groups of biden voters who disapprove joe biden, the low hanging fruit, the persuadable folks who want him out if you are a republican party, they could say whatever they want about joe biden, and you say what about trump? they are like, absolutely not. that to me, is the fact i don't understand why more people in the republican party don't say it. >> we are talking about republican leaders in washington, or republican voters? donald trump created a cultural movement and decided to park it in today's republican party. i think the biggest gamble of all is donald trump is hoping to land the actual trial after the early primary dates in florida and march. the biggest scandal for the country is exactly the same because of donald trump wins the gop primary, the nation's likely saved another term of donald trump or a republican like donald trump, because joe biden beats him. >> all right, david jolly, when dave jolly says things about predicting joe biden is going to win this handily and donald trump is going to be defeated. and i get a little bit nervous even though he's facing down

potentially multiple federal indictments. >> it's not a sure thing. >> i'm like, oh, really, you really think biden can beat him? >> nothing's a sure thing. but it's also like if you're trying to get the least popular figure as your nominee, donald trump is definitely that. that's just what the data say. >> that is what the data says. all right, my friend, have a wonderful evening. >> and thanks to you at home for joining us this evening. if you are a republican running for president in 2024, there is one question that you know you are going to have to answer. what do you think of donald trump being indicted on federal criminal charges? >> and you would think at this point that anyone entering the race with the republican nomination would be prepared to answer that question, and you would be wrong. today miami mayor francis suarez announced he is joining the pack of candidates running for the republican nomination. he gave his first interview to good morning america, and that interview went like this. >> what did you make of the

indictment? >> yeah, i think one of the things that happened in miami is people were hoping and that some members of the press were even hoping there would be anarchy, and i think what miami did -- >> i'm sorry, i asked what you thought of the indictment. >> well, and i want to talk about indictment. >> did you read the indictment? what did it say to you? i let you say why you're running for president. answer that question. tell me what you think about the indictment. do you think it shows that donald trump is fit to be president? >> i think what it shows is that people are frustrated in this country particularly republicans who fear there isn't an equal administration of justice. >> that's what happens when you go on national television to announce your presidential campaign without a good answer to the most important question facing the republican field right now. it is something that everyone else in the race has started to

figure out, and that is why they have all started to coalesce around a new line, a new talking point whenever they are asked about donald trump. and that strategy is blame the department of justice and the fbi. >> i think the doj and fbi have lost their way. i think they've been weaponized against americans who think like me and you. >> we have seen the politicization at the department of justice for years and years. >> what we've seen over the last several years is the weaponization of the department of justice against a former president. >> the doj and fbi have lost all credibility with the american people. >> that is the new republican line when it comes to donald trump's handling of classified documents. the department of justice and the fbi have been weaponized. and the person who is supposedly weaponizing those two organizations is in their mind joe biden. now, never mind the fact that joe biden has stayed about as far away from trump's

prosecution as a sitting president possibly can, refusing to even comment on this case publicly, conservatives have gone all in on the idea this is biden's secret plot. on the day of trump's arraignment fox news ran this graphic alongside their coverage of biden and trump. wannabe dictator speaks at the white house after having his political arrival arrested. fox later told nbc news the chiron was taken down immediately and addressed internally. that central idea biden is some sort of autocrat against trump, that idea remains the focus of practically every fox news segment about the special counsel's indictment. meanwhile, trump has taken all of this to a new level and has started saying things like this. >> 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. name a special prosecutor. >> okay, so the former president who wants to be president again is now openly vowing to turn the department of justice against his political enemies at the exact same time that his defenders are accusing joe biden of doing exactly that. which is, wow. the hypocrisy here seems to be lost on most people in trump's party because this vow or this campaign pledge or whatever you want to call this, has now gained traction in the republican party on whole. republicans have decided that the solution to this alleged plot between the executive branch and the department of justice is to erase the line that exists between the department of justice and the white house. here is governor ron desantis in an interview on fox news. >> republican presidents have accepted the canard at the doj

and fbi are, quote, independent. they are not independent agencies. they are part of the executive branch. they answer to the elected president of the united states. >> that view that the doj and the fbi should not be independent from the presidency is actually gaining traction among conservatives and not just the ones whose name end in trump. "the new york times" points out today mr. trump's promise to use the justice department to go after his enemies fits into a larger movement on the right to gut the fbi and abandon the norm the department should operate independently from the president. the most powerful conservative think tanks are working on plans that would go far beyond reforming the fbi even though its senate confirmed directors in the modern era have all been republicans. they want to rip it up and start again. so president biden who has thus far maintained a district division between himself and the department of justice is accused of being a wannabe dictator by

the republican party. and the gop solution to this random phantom problem is give a future president complete control over the department of justice, so long as that president is a republican. joining us now are slate senior editor and host of the amicus podcast, and former missouri editor claire mccaskill. let me start with you on the surreality and i guess hypocrisy of this moment to see republicans accusing joe biden of being a wannabe dictator and effectively embracing a new form of governing that would effectively allow the next president to be a dictator. >> it is beyond embarrassing that he is an educated man who is spouting this stuff, the same

thing with some of these other people who are saying let's blow up, you know, the rule of law in this country. they always want to talk about the founding fathers. you think the founding fathers would be good with this, that we would have some kind of king-like figure to direct people to arrest people on a whim? you know, the rule of law held under donald trump because there were good men and women who made sure it did even though he tried to blow up that line. and think about this for a minute. if joe biden is somehow manipulating the justice department, why in the world would he lead a trump prosecutor in charge of his own son's investigation? >> yes, that's a good point. >> this is so bizarre to me. he clearly is trying to stay so far away from this. i'll never forget the obama administration, when i actually tried to talk to the president about what was going on in ferguson, and he put up his

hands and said, claire, i will not talk about anything that has to do with doj, will not talk about it. you're welcome to call doj and talk to them and make sure they know what you think you know, but i will not talk to you about. that is the rule in this country. it's always been the rule. the only one who wants to blow that up is donald trump because he doesn't have either the facts or the law on his side. >> you know, dahlia, i was surprised it's not just trump. the heritage foundation is now trying to make the case for blowing up the fbi. and i want to call everyone's attention to this great analysis you have on slate this week, and i'll read an excerpt from it. yes, the legal walls are closing in and as they do for some the power of these legal walls is crumbling before our eyes. the more criminal trouble trump finds himself in, the more his political capital rises, the more the rule of law of triumphs, the stronger the forces that hate the rule of law

actually become. that is the conundrum of this moment, right, dahlia, the notion that this is the rule of law doing what it's supposed to do. you know, finding wrongdoing and prosecuting it, and at the same time the after-effect of that is to erode the power of the rule of law. >> i mean, i think, alex, this is the mistake we keep making is thinking the rule of law or the legal system or accountability are ends in themselves and that, you know, if merrick garland can just perform independence, if joe biden can just perform independence, if jack smith can just perform he's acting independent of the white house, then somehow the rule of law gets vindicated. and i think what we are learning very dispiritingly as you say is that the rule of law is not an end in itself and all these fancy harvard law accredited

people are happy to say i don't care about the indictment, don't care what the espionage act told, i just want politics to end. and the way you do that is you obviate the need to have a conversation by saying witch hunt, saying deep state. and everybody who believes in you doubts that a legal resolution can ever be fair. and i think just the most depressing thing i keep seeing is this statistic that says 76% of republican primary voters are already convinced this is a purely partisan witch hunt investigation, and they know there's a threat to national security, that what was done, the underlying sort of predicate facts here are deeply, deeply damaging to national security and to relationships with allies and don't care because it's a witch hunt. and i think once you're at the point where politics have outrun the rule of law, where politics

and power are an end in themselves, you get to this exact place where whoever says witch hunt loudest, whoever says weaponize the justice department most ferociously wins the day. >> yeah, well, it feels like the end of something and the beginning of something else. i mean, claire, to dahlia's point about the i don't care, i don't have to read the indictment, i was shocked the bulwark reported this week that chuck grassly, the former chair of the judiciary committee in the senate said about the indictment i haven't read it at all, i'm not a legal analyst, i'm going to leave that to the roprofessionals to tell us about it. i've read everything i can of secondary sources of it but not the original. this is the former person of the senate judiciary committee saying i can't read about the indictment, i'm not a legal analyst. >> yeah, and he's the same guy running around saying that somehow the justice department is being weaponized. how do you know, chuck?

you know, stop running for a minute. god love you, he's a very old man who has kept himself in great shape physically, but mentally he has got to absorb the fact that this indictment is full of evidence. it's evidence. and they don't want to read it because they don't want to be confronted with evidence. they're way more comfortable doing this. and my question for them is this, too. you know, the fbi is widely respected around the world in terms of its training, in terms of the job they do, in terms of getting really bad guys that work worldwide and ones that particularly are good at doing crimes across state lines, human trafficking, drugs, money laundering, all kinds of complex crimes. what do these guys think is going to happen if they just fire everybody? what, all of a sudden another fbi is going to spring up that's

perfect? i don't understand how this would work. who enforces federal law while we're busy finding hundreds and hundreds of guys that work in sheriff's departments in some rural community that say go trump and try to train them to do the most investigative work in the world. i don't know how they can say this with a straight face. >> yeah, i think that is such an important point to make, which is what they're proposing is actually on its face ludicrous. dahlia, the theory about the unified executive theory, the idea the president has all the powers and all the powers are consolidated under him, which seems really in unofficial legal parlance, wack-a-do, but it seems thisry is embraced on the far right. can you talk about what threat that poses to a free and fair

democracy? >> it's so fascinating in that piece you site from "the new york times," the most amazing fact in it is that the big purveyor or one of the big purveyors of this theory we should teardown the wall between the justice department and the white house and the justice department should serve at the mercy and pleasure of the president is none other than jeffrey clark, who donald trump you may recall wanted him to be attorney general, not because he was fit to be attorney general but he was the only person at the doj who would have done whatever donald trump wanted done so he could stay in power. so the notion these post-watergate reform, the essential reforms that tried to construct a wall, the wall that, you know, senator mccaskill describes between the doj and the white house, the notion that we're going to take that wall down so that we can construct an

entire justice department that does nothing for four years but go after the bidens for no crime being named except for biden, and that is an idea embraced under this sort of monarchic theory of presidential power shows to me how far we have moved. even bill barr, the most sort of discredited justice department official we had pretended there was a wall between the justice department and the white house. now we're not pretending anymore. that's a far, far move in a couple of years. >> claire, biden has told the white house and aides to take a vow of silence on the topic of the indictment. he's directed the dnc to do the same, and i understand that in a legal perspective and to some degree a political one, but if these calls are met unanswered, what fills the void? do you worry about that strategy? >> well, it's scary. i will admit seeing people that are as educated as ron desantis

and jeffrey clark and the heritage foundation and people who purport to be constitutional originalists spout this stuff is scary. and the fact that they're feeding it to trump supporters and republicans as fact when it's not is also scary because dahlia's right. the rule of law is what we perceive it to be. it is -- people have to believe in it. and they are doing incredible permanent damage. now, i will say this. i don't think most americans want a president in charge of deciding who is prosecuted. and i think most americans see that this is a serious case with real evidence. i wish the federal court would see the beauty of a televised trial in this instance. but regardless i do think that most americans will come down on the side of what joe biden believes in and what i believe in and what we all believe in, and that is cases should be decided on the facts and the law

and nothing else, and i think that provision will win the day politically even if the other side is feeding all this b.s. out to their supporters. >> i appreciate you sounding a nota phone. thank you for your time. appreciate it. coming up one south carolina school district was shown this video about systemic racism. wait until you hear what happened. plus donald trump's reputation for not paying his bills, that reputation is catching up with him at a really, really inconvenient time. that's up next. stay with us. h us

there is a better way to manage diabetes. the dexcom g7 continuous glucose monitoring system eliminates painful fingersticks, helps lower a1c, and is covered by medicare. before using the dexcom g7, i was really frustrated. all of that finger-pricking and all that pain, my a1c was still stuck. before dexcom g7, i couldn't enjoy a single meal. i was always trying to outguess my glucose, and it was awful. before dexcom g7, my diabetes was out of control because i was tired. not having the energy to do the things that i wanted to do.

(female announcer) dexcom g7 is a small, easy-to-use wearable that sends your glucose numbers to your phone or dexcom receiver without painful fingersticks. the arrow shows the direction your glucose is heading-- up, down, or steady. and because dexcom g7 is the most accurate cgm, you can make better decisions about food, medication, and activity in the moment. it can even alert you before you go too low or when you're high. oh, the fun is absolutely back. after dexcom g7, i can on the spot figure out what i'm gonna eat and how it's gonna affect my glucose. when a friend calls and says, "hey, let's go to breakfast," -i can get excited again. -after using the dexcom g7, my diabetes, it doesn't slow me down at all. i lead line dancing three times a week, i exercise, and i'm just living a great life now. it's so easy to use. it has given me confidence and control that everything i need is right there on my phone. (earl) the dexcom g7 is so small, it's so easy to use, and it's very discreet.

(dr. king) if you have diabetes, getting on dexcom is the single most important thing you can do. (david) within months, my a1c went down to 6.9. (donna) at my last checkup, my a1c was 5.9. (female announcer) now, millions more are covered by medicare. take advantage of the expanded coverage by calling today. (upbeat music) ♪ i know there's conflicting information about dupuytren's contracture.

i thought i couldn't get treatment yet? well, people may think that their contracture has to be severe to be treated, but it doesn't. if you can't lay your hand flat on the table, talk to a hand specialist. but what if i don't want surgery? well, then you should find a hand specialist certified to offer nonsurgical treatments. what's the next step? visit findahandspecialist.com today to get started.

are you ready? are you ready? food for everyone. >> on tuesday shortly after he was charged with 37 federal criminal counts, donald trump visited the cuban restaurant cafe versaille in miami, an iconic restaurant where politicians love to stop for photo-ops. and while he was there trump promised to buy food for everyone. it was an unusually generous offer from trump who's not exactly known to have santa-like instincts for giving. and so everyone cheered and

there were presumably warm feelings in the room and, yay, except no one got anything. the miami new times quotes a knowledgeable source who said that donald trump's stop totaled about ten minutes leaving no time for anyone to eat anything much less place an order. so, yeah, that sounds a little more familiar. trump is not really known for paying his bills, after all. according to usa today trump has been involved in more than 3,500 lawsuits, a large number of which involve workers who say trump or his companies have refused to pay them. in 2021 trump refused to pay rudy giuliani for his legal work, as in rudy giuliani the lawyer who spearheaded trump's bogus claims of election fraud. last august fox business reported truth social stiffed a contractor out of more than a million dollars. a stand up guy. free food for everyone.

this reputation is not helping trump as he continues his search to find a lawyer to represent him in federal court in florida. abc news reported today that, quote, trump's history of legal turnover has led some attorneys to turn him down while others have asked for retainer fees trump's team views as excessive. however, multiple sources say trump has options for lawyers. meantime trump's defense in florida is being fronted by a man named christopher kise, a lawyer trump retained last year and who made sure to get all his money up front, $3 million to be precise. joining us now is joyce vance for the northern district of alabama and co-host of the sisters in law podcast. it's always good to talk to you and especially on a matter like this where i think a lot of people don't know what exactly lawyers would be doing at this stage of the game and why it is important for donald trump to

have counsel representing him. could you shed some light on that for us? >> sure. so this is a critical case to have a strong defense team from the start. and one of the reasons we know that, we saw judge cannon enter an order directing trump's lawyers to proceed as quickly as possible to get security clearances so they can begin to review the government's evidence in this case. that's not a job for one lawyer, may not be a job for two lawyers but the evidence looks to be complicated and voluminous, and the defense lawyers don't have a lot of time to get to work here. they'll need to prepare their motions and they'd like to indicate what they want to use at trial. a lot of work to do and you need your team in place to get there. >> joyce, in terms of judge cannon, i know that there's been a lot -- well, we spent a lot of time on her cv yesterday.

a lot of people have focused on her rulings in the special master case highly controversial and ultimately turned down, if you will. she today as you point out added an order to trump's docket. that would suggest she's not recusing herself from this case. is that a fair assessment? and do you think at this point there's any chance she might? >> so i think she hasn't recused yet, but she has not been asked to. the justice department has not filed a motion asking her to recuse. we don't know what she would do if they filed that motion. they may also decide to play the long game here and wait and see if she makes an additional ruling that's sort of in the same category as her earlier rulings on the search warrant case, there the sort of thing they would take an appeal on and then ask the court of appeals to reassign or have the chief judge reassign a different case to the judge on remand.

the real is they can appeal her now, once there's a jury seated with double jeopardy attached her rulings, she controls for instance what evidence will be admitted at trial. and if there's an acquittal it's too late. doj lawyers, prosecutors don't get a second bite at that apple. >> yeah, and i want to talk about that. what evidence is admitted seems to be a big, big question trump's lawyers would like to hitigate. they're not having with the piercing of the attorney-client privilege, the crime fraud exception that was cited to effectively allow the doj access to evan corcoran, trump's lawyer, his voice memos that play a huge role in the indictment. do you think that there is a chance that judge cannon says these e-mails cannot be used -- or these voice memos cannot be used as evidence, none of the correspondence between corcoran

and trump is admissible, and how much stock should we put in the 11th circuit in terms of acting as a check on judge cannon? >> so lots of complicated, difficult questions. and alex, you know my crystal ball i sort of try to not trot it out too often, but i'll do it in one regard here to the last part of your question about the 11th circuit. the 11th circuit has a good track record on this case in particular but in general over the sway of time. they believe in the rule of law, they follow the law, they're committed to doing that. they know how to move quickly when quick movement by the court is needed. i think we can have confidence whether we like all of their rulings or not, i believe the judges on that court will look at these issues and they'll apply the law to the facts, and that is something that we can have confidence in. you know, there are sophisticated nuances here, some involving the facts and some involving the law as to how judge cannon may look at this

question of whether or not the government will be able to use evidence generated from trump's lawyers. there's a little bit of an aspect to this issue that this particular issue that's already been decided in this case by a judge in the district of columbia, trump tried to take an appeal, and the court of appeals and the district of columbia told him, no, we believe that the judge's decision that the government is entitled to use what would normally be lawyer-client material is one that will stand here. but there's still avenues to try and attack that. we're in a different circuit. that decision was made in a preindictment posture, so perhaps trump's lawyers will get some traction legally, but when you look at the facts here at least to the extent that we have seen in this indictment, what the government is alleging it can prove, it seems quite clear that this is a strong case as strong a case i can remember seeing for piercing the attorney-client privilege. and when she gets down to

considering the facts, she will have to rule the same way the judge in d.c. did. >> as we're speaking about lawyers and evan corcoran in particular, it strikes me as in a word bonkers that this person has offered the most damning evidence in this mar-a-lago indictment and continues to represent donald trump in the january 6th probe that is launched by the special counsel. does that strike you as odd? >> i think bonkers is the perfect way to describe this. you know, i don't really know what to make of it. as a lawyer you have ethical obligations. the bar in the state where your bar license is issued will certainly hold you accountable if you violate those rules. it's a-built curious of a decision by a lawyer that they wouldn't step aside once a decision like this was made. but corcoran has maintained that he is not cooperating with the government, that he was in essence a hostile witness and testified only to the extent that he was forced to.

so this is unusual to say the least. i think that's fair. >> yeah, well, also given the difficulty that the former president is having in finding new counsel, it might not be wise to get rid of the counsel he does have. joyce vance, thank you as always for making the time. >> thanks, alex. we still have much more to come this evening. republicans are playing games with human lives and creating a humanitarian crisis for democrats to cleanup. plus what happens when you try and teach students about systemic racism in south carolina? that's next. outh carolina that's next. ♪ 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! ♪

this is jamal. jamal is a boy who lives in a poor neighborhood. he has a friend named kevin who lives in a wealthy neighborhood. >> that video about systemic racism was part of an assignment that a high school teacher in south carolina named mary wood, that she gave to her ap language class back in february. the video was supposed to prepare students for a writing assignment based on the book "between the world and me" an award winning best selling memoir that details america's complicated racial past and its present. but mary wood's students never got to finish reading that book. her school's administration stepped in and ordered her to stop teaching it in class after

complaints from two students about the video you just saw. last year south carolina state lawmakers passed a rule in the state budget that makes it illegal to use state money to teach any ideas related to race including that an individual by virtue of his race or sex is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive and ideas that cause an individual to feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his race or sex. if that language sounds familiar, it's because it's almost an exact replica of language in florida governor desantis' stop woke act. and thanks to e-mails those two students sent to a member of their school board, we know just how uncomfortable these students were. one e-mail reads in part hearing the teacher's opinion and watching these videos made me feel uncomfortable. i actually felt ashamed to be caucasian. i understand where in ap

language where we're learning to develop an argument and have evidence to support it, yet this topic is too heavy to discuss. another wrote, i was incredibly uncomfortable and was in shock that she would do something illegal like that. the students sent their complaints not to the teacher but to a sympathetic school board member who was instrumental in escalating the matter. that board member ran for and endorsed her seat with the lexington chapter of moms for liberty. and moms for liberty is quite enthusiastic what is happening in mary wood's classroom. earlier this week they wrote teaching critical thinking does not require indoctrination. students are pushing pack. moms for liberty first gained national attention by disrupting school board meetings in florida over covid policies. the group has since expanded its reach nationwide with what they say 285 chapters in 44 states.

and moms for liberty has expanded its focus as well to target books and the teaching of race, lgbtq rights, and other inclusive curricula. that mobilization prompted the southern poverty law center to designate moms for liberty an extremist group. meanwhile, the group's influence is growing beyond the classroom. last month -- or later this month they're planning to hold a summit in philadelphia and at least four republican presidential candidates are expected to attend because right now culture wars are republican policy. still to come tonight, 2024 presidential politics may be about to get weird. i mean they already are kind of weird, but this time they're getting weird on the democratic side. we are going to explain that. plus republican governors are using human beings as pawns to score political points in the game that has no winners. we are going to tell you what democrats are doing about it coming up next. t democrats are doing about it coming up next in 99% of people over 50.

it's lying dormant, waiting... and could reactivate. shingles strikes as a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. and it could wake at any time. think you're not at risk for shingles? it's time to wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention. the sleep number climate360 smart bed is the only smart bed in the world that actively cools, warms, and effortlessly responds to both of you talk to your doctor or pharmacist

for up to 44 minutes more restful sleep per night. save $1,500 on the sleep number climate360 smart bed. shop now only at sleep number.

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.

at this point, the stunt has become very familiar. migrants flown or bussed from border states to liberal cities often left in politically pointed locations like outside of vice president kamala harris's d.c. residence. these are not coordinated humanitarian efforts.

they are stunts by republican governors using people as pawns to own the libs, often giving less than a days warning to local charity groups helping those in those cities. it happened yesterday in los angeles. the coalition for humane immigrant rights in los angeles was tipped off just one night before republican texas governor greg abbott bussed 42 migrants to their city. according to that humanitarian group the migrants including children and toddlers arrived in los angeles after a 23-hour bus ride without food, a claim that governor abbott denies. for many of these migrants being shipped to a random liberal city means family separation and the disruption of their asylum claims, that was the case for some of the migrants who arrived in l.a. yesterday. one migrant told the california humanitarian group that he had an immigration interview in new york, which he now risked missing. he said i don't know how to read, i don't know what this paper says. all i know is that they told me

i need to be somewhere in new york. is that nearby. the group also told "the new york times" that when they learned texas was busing pligrnts to l.a. they thought it could be a false alarm like the many they had heard in the past. in the past two weeks governor ron desantis through 36 migrants to sacramento, california. but the stunt has become so common that even though this was the first time a republican governor sent migrants to california, the city was ready. last night l.a. mayor karen bass disclosed she directed the city to plan for an event like this last year. so yesterday the migrants were immediately brought to a local church where they were given food and supplies and toys for the children. they were offered attorneys and help to getting to their actual intended destinations so that they might continue their legal immigration process. this is not a natural disaster that los angeles developed a contingency plan for, it is a man made one and one that is now

repeated so frequently that responsibly running a city requires planning for stunts like these. joining me now is tim miller, former communications director for jeb bush's 2016 presidential campaign and now writer at large for the bulwark. thanks for being here tonight. i think the experience you had working with jeb bush is so critical in a moment like this when we try to understand how this sort of cruelty, the expense, the gamesmanship, that all of this became good optics for republicans seeking higher office. i mean how did we get to this point? >> things change and jeb on how seriously took this issue, he wrote an entire book with chapter upon chapter. i'm sure your viewers don't agree with every suggestion he had, but the whole point of it was how can we come up with a reasonable policy that secures

our borders and being humane. and just the departure from what we're seeing now just on both levels, one, it's not a serious effort to solve the crisis. it's not as if greg abbott is say i'm going to work with other governors and share the burden. i have to imagine that's someone you can call up and cut a deal with, with texas, say, hey, we can share some of the burden. this is not an effort to solve the problem. it's a total troll, it's a troll because unfortunately the reason why this has changed in the republican party it is what republican voters want. and the more relevant experience i have, unfortunately, alex, it's not the jeb campaign but last year during the mid-term going to a kari lake and masters event in arizona, the desantis migrant stunt, was the biggest

part of the day. it shows this is what republican voters are motivated by this, that's the most depressing part of this whole thing. >> and i remember you going to that event, tim. the fact is there's the economic cost, right? if you're an anti-migrant state that is going to cost you economically given where labor is these days and also the fact desantis has filled his coughers with $12 million allocated with really just own the libs. he's taking texas migrants and paying for their flights to liberal cities is which is on so many levels absolutely -- i keep using the word bonkers in this program, but there is no other word for it. but the essence of this is what you point out, it's the cruelty piece. and to me it seems like immigration has become this county fair for republicans to show-off their cruellest policies. why the lust to be mean to

fellow human beings? why has that gotten such a toe hold? why has that seized the imagination of the gop? >> yeah, i think there are a lot of underlying elements. i hate to blame everything on trump, but i do think trump did unleash people's darker angels, right? i think it's true. i think people got a taste of this of enjoying him watching him insult, degrade, demean people they didn't like, enjoying him saying things and propose policies no one would ever imagine like a muslim ban or things like this. and i think that opened the door to this and other trump camps saw there were these base instincts within the republican electorate that they had a response to this. and i just think the desantis thing to your point, it is such a category difference. you have to say this. the greg abbott thing is gross,

and he at least is on a border. i think the desantis thing is a purely performative stunt paid for by florida taxpayers, so it's not conservative in that sense. there is no substantive need for it. he's surrounded by water, he's not on a border. there's no policy to be solving. it is purely a, hey, i know republican voters will respond to me being mean to these migrants and more importantly being mean to the liberals, the so-called snooty liberals, and that is the thickest part of all this at least as it goes to desantis it's not even a policy issue he's dealing with the in the state. it's purely performative. >> and it bears mentioning desantis won 58% of the latino vote in florida where he's enacted some of the most draconian immigration policy that's going to make it harder for migrants to go to the doctor, and it's beginning to --

it's beginning to affect his support among latinos. i just wonder if you think so publicly broadcasting just a deeply cruel policy towards people who also happen to be largely of hispanic origin is going to be a problem for republicans seeking to win a general election. >> i do. and some of the rhetorical stuff was before the election, but the substance was not. this bill they passed in florida, for example, where they have very deep punishments for people even traveling with migrants, giving aid to migrants, traveling across the state with them like bringing them from where they might have traveled to another part of the state for shelter or whatever. now there's felony penalties for that in florida. so i do think that will hurt him. i think he benefitted -- we can do a whole show why ron desantis ends up getting 58%.

i do think it's going to hurt republicans, and interestingly some with latinos but a big portion with the folks they've lost, college educated suburban republicans who who are attracted and who have abandoned the party in droves. those are the people of every race, and i think you're seeing that in the suburbs. you know, republicans being punished. i think desantis would be punished in the same way trump would with those voters in particular. >> and there's just a weight on one's own conscious to send toddlers on 23-hour long bus rides with no food. we have one more story this evening about how the 2024 race may be about to get weird for president biden. that is next. o get weird for president biden. that is next

i know there's conflicting information about dupuytren's contracture. i thought i couldn't get treatment yet? well, people may think that their contracture has to be severe to be treated, but it doesn't. if you can't lay your hand flat on the table, talk to a hand specialist. but what if i don't want surgery? well, then you should find a hand specialist certified to offer nonsurgical treatments. what's the next step? visit findahandspecialist.com today to get started. you might remember this inflection point back in

february 2020 following representative jim clyburn's endorsement of candidate joe biden won the south carolina primary and that put him on a path to win the democratic nomination. since then president biden has signaled a desire to give states like north carolina a larger role in his nominating process. back in december he asked democratic leaders to switch up the party members. but last february when the dnc officially voted to adopt south carolina's promotion to the front of the pack, new hampshire and iowa were not happy. new hampshire officials said they would ignore the change and argued that state law requires them to hold the presidential primary at least one week before any other state. officials in iowa have announced they're in the process of the holding their contest on the same day as the republican caucus, which is in january, also at the very front of the calender. and here is where things could

get weird. if iowa or new hampshire go rogue, president biden, the man who is almost certain to win the democratic nomination, may be forced to keep his name off those ballots for noncompliance. and that means that longshot candidates like anti-vaxxer robert kennedy jr. or spiritual advisor maryanne williamson, either of them could win the first two nominating contests for the year merchandise the dnc has warned it will strip those states of the national convention delegates, meaning their primaries would ultimately not count. tomorrow in indianapolis the rules and bylaws committee plans to review and finalize the plan. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. this morning brand new reporting on donald trump's obsession with kpi