. he's had one lawyer all along, and that lawyer, unfortunately, potentially is roy cohen cannot

be there physically. and roy chon was about pursuing a scorched-earth policy outside the courtroom. you just burn everybody down, and i think that paradigm is very much what's in trump's mind. it's the core of his political philosophy and approach, right? and any lawyer who sort of acts as mary said in a conventional responsible way typically is not going to evoke his admiration. and so i think -- you know, i think you have a situation in which you have a client who is essentially acting ultimately as his own counsel, and that counsel does not tend to operate from within legal parameters but political ones. >> and mary, that was fine until trump was squarely in a legal predicament. that actually worked out from him in hindsight with mueller who was bound by policy that

said you can't charge a sitting president. it has been fine for him so far. he hasn't been charged criminally by the federal government. but now if you're going to burn everything down, it's going to include some things we're going to talk about in the broadcast. he wants to fundamentally change justice in the united states of america to make it a political weapon that's at the disposal of a president which he actually did with the durham probe. if we're listening to what he's saying is what does he envision? because he actually did this already. they perverted justice. they brought case and they failed because they hadn't yet corrupted the judiciary. that is part of the plan, and desantis shares these views. i mean, what do you think is really being said by what glenn just articulated, that trump is acting in his own legal defense and it's not really a legal defense at all. it's a political one. >> well, i think -- i think that's exactly what it is. it's a political one.

and, you know, right now based on what i've seen in terms of the fund-raising he's doing off of these criminal charges shows that, you know, he's definitely making some political hay with this, extraordinary amounts of money that he's bringing in. and this must be so painful to my former colleagues at the department of justice to see that an effort to actually use rule of law, bring a righteous prosecution, give every bit of fairness to mr. trump who desperately did not want to be charged in the district of columbia and now is not only in what he perceives to be a much friendlier jurisdiction to him but also has an unbelievably friendly judge to him. the government has i think in many ways bent over backwards to have the perception of fairness and not trying to take any advantage that might legally be entitled to. there were good arguments for

the district of the venue in columbia and they're portraying this as a legal persecution and fund-raising off of it. we talked a lot about his strategy in the past has always been to delay, delay, delay. and i wonder if that's not just because at least in part if he delays this long enough not only that he wants to delay so he doesn't have to worry about being convicted before the election, but also i wonder if he doesn't think this doesn't give him massive fund-raising opportunities for the next year and a half until the election. and so i think he's just -- to him this is just another type of politics. he's never taken any litigation seriously. it's all coming crashing down on him this year. but i don't think mentally he has pivoted off of turning everything into politics and actually realizing he is sitting there as the defendant in two

criminal cases. he's been -- you know, he's been found to be a sexual abuser in a civil case. he's facing other civil cases. it's all coming down on him now. >> you all have been adored for my favorite topic and that is the asymmetry, and i actually want to turn this around to what the rest of us do. trump's going to trump. but i want to push the story that mary just opened about doj bending over backwards to create a perception of fairness and ask all of you if that's really the right way to go. we to sneak in a quick break. when we come back, much more on that question. we're also going to share a theory from our friend andrew wiseman on a possible jack smith back up pocket plan. plus, despite calls for war for retribution, how that violent rhetoric ahead of the arrest of the ex-president, what happened on the streets so far has been much muted thankfully when many were preparing for worst.

could the many prosecution of the january 6th protesters have an impact or are we looking for something harder to identify? and later in the program trump promising and he's re-elected he will send a wrecking ball as we've been discussing to the rule of law. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. after a quick break. don't go anywhere. more shopping? you should watch your spending honey. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. check it out, you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, i'll look into that.

let me put a reminder on my phone. save $700 dollars. pick up dad from airport? ohhhhhh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ money stresses me out. so, i got this experian app, and now, i'm checking my fico® score. i got a new credit card, and i'm even finding ways to save. finally getting smart about money feels really good. see all you can do with the free experian app. download it now. 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.

hi, i'm katie. i live in flagstaff, arizona. i'm an older student. i'm getting my doctorate in clinical psychology. i do a lot of hiking and kayaking. i needed something to help me gain clarity.

so i was in the pharmacy and i saw a display of prevagen and i asked the pharmacist about it. i started taking prevagen and i noticed that i had more cognitive clarity. memory is better. it's been about two years now and it's working for me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. we are back. glenn, mary, and andrew are back with us. i have a two-part question for you. i want to pick up on the point mary is making about doj bending over backward to create the perception of fairness. we'll know when that isn't the

right legal strategy to pursue. and my question is about your provocative and intriguing writing in the atlantic about jack smith's backup plan. >> so i think that the road to hell is paved would good intentions is appropriate here. i think if you go down the road of trying to accommodate donald trump in a way that is inconsistent with what you do with anyone else without there being a reason, he's protected by secret service. that's fine to take that into account because it's different. you're not -- you really do have to treat it -- mary made this point to me which is, and glenn made the point, a similar point at the beginning of the show if you take this as an example, a small example but it's still an example of the actual first arraignment where the magistrate was not setting standard

conditions, and the magistrate was like what's going on? a standard condition is you cannot talk to witnesses. that's where the government just has to bite the bullet. >> for a simple understandable witness. you cannot tamper with a witness or meddle in an ongoing legal producing for anyone in law and order understands. >> that is a really appropriate accommodation in this case because the indictment itself charges that he tried to solicit obstruction of justice from his own counsel and from mr. nauta. and so it's not like there's some factual reason to say it's inappropriate here. and i just think that's where you just have to live and die by the norms, exactly. and it doesn't stop donald trump from saying i'm being vilified and i'm being victimized. and he's going to say that no matter what, so better to just -- yes, now the doj can say, wait a second, we've treated you more favorably.

that's not a great look either. how about treat him like everyone else? bedminster, fascinating because -- i write this with ryan goodman when people ask how did i have time, i said ryan goodman has insomnia, so it's really, really useful. as jackie said about her coauthor, i have a really great coauthor. so there's five paragraphs in the current indictment about bedminster, and they are the most serious allegations because it is twice donald trump is alleged to have disseminated information that is highly classified. >> he's not charged with it. why do you think that is in. >> exactly. it is described -- >> correct. >> but it is not individually charged. it's sort of hard to know why wasn't it charged when it's the most serious because it's not the risk of dissemination, it's actual dissemination. if you're in the intelligence

community, that's what you're worried about. the activity took place in bedminster, so where's this case brought? in florida. there's a venue issue. there's an argument but it's not like a lock to bring it in florida. and so what ryan and i wrote about was is that a sort of off-ramp where jack smith knowing that he's going to bring this case in florida, knowing that there was a substantial likelihood given the denominator that he would have been able to do this as -- because you can still charge it not as an alternative but in an addition. so i think it's worth people seeing do we see activity related to this in a new jersey grand jury because that is a potential additional way of charging the president if jack smith thinks that the case they brought is being slow walked. >> glenn, one of the -- he says

a lot of things that aren't all interesting and riveting, but one of the more interesting and riveting things he said on television is he was, quote, preparing for the bedminster surge. and i remember hearing it and i whipped my head around and i was like, what? there was never a bedminster surge we know of. what is your sense of what may have gone on behind the scenes either from trump's legal team and we know it because he talked about it on the tv, so we know it was at least at his level or from doj. >> the first thing i want to circle back to what you said before in term of the bending over backwards i would argue and i think some of the doj people, at least some of the former doj folks have argued this. it's not necessarily accommodating trump. it's covering their own flank. so to some extent what they're attempting to do is create an environment in which they can't beacusised of anything --

>> let me jump in. by whom, glenn? they could have said, fine, you keep it, we'll let the world see our state secrets, you keep it. we'll let our sources and methods be slaughtered and murdered all over the world and no allies give us intelligence again and he still attacked them. covering that flank from whom, the republicans in congress who know better, mitch mcconnell? they're not out defending doj? >> no, no, no, i think just in general -- and again i'm not arguing on their behalf but merrick garland in particular -- >> i heard that too. i just wonder from whom. everyone on earth won, democrats and people that understand truth from lies, they get it, right? they got it. and everyone on earth two, again if doj had declassified state secrets and nuclear codes, trump would be saying the same thing about doj. i hear it, too, and i just wonder from whom are they protecting themselves? >> i think that's a

reasonable -- a reasonable point, but i think their view on this in my sense is that they see the department as being more or less perpetually under attack. this last week has really ratcheted it up, i mean desantis' comments and trump piggybacking on that. it didn't take more than that to make them acutely conscious to the dangers of the department. one thing i'll say about smith is he has moved expeditiously. and within the covers of that 49-page indictment that is not patty cake stuff. and there were lots of subtle maneuvers he made. i recall when the aft on the search warrant from mar-a-lago was released, we reported there was an internal debate within the department of justice whether or not to release any of the photographs. well, there were six pictures. and the pictures in the indictment last week really told a story, pictures of the boxes piled up in the bathroom. so i think the way -- not so

much to say whether or not we agree with this approach, but it seems to me what smith is attempting to do is to sort of avoid petty -- what he would see as petty humiliations or even inconveniences to trump while subtly making the case in the public domain pretty aggressively in the filings. that seems it be the two-step that they're attempting to do. whether or not that's a good idea i think time will tell. >> and mary, what doia think about the possibility of a prospect for anymore activity, investigative or legal, at or around bedminster? >> well, you know, i certainly think it's possible. i guess i don't know that i think it's all that likely. i mean resources for one thing are already going to be at issue. i personally hope that they're moving full speed ahead on the january 6th case, which i think, you know, would be a different in kind from another documents case and very, very important for democracy to see

accountability for january 6th if there's evidence to establish accountability for not only mr. trump but others in his orbit. we have 1,000 people who are now paying the price for carrying out the wishes of the former president, and it would be, i think, just justice requires that those higher up who have so far avoided the accountability, i think justice requires that they also face the music. all of that said, if most of the work is already done in this investigation of whether any documents were actually disseminated at bedminster it maybe would not be such a heavy lift to bring another case. the real question is like to me is all the evidence there? in other words, does the department of justice actually have the document that in one of the two instances in the indictment is alleged to have been sort of shown, waved around, portioned, sort of paraphrased or read from to these two people working on an auto biography from mark

meadows. the president referred to it, referred to the document, talked a little bit about what was in it and was very clear it had not been declassified because he says to his aide we should move on because i want to show it to you. whether the doj has that, they don't say that in the indictment. and similarly with the document referred to in another paragraph or two of the indictment where it's alleged mr. trump showed another piece of classified information involving maps the leader of his pack, political action committee, it's unclear whether doj has that document. and those would be things that would need to have happened, antic dotes from the auto biographers or leader of the pack are less proof to bring a case like that. but they might have it, we just don't know right now. >> glenn, thanks to you and thanks to all your reporting from miami. and looks like you're no longer

in miami, but all the reporting from you and your colleagues all week has been really important. our thanks to jackie. she had to runoff to do more reporting so we'll keep an eye on her twitter feed and "the washington post" page to see if anything breaks in the next hour and a half. there's much more to come. we're monitoring the threat of violence in the wake of trump's second indictment. olence in the second indictment. 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. 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.

♪ 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! ♪

although the disgraced twice impeached and twice indicted ex-president donald trump and his allies have been using violent rhetoric in response to the criminal charges he now faces before, during, and after they came down, on tuesday when he actually arrived at court in miami there was no violence in the streets of miami or anywhere else. it was not another january 6th. to be sure there were hundreds of protesters gathered outside the courthouse, but the crowds were much smaller than anticipated or feared, and there were no outbreaks of violence there. "the new york times" reports this, quote, twice in recent months allies of former president trump have used violent language to criticize the criminal charges against him, calling for vengeance and encouraging trump supporters to respond to the indictments as though they were acts of war. quote, both times in both cities the crowds that actually showed up for trump were relatively tame and fairly small. rachel cline feld at the

carnying endowment for international peace pointed to several reasons for that. the prosecution of january 6th protesters which now amount to more than 1,000 criminal cases have had a real deterrent effect on those who might have once considered violence. joining our conversation former chief of staff at the department of homeland security, author of the forthcoming book "blowback." someone who's been warning on this program for months and months and months about political violence. miles taylor is back, andrew is also here. miles, this feels like a nuanced story. one, you know, nothing less than relief and real i think happiness, right, that nothing bad happened in miami on tuesday. and what we saw for speaker pelosi's husband waiting in his home and what we saw in new mexico with the chance to interview the prosecutor there is political violence completely tethered to the grievances articulated by trump and his political allies.

>> yeah, i mean, nicolle, if you look at the data, it says don't count on peace and don't count on civility because of all the trend lines we're seeing towards political intimidation and violence in the country right now. the way i would describe this moment is that donald trump has lit the fuse but the bomb hasn't gone off yet, and i want to take you back into time because we've seen this show before. now, what so-called moderate republicans told us in lead-up to 2020 that if donald trump lost he would concede, and he would transfer power peacefully. i warned a year before that as you remember that i said donald trump would not concede if he lost, and it would not be peaceful. it would be violent. now, i was right. and it's not because i'minose trudoms. it's because i know the man and the extremism movement he's fomented and we're seeing that show on rerun. we've had moderate republicans tell us trump probably won't run

again. if he does, he won't lead the pack. no, they were wrong. he is running for president again. despite the indictments, he is leading the pack. the more important question from a public safety standpoint is what will he do if he loses? what will he do if he loses these court cases or his next bid for the presidency? that's why we haven't seen violence yet because trump and his supporters still think he's in the fight, still thinks he has a chance to win this election. if he loses in 2020 donald trump will be his last zejort being his violent supporters. if i were still in law enforcement and alt the department of homeland security, i would be saying to our people prepare for another january 6th level event because at some point this man is going to lose in some way, shape, or form and we're going to need to be ready to exhort his supporters for violence. >> the story he's telling his supporters is one of imminent

retribution and it's coming. and i guess what miles is pointing to is watch this space should it come to pass. >> there may be supporters who are waiting for the real call, but i will indicate a couple of other things. there was more time between the election of 2030 and january 6th of 2021, a lot more time for there to be recruitment to the cause. and even if we fast forward from november 3rd to the time where trump said be there, be wild, there were still several weeks to get organized. and we know that some of that organizing was happening even before the be wild comment and that got doubled down on after that. so you had groups like proud boys and oath keepers and many others, conspiracy theorists who are loalistically making plans to come and were talking about violence and preparing for it and talking about bringing weapons. not just talking about it, they

did bring weapons. we've now had convictions in sedition conspiracy cases against those organizations. so there was far less time here to get organized, and i do think -- i agree with rachel kleinfeld, and you red a segment of her quote in her reporting and do think these prosecutions have had a deterrent effect on trump supporters because they know their the ones who will end up getting arrested and end up getting prosecuted if they engage in acts of violence. there's a road map for that they've already seen. i would say also that in the extremists there are people who are really turning against trump. now, that doesn't mean they won't support him in a certain way because they're very anti-biden and anti-what they refer to as the deep state, but they do see trump as a loser. i mean he was -- you know, had a role to play in the losses in 2022. and so i think it's just a more fragmented population right now,

and that's potentially why we didn't see big events in manhattan and miami. but what worries me the most -- and i am worried about another future time when donald trump loses and doesn't concede, i am. but what worries me more in the meantime is the one-off lone actors, right, who are inspired by the rhetoric, by the movements, by other elected officials. we heard andy biggs and kari lake and others make the thinnest veiled call to violence in the last several days. and these are things that inspire people as you indicated earlier the person who attacked paul pelosi, the person who tried to attack a cincinnati fbi office after a search warrant, you know, these are the things much harder for our law enforcement agencies to prepare for than a big event at the capitol or the courthouse or some central location like that.

>> on lone wolves and on being a loser i have a million questions for you. i'll have to sneak in a quick break first. we'll come back to that on the other side. don't go anywhere. other side don't go anywhere. full potential. these are the greats: people living with, thriving with — not held back by — disease. they motivate us to fight diabetes and obesity, rare diseases and cardiovascular conditions, for generations to come. so, everyone can meet their moment. because your disease doesn't define you. so, what will? novo nordisk. driving change. ♪ ♪ - why are these so bad? - if i would've used kayak to book our car, we could have saved on our trip instead of during our trip. ughh - kayak. search one and done. what are folks 60 and older up to these days? getting inspired! volunteering! playing pickleba...!

[♪♪] 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. we got the house! you did! pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team.

- you like that bone? i got a great price on it. - did you see my tail when that chewy box showed up? - oh, i saw it. - my tail goes bonkers for treats at great prices. sorry about the vase. - [announcer] save more on what they love with everyday great prices at chewy. ♪ tourists tourists that turn into scientists. tourists taking photos that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪ he hasn't won a damn thing since 2016. three-time loser. 2018 we lost the house. 2020 we lost the white house. we lost the united states senate a couple weeks later in 2021. in 2022, we lost two more governorships, another senate

seat and barely took the house of representatives when joe biden had the most incompetent first two years i have seen in my life. loser, loser, loser. >> as a political message, it's intriguing. to get all fired up and carry out acts of violence for donald trump, will it work? >> i hope so. i wouldn't put my money on it. that's not what security fors are going to be doing. there's a reason when jack smith showed up, protection. there's a reason the judge in new york has protection. you have a youth in new york who issued a protective order. why? they are worried about what the former president of the united states would do with respect to witnesses and jurors. you have a federal judge who issued a protective order about

what the former president of the free world would do with respect to witnesses. there's a reason to that. it's not because they think there's no prospect of violence. listening to that clip, i'm really looking forward to chris christie during -- if donald trump shows up for a debate, he is going to take this indctment and read it to him and force him to answer questions about it. he knows how to make arguments. he is a former prosecutor. >> chris christie making this turn as a political matter. nobody knows how it will turn out. what do you make on the security side in terms of seeing this fissure that hasn't existed in a profound way on the right? >> it's good chris christie is finally saying this. he spent a lot of time in donald trump's camp. i'm glad he is bringing this message to people. but i think it's too late.

the data would show us that the underlying gop base definitionally has been radicalized towards conspiracy theories and other views. you see that by just looking at the polls. i think chris christie is largely speaking to an empty room at this point. if you look at the betting markets at the moment, donald trump has a 30% chance of being the next president of the united states. let's contextualize that. when he won the presidency, the betting markets said he had a 9% of being president. right now, three times as high of a chance. why? because his base has been radicalized to the maga viewpoint. how does that relate to violence? a lot of what we are seeing is very sensational rhetoric about civil war. i unfortunately listen to this all the time. i listen to podcasts. i see what they are saying. this is the lesson about

extremist movements. listen to the words. when it comes to violent extremist groups in the united states, we need to listen to the words. what we are seeing are the most explosive calls we have seep for civil war in this country, violence in this country. that just continues to increase. i think that's the worry here is the underlying narrative still continues to be pretty radical coming from key gop leaders. that's what law enforcement is worried about, is turning that temperature down. >> we should be clear. we have this conversation often enough. because it didn't sprout up around his second indictment doesn't mean it isn't virulent around some of the other things we cover, the republican war on trans kids and their parents. the republican war on drag shows. the culture wars may be drawing more of the heat than all of the indictments will. thank you so much.

a new episode of the podcast prosecuting donald trump is out now. the latest episode is a deep dive on what happened inside the miami courtroom tuesday and what comes next for donald trump post-arraignment. up next, a twice indicted donald trump promising to dismantle the rule of law in america. we will tell about you that and much more straight ahead. don't go anywhere. much more strd don't go anywhere. erizon. 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.

♪♪ 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! hey. what are you doing right now? you up for something impetuous? i'm a palm springs hotel. i got the desert air, sun-kissed pools, and shady hideaways. i'm looking for someone who can decide on a friday that a one night commitment on a saturday is a fine idea. maybe you heard of the rat pack? they hung out here all the time. so, pack a bag. or don't. you could be here in a few hours. meet me at hotels.com wayfair has nice prices yso you can havee inice things.s. hah! kelly clarkson, we have a kid... and harold.

wayfair's got just what you need... performance fabrics, stains don't stand a chance. no chance! -woo! dog friendly and wallet friendly... pug-proved. get nice things with nice prices at wayfair. ♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪

♪♪ i have never once, not one single time suggested to the justice department what they should do or not do relative to

bringing a charge or not bringing a charge. i'm honest. >> i will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after the most corrupt president in the history of the united states of america, joe biden. and the entire biden crime family. >> hi, everyone. two radically different approaches to humanity as well as leading the u.s. justice department. on the one side, the norm. a belief doj is independent. on the other, donald trump. an individual who believes doj is his tool, the tool of his presidency to be used to be wielded against his political enemies. in a stunning piece of"the new shines a light on trump's impulses in this area, in light of his indictment, he is

escalating threats against the department he once oversaw. from that piece, trump's message was that the justice department charged him only because he is biden's political owe poe next. two trump-appointed people are investigating trump. two men who served in the trump administration have emerged as figures in this movement to rid doj of its independence. the former director of the office and management and the former doj official jeffrey clark. more from the reporting. they are promoting a legal

rationale that would change the way presidents interact with the president department. they argue u.s. presidents should not keep federal law enforcement at arm's length but instead should treat the justice department no differently than any other cabinet agency. they are condemning mr. biden and democrats for what they claim is the politicalization of the justice system. with this reporting, it's a frightening lurch authority authoritarianism by the ex-president. not one quietly happening under the surface or in back rooms but one being set overtly before podiums right before all of our eyes. it's where we begin with some of our favorite reporters and friends. washington correspondent charlie savage is here. also joining us, former u.s. attorney and former deputy

assistant attorney general harry litman is back. and msnbc contributor mara gaze at the table. charlie, i read this reporting. it was a piece of keep you up at night reporting. i read it as a parallel to your investigation, which is what this looks like in practice. trump did this. trump and barr did this. the only reason it failed is because the cases that were brought failed before juries. what it seems like today's reporting puts on the table is perfecting what has been attempted and -- i think back in 2018 trump was talking about prosecutor hillary clinton and james comey and andrew mccabe. it was designed to see to it. this was the desire for doj for the duration of his presidency. what he seems to be promising is something different and more advanced. explain.

>> i think you are right that he articulated a desire to do these sorts of things in his first term as -- his only term to date as president. in fact, the pressure that he put on doj and eroding the post-watergate norm that presidents do not interest -- interfere about whether to charge someone when he called for an investigation into the russia investigainvestigators. the story of the trump term was a story of grandiose ambition and authoritarian ambitions. part of what we are seeing is

the shaking up, a desire be mr. trump and people around him to do it right next time. there's a project under way at the heritage foundation to build an administration of nominees for him to put in place if he were elected so from day one he would have people who shared the view of dismantling the government as we know it, not just the administrative state but tearing down the fbi. they learned from the first term and are openly saying they will do it much more aggressively if they get back into power. >> charlie, explain your reporting about the role in that effort that mr. clark -- i believe jeffrey clark is under scrutiny in his role of the attempted coup. explain their role. >> they are part of a think tank

that the trump government in exile -- part of the effort to lay the groundwork to move back into power and understanding how the levers of power work from day one, if they get that opportunity. they have been openly calling for and trying to lay out an intellectual framework to dismantle the post-watergate idea that the justice department should be independent. that there's a norm the presidents let the attorney general and law enforcement officials decide what investigations to open and close, what charges to bring or not bring, without political interference from the white house. they have been putting out the idea that that is a misconception. that's not the way the justice department works legally. it's just a cabinet agency like any other, subject to the direct control of the president. it's not an independent agency. it's fine if a president does that.

the complexity is that it conflates what the rules might allow with the norms of how the government actually works in the modern era, which sometimes are just as important. this is a pattern with trump in general where he finds spaces where things just aren't done, even if there's not a law against that, and exploits that space. this may be the most important area where the gap between how the law has worked for the last 50 years in our country and what the actual legal rules are about a president's control of an agency that's not an independent agency, that creates an opportunity for some dramatic action. >> harry, there's an -- it's usually a piece of reporting that gets us to this point in the conversation. there is never a thought

exercise that doesn't come to the conclusion that norms are not enough to protect valued institutions from donald trump. they are inadequate in every instance. i was thinking earlier in the day and last night when i read this reporting, can i say that there's no agency he sought to pervert and exploit more than doj? if you saw him hollow out state and diplomacy and undermine diplomats and fire people and undermine the efforts of people representing the united states and ukraine and export zelenskyy, and threaten to withdraw from nato, would you say there's nothing more damaged than the state department. if you worked at the pentagon and you saw him waving around a document, you would say there was nothing more damaged than the penlt gone. i'm not going to say there was nothing more damaged. his effort to politicize them

and to run over the people who led it was extraordinary. here is some of his attacks on the men he hand picked to lead doj. >> the attorney general said, i'm going to recuse himself. why didn't he tell he had me that? had i not fired james comey, it's possible i wouldn't be standing here right now. this thing is a disgrace. anybody other than a low life like bill barr, because i terminated because he was gutless. >> what bill barr was supposed to do was to declare the election corrupt. just say it. my republican allies in congress will do the rest. what sessions was supposed to do was to make the russia investigation into russia's attack on the american election

in 2016 -- that's what they did to wrong him. what do you make of charlie's new reporting? >> stunning and terrifying. you can call it norms, as charlie does. that's accurate. that shouldn't give us a sense that they are soft. these are the norms put in place since watergate to keep -- watergate was the closest until january 6 to the republic's falling. and that they didn't has everything to do the independence of the department of justice. what's so remarkable to me here and you and charlie both averted to it, when you look at other instances in history where dictators come in and devolve democracies, they talk a nice game and then come in and collect power. he is shouting from the rooftops, i will take a blowtorch to the constitution and the norms that we set up as a society after watergate in order, precisely, to not become

a banana republic, to have the independence that's part and parcel of the rule of law, without which we are really not a government of laws, but a government of men and women. it's stunning that he is doing it overtly. as you say -- i don't even think he understands what he is talking about. but it is so express that he is ready to shred the constitution and the protections of it. that is really -- conservatives have said this. it's the structure between government agencies that really are the bulwark of our protection, not the parchment guarantees. he wants to make this the kind of monarchy and autocracy that the country was formed to get away from. >> i am never sure if he knows

what he is saying or not. i think at this point, i don't buy he isn't doing everything he is doing on purpose, that it's more than a canine reflex. i wonder what institutions like fox news are doing cheering him on. let me read this. on its most watched nighttime programs, fox news has been all in on the attacks against the justice department, including the accusation that mr. biden had directed the prosecution of mr. trump. fox news displayed a split screen, trump on the right and mr. biden on the left. that could be true if trump is re-elected. over here on earth one where most of us reside, doesn't have any relation to the events of

tuesday night. >> you have organizations like fox news but also the heritage foundation and other far right elements of society that don't reflect the views of most americans who are providing this legal framework to essentially, i think, challenge the american people's basic understanding of how the country is meant to function. we have been hearing this for several years. the latest is, it's an executive government. that is a challenge at this point to the idea that you have separation of branchs of government, the three branchs of government that are supposed to provide checks on one another. we have heard, it's not a democracy, the united states. it's a republic. all of this is just a sustained effort to, i believe, inure americans. i trust donald trump, so maybe

he knows what i'm talking about. i can tell you right now, any american who had the benefit of watching schoolhouse rock or just knowing anything basic about how the country's government works, don't be fooled, the separation of powers is at the heart of the democracy. i think, unfortunately, donald trump is essentially trying to use the american institutions to destroy democracy. that has happened in other countries. that's a playbook we have seen elsewhere. it's not new. it's what's happening right in front of our faces. the question is, are we going to take is seriously? whether or not he does, he is telling us exactly what he is going to do. there are others around him who are going to be willing to take up that fight, whether or not he wins. this is not just a one-man awe authoritarian movement. >> that's the evidence of the

rot inside the republican party. john mccain had this function around foreign policy. all those voices have been muzzled or converted. i want to read more from your reporting, charlie. like other conservatives, clark adheres to the executive theory which holds the president of the united states has the power to directly control the entire federal bureaucracy. congress cannot fracture that control by giving some officials independent decision making authority. there are debates among conservatives about how far to push that. whether some agencies should be lawed to operate independently. the piece that is sortunder

understated is they don't want biden to have the normal powers but they trump to have the powers of another nation's monarchy. is there anyone who is still capable of recognizing the irony or hypocrisy in that? charlie, i think you got muted. we will ask you to stop and start over. can we hear you? we still can't hear charlie. we will work on his audio. harry, jump back in. either on this point about rules that are only rules they want to apply to trump and nothing that they would ever believe to be authorities appropriate or legitimate for a democratic president. >> leaders of both parties, nicole, since watergate, have made each attorney general

nominee, in turn, swear that they would be independent and would not let the politics or favoritism toward a president control their decisions. would not have the kind of roy cone model that trump has been crying for from the start. it really is the exact lesson that we learned from watergate. it's the exact thing that he wants to trash. again, i find it stunning that he is making it, saying it from a megaphone day in and day out. this sort of theoretical ground of the executive in jeff clark. that really is almost beside the point. he is saying straight out, america, give me the power so i can run roughshod over rivals and make this a banana republic. he is doing it express and gaining some kind of support

from it. it's that part that is most terrifying. it's not as if he is a new quantity for us. talk about once burned, twice shy. we know he is in ernest when he says this. yet, he is the leading republican candidate for president. >> it's stunning to see republicans criticize this administration or this president or this justice department for acting by rules that they don't pretend that they would play by. charlie, i will try your audio one last time. i want you to jump in on this piece that now that this is all sort of spanning this modern trumpian party, populated by people known to be under criminal scrutiny, to saying these things at rallies, to their favorite cable news network, with banners about want to be dictators, is there anyone

you find that is uncomfortable? are there conservative legal figures left that would say this isn't a good idea? >> i think there are. they would be the never trump republicans, those who have been exiled by the republican party by virtue of that position. i would say as well, i have been writing about executive power for 20 years. i wrote about the bush/cheney years and the obama years. it's the case that these are not partisan issues, that they transcend. whoever has less constraints on their power will use those to advance liberal or conserative events. people who criticize executive power tend do it when their guy

is not in office. it's a place where there's maximal hypocrisy in american politics. democrats are for checks and balances when bush is president. they are worried about too many checks and balances when obama is president. that's just the way politics works in this country for the most part. wait until trump is president again. >> charlie, i think the memos are fair for that analysis. i have to say, i don't know there was anyone in the democratic legal establishment who was advocating for dismantling the independence of the department of justice or the fbi. your point is that the critiques and the lens changes based on who is in power? >> certainly, democrats were not trying to dismantle the justice department. but it's the case that even in the clinton years, they were

advocating more president cal control of administrative rule making than had been the tradition. when obama was president and after republicans took over the house and he wasn't able to advance his authority or his policies through legislation anymore on things like legalizing gay marriage, the daca program for dreamers, he was finding arguments for doing things unilaterally that before he thought he did not have authority to do. that's different than dismantling independent law enforcement. i'm just saying that this is not a party of matter when it comes to executive party issues. >> thank you so much for your reporting and for joining us. harry, thank you for being part of the conversation and starting us off. mara sticks around. when we come back, trump loyalists. the man that disgraced things

was the attorney general in the bid to overturn his defeat. the line between two dangerous and autocratic plots. also ahead, ron desantis says, me, too. he wants to wage war on the justice department also. trump's mini me. his plan includes an all out tear down of doj and the fbi, gutting large parts of both and moving fbi headquarters out of washington, d.c. don't go anywhere. t dandruff re, 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. ♪♪ 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.

bridgett is here. already did. she has no clue that i'm here. she has no clue who's in the helmet. are you ready? -i'm ready! alright. xfinity rewards creates experiences big and small, and once-in-a-lifetime.

that voice is the act of richard donoghue testifying before the january 6 select committee about his zinger to jeffrey clark about his clack of credentials. in front of donald trump, who wanted clark to take over the justice department to aid his failed attempts to overturn

trump's 2020 election defeat. jeffrey clark's violation of strict rules when he met with trump the month before to discuss their plan has elevated him as a figure, perhaps a key one, in the ongoing doj investigation into january 6. it's important background to keep in mind as we learn about clark's role in another autocratic plot. let's bring in eric swalwell of california, a former impeachment manager for the second impeachment of donald trump. mara is still with us. congressman, what do you make of what is now in the open to dismantle doj and the fbi? >> they don't want a rule of law. they want a rule of mob with donald trump as the lead

mobster. that's clear now. the truth is, they have run this play before. right? donald trump got impeached because he tried to use taxpayer dollars to get dirt on joe biden. it turns out, there was no dirt on joe biden. he was impeached for the conduct. he launched this durham report to try to undo every finding of the russia investigation. this was this special counsel under his department of justice. no indictment of consequence was brought. in fact, the two jury trials that happened, the jurors returned not guilty verdicts. there's no evidence bill barr told durham he couldn't indict someone that he wanted to indict. i think the trump administration -- or the trump team doesn't know how to define joe biden. they want him to be sleepy joe and corrupt joe. you can't be sleepy and corrupt. the truth is, he is neither. it's a lack of being able to define him because they fear him. so now they threaten him.

>> congressman, it's right to bring this back to what we do every here on earth one. trump is going to trump. he is going to assemble trumpy people to help him trump along and destroy the rule of law or annihilate nato or abuse the role of the military. as you said, none of the plays are new. none of the story lines are new. they have been pursued before. i wonder what you think then the response should be. what is the conversation with the country about the risks of a second trump term? when should it start? >> the risk is more political violence of a greater magnitude. that's where it's really on speaker mccarthy to be a responsible adult about this. i don't think we can survive another politically violent event like january 6. this is really -- i think these

indictments about the civil expoure he is facing, it's the republican's last best chance to see national political unity is the antidote to the trump vortex we have been sucked into, to get us out of it. my republican colleagues are saying that this is war. we need eye for an eye. the gubernatorial nominee in arizona is saying that americans are armed to the teeth and we should be prepared to see them use that second amendment right. the violence rhetoric is only escalating. i'm afraid unless the leader of the party, who is elected, speaker mccarthy, starts to condemn, we're going to a very bad place. >> congressman, you are one of the sort of foremost political minds in your party. i will put a political question

to you on this. kari lake said if you want to get to trump, you have to go through us. she made a reference to being armed. why do you think that works? it has nothing do with improving the lives of anybody, except he who criminally charged for his various public and brazen crimes. >> i would say it works for the losers' party. they have lost. democrats -- i know we are anxious and we are of the bedwetting type from time to time and freak out about where we are. the truth is, the second donald trump was elected, we have been on a decent winning streak. we have been in the middle. we have put forward competency over chaos. their rhetoric works with a lot that keeps losing. if we just stay motivated to

believe in the rule of law, to believe in democracy, to believe in freedom, women's freedom or kid's freedom to come home from school, to read whatever book you want to win. we won a marriage race in jacksonville. we are on a winning streak. they are on the losing side. we need to be more confident that our message is working. >> chris christie is making a similar argument against trump. republican voters -- i gave up political predictions after 16. i'm curious to see how far he gets. i want to ask you about the men and women inside the agencies trump seeks to dismantle, the doj and fbi. do you worry the frame moves so violently that maybe if they are not dismantled, there's a chill that the rule of law is impacted

in less discernible ways? >> it is impacted in the way of which the number of people who want to wake up every morning, make less to do something more fulfilling, which is a public service and how hard it is to recruit those individuals, particularly in law enforcement right now, we see a struggle to recruit people to go into law enforcement. i think these attacks the republicans have made by calling for de-funding of the fbi, dishonoring the officers who saved us on january 6 that doesn't help. immeasurable is the moral the folks have to suffer through. not just the morale but they now are in a position where anything they do -- jim jordan may want to bring them before a committee to go down the rabbit hole of the crazy conspiracy theories. it's not fair. that's why it's on us who are elected to be more responsible about this and recognize that

this trump vortex, we are almost out of it. the only way to happen sooner is if republicans quit trump. >> from your lips. thank you very much for spending time with us. when we back, the race to the bottom. a new plan to overhaul the fbi and justice department from ron desantis. we will tell you about his campaign message after a break. s campaign message after a break f. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ we got the house! only pay for what you need. you did! pods handles the driving. pack at your pace. store your things until you're ready. then we deliver to your new home - across town or across the country. pods, your personal moving and storage team. (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. i think this is it guys? when the martins booked their vrbo vacation home, they really weren't looking for much: a patch of grass for bruno, a pool for first-timers, don't worry, i've got you. and time with each other.

and when they needed support, someone was right there. i got you. because what's unique about a vrbo is you can reach a real person in about a minute. ♪ ♪ today, my friend you did it, you did it, you did it... ♪ centrum silver is now clinically shown to support cognitive health in older adults. it's one more step towards taking charge of your health. so every day, you can say, ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver. okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health. everyone: woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals. enter the $10,000 nourishing moments giveaway. your best defense against erosion and cavities is strong enamel- nothing beats it. new pronamel active shield actively shields the enamel to defend against erosion and cavities. i think that this product is a gamechanger for my patients- it really works.

we have been handed breaking news about the topic we have been covering all day, the mishandling of classified documents. airman who leaked charges is indicted on charges of miss handling secrets. jack teixeira posted sensitive documents on a gaming server. the filing of criminal charges against teixeira comes two months after fbi agents arrested him at his home. teixeira has remained in custody after prosecutors presented evidence he had a history of making violent and racist threats, had access to weapons and represented a risk of

sharing sensitive information with foreign countries. the unauthorized removal, retention and transmission of classified information jeopardizes our nation's security. that's the acting u.s. attorney for massachusetts speaking in a statement. individuals granted access to classified materials have a fundamental duty to safeguard the information for the safety of the united states, our active service members, its citizens and its allies. we are committed to ensuring those entrusted with sensitive national security information adhere to the law. katty kay, it's remarkable. it seemed like an important moment to say, yeah, when people do this, they get charged. in this case, he has remained in federal custody. he will face the full weight of the u.s. department of justice for his crimes of

missmishandling this information. >> jack teixeira is not a former president. he was a low ranking official. he managed to get ahold of this information and put it on this gaming site. at the time, it came out day after day, these leaks of extraordinary amounts of information he put out about america's security planplans, t dealings with ukraine, the vulnerabilities in the united states. i thought, wow, what a week to have this happen. this is exactly what we have been talking about, of course, in a different context with a different person.

this fundamentally is the same issue. >> whether it's reality or mr. teixeira, everyone else who does whatalleged -- trump gets a better deal from the department of justice than anyone in history. >> than anyone in history. even though in most organizations, of course, the higher up you are, the more responsibility you have. the buck should stop with you. just pulling back for a moment, the concern is not just that it's a similar dynamic where somebody was sharing state secrets, but that potentially this might be a part of the same dynamic of radicalization that's been happening in the country. we know this is an issue in law enforcement. that's not the majority of law enforcement.

this has been known since the 2009 department of homeland security investigation memo that said, domestic extremism is a real threat. it's a threat that we could see in members of law enforcement or members of the military radicalized. we don't know yet what happened here. this is a young man. we have to see. everybody is entitled to his or her day in court. there are signs that this could be a broader problem. of course, at a time when americans of -- especially some americans in the republican base don't have faith in the institutions because trump is attacking the doj, this backs mor problematic. people believed they were rescuing the government by attacking the government. this is a broader concern as well. it's more reason to prosecute

the president if he did commit crimes. >> i want to bring into our conversation tim miller as well. we talk a lot about the threat of political violence from people who listen to donald trump's words. he is running for a third term on the campaign promise of being your retribution. we cover and we talk about these things, not as political stories, who is up and who is down. i don't care. the threat that they pose to our institutions and homeland security. this is a different pattern. this is a pattern of disdain and hatred for the people who collect and gather and fight to protect u.s. national security based on this kind of information. it looks like a copycat crime if you read the charges against mr. teixeira. there's more than an echo to what donald trump is charged

with doing. >> for sure. it's another case, by the way, of donald trump getting treated better than his own support ez -- supporters. it's a different. this trend you are pointing out of targeting the people that serve this country in the most sensitive way, our intelligence commune, people gathering intelligence, people defending the rule of law, people who have taken this investigation seriously, jack smith and others, these folks who have not acted like a banana republic, they have been trying to follow the rule of law. across republican political candidates, across maga media and the maga republican political candidates, you see a

repeated attempt to demonize the people that serve this country, that try to do so the right way, working for the government. that does stem from donald trump. it stems from his rallies when he targeted peter struck and lisa page and others. it stems from the head of the snake here and the republican party that has decided to make the enemies of this country not just the democrats, not just the media, but people who are serving this country in the military and the national security agencies and the doj. that is trickling down to people like jack. >> you and i both worked in the press arms of politics. we know it takes layer upon layer upon layer upon layer to build credibility. what donald trump has done by slashing the credibility of the intelligence agencies, by saying i believe vladimir putin, not my own agencies, by slashing the reputation of the heads of the fbi, by accusing them of

treason, was to tear it down in ways that will be immeasurable for years to come. it will take years and years to restore faith in those institutions in the minds of people who you called out as the maga media products. >> i think that's right. that's the thing that's so angering and frustrating when you have marco rubio and lindsey graham who do have respect for the institutions. making excuses and going along with this behavior. to your point, about how just the effects of this -- i have gone to the turning point conferences with the younger maga crowd. they are animating issues. they are upset what they think is the deep state, being upset at the doj, not trusting that you can get a fair shake in a court of law, not trusting the

military has leaders, have american people and the servicemen and women's interests at heart. that's what the people who are coming up through the ranks are starting to think. that is hard to change. once you have that distrust, it's going to take a lot of hard work to build that trust back. there's nobody on the right that's even trying to do that. everyone is trying -- is either going along with the tearing down of the trust of the institutions or making excuses for it. i agree. i think there's an under appreciation for this. >> we were here to talk about something else. but the events now that populate anybody's newscast -- i shouldn't say anybody's. anybody on earth one. all have a threat to this effort to sow distrust. tim miller, thank you for being part of our coverage.

we will talk about the new book, "the power cod." it's about reclaiming and remaking power for us, women. that's story is next. women that's story is next - 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. 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. family is just very important. she's my sister and, we depend on each other a lot. she's the rock of the family. she's the person who holds everything together. ♪♪ it's a battle, you know i'm going to be there. keytruda and chemotherapy meant treating my cancer with two different types of medicine. in a clinical trial, keytruda and chemotherapy was proven to help people live longer than chemotherapy alone. keytruda is used to treat more patients with advanced lung cancer than any other immunotherapy. keytruda may be used with certain chemotherapies

as your first treatment if you have advanced nonsquamous, non-small cell lung cancer and you do not have an abnormal “egfr” or “alk” gene. keytruda can cause your immune system to attack healthy parts of your body during or after treatment. this may be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you have cough, shortness of breath, chest pain, diarrhea, severe stomach pain, severe nausea or vomiting, headache, light sensitivity, eye problems, irregular heartbeat, extreme tiredness, constipation, dizziness or fainting, changes in appetite, thirst, or urine, confusion, memory problems, muscle pain or weakness, fever, rash, itching, or flushing. there may be other side effects. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions, including immune system problems, if you've had or plan to have an organ or stem cell transplant, received chest radiation, or have a nervous system problem. it feels good to be here for them. living longer is possible. it's tru. keytruda from merck. ask your doctor about keytruda. (smelling) ew. gotta get rid of this. ♪tell me why♪ because it stinks.

♪have you tried downy rinse and refresh♪ it helps remove odors 3x better than detergent alone. it worked guys! ♪yeahhhh♪ downy rinse and refresh. ♪ ("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! ♪ following up on her "the new york times" best seller, our friend katty cay along with her friend released a book. kansas called if power code. it takes a look at the idea of

power in time of sweeping change, and specifically how to reimagine power for everyone, especially women. we're back with kattive and mar ra. katty, this is something i asked you about. now it's out and i want to talk to you about it. let's consider this the beginning of the conversation, but tell me why you came back to this topic and tell me what's in this book. >> yeah, we've written over the years, claire and i have, this is our fifth book together. we talk about confidence, confidence for girls and work life balance issues. we looked at the numbers. 10% of ceos with women. 27 of the countries around the world, only 27 have women leaders. that led us to look at the issue of power. why haven't we broken through it? it's taking too long.

we looked at a study from harvard that showed women don't want power. women's interests in life are broader. we have more interests and commitments than men have, and we see the cost of getting power as too compromising and the stuff itself doesn't appeal to us. the egos around power, the way it's structured seems to be unappealing. we thought, let's flip that and have a really big look at this huge topic of power and we kind of came to the conclusion you don't need to remake women at all. we're going all the right things to wield power well. what we need to do is remake power. >> what does that mean? what does that look like? >> one of the things we came across is men and women define power differently. men have a much more competitive view, so more for johnny is less for steven. women don't see power the same way. we see it as the i don't have power. what's the purpose? what we can do with power, what's the impact we can have with power? if we start thinking of power in

that way and valuing and rewarding people who wield power in that way, then it can actually be a proposition that's more appealing to many businessman. >> it's the women take people along, men have a scarcity mentality. is that part of it, katty? >> that is part of it. we're talking about power this week, right, and corrupted power. and actually, in our research, women who have power, that old phrase power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, actually, it doesn't corrupt women. our research shows that women who have positions of power, retain their empathy, their corruption to those below them, and women around the world who are leaders are 80% less likely to be charged with corrupt. so actually, power in the hands of women is actually an effective tool. >> that's so amazing, so interesting. as we said we could do to two hours and we'll find time to keep going. power code is out right now. buy it and read it, because

we'll continue our conversations with katty about it. katty and mara, thank you for spending time with us today. we'll be right back. ime with us. we'll be right back. 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. want luxury hair repair that doesn't cost $50? pantene's pro-vitamin formula repairs hair. as well as the leading luxury bonding treatment. for softness and resilience, without the price tag. if you know... you know it's pantene.

♪ shelves. shelves that know what taste buds want. shelves smart enough to see, sense, react, restock. ♪ so caramel swirl is always there for the taking.

as a business owner, your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network, with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to 75% a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers. so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities™. so, you've got the power of xfinity at home. now take it outside with xfinity mobile. like speed? it's the fastest mobile service around. with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only 30 bucks a line per month. that's hundreds in savings a year when you wave bye to the other guys. no wonder xfinity mobile is one of the fastest growing mobile services. you really shouldn't walk out the front door without it.

switch today at xfinitymobile.com. thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary time. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber start rights now. hi ari. >> hi, nicolle. quick factual compliment if i may, deadline wasn't the same without you yesterday. >> you worked an hour in this insane week. i'm grateful. i had a fifth grade graduation to attend. >>