by the way, nine other submersibles regularly make trips or have made trips out to the submersible to the titanic. this is the only time anybody has died. >> let's keep it that way. tom costello, tom, thank you very much for joining us. also just such a tragedy. that's going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now. ♪♪ hi there, everyone, it's 4:00 in the east on a day full of news here at home and abroad. we'll have several live reports from kyiv on the ongoing crisis unfolding in russia in a couple minutes. but we start with the efforts to hold accountable those involved in a coup plot here at home. there is brand new reporting breaking just this afternoon that some of the people who had a front row seat to the actions of the disgraced twice impeached now twice indicted ex-president before, during, and after the capitol insurrection may now, right now, be providing crucial

testimony to special counsel jack smith as his probe into january 6th zooms ahead. exclusive reporting from nbc news's julia ainsley says this, quote, about half a dozen secret service agents have testified before the grand jury that will decide whether or not to indict former president donald trump for his alleged role in the january 6th 2021 riot at the capitol, and efforts to interfere in the peaceful transfer of the presidency. that's according to two sources familiar with their testimony. roughly five or six acts have appeared in compliance with subpoenas they received. while it's unclear what testimony they provided, we do know that trump's secret service agents are very much in a position to corroborate some of the most stunning testimony of the star witness of the january 6th select committee. the meadows' aide who pulled back the curtain on the inner workings and private conversations of the

trump-directed coup plot. we are talking about cassidy hutchinson. hear is some of what she told the committee last year about incidents involving the head of trump's detail, bobby ingle and tony ornato. >> i recall tony and i having a conversation with mark probably around 10:00 a.m., 10:15 a.m. where i remember tony mentioning knives, guns, in the form of pistol and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears and body poles. spears were one item, flag poles were one items and tony had relayed to me something to the effect of and these effing people are fastening spears onto the end of flag poles. i was in the vicinity of a conversation where i overheard the president say something to the effect of i don't effing care that they have weapons.

they're not here to hurt me. take the effing mags away. let me people in. let the people in, take the effing mags away. >> the president said something to the effect of i'm the effing president. take me up to the capitol now. to which bobby responded, sir, we have to go back to the west wing. the president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. mr. engel grabbed his arm, said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. we're going back to the west wing. we're not going to the capitol. mr. trump then used his free hand to lunge towards bobby engel, and when mr. >> secret service agents could bring jack smith closer to understanding to what extend the deadly violence that unfolded on

january 6th was preplanned, and what role the trump white house played in any of that planning. once again, from that new reporting, quote, also of interest is what agents knew and discussed leading up to and during the capitol insurrection. the department of homeland security office of inspector general notiied congress last year that all text messages between agents on january 5th and january 6th, 2021, were lost. the agency said it was part of a pre-planned software upgrade. their communications and anything agents may be able to recall could inform the grand jury about the extent to which trump knew about the potential for violence on january 6th. and how he responded to threats made against vice president mike pence. the secret service on the witness stand in jack smith's january 6th investigation is where we begin today with some of our favorite reporters and friends, pulitzer prize winning national investigative reporter for "the washington post" and msnbc contributor carol leonnig

is here and former deputy assistant attorney general and former u.s. attorney harry litman is here. that is my colleague julia ainsley's fantastic. reporting. cassidy hutchinson provided that testimony, the live testimony, which was the second clip. it will be one year in two days. one year that donald trump and everyone around him spent not so privately trying to knock down the voracity of that specific bit of her testimony about what happened in the presidential vehicle. and efforts to harass her and intimidate her and try to make her sound and look like she wasn't telling the full truth have failed, and now it seems to have come full circle almost exactly a year after that testimony, half a dozen secret service agents testifying before the grand jury. wow. >> couldn't agree more, nicolle, and hats off to julie for really good reporting. i would add a few things. we don't know what jack smith

and his team are asking those agents, but any former or current agent who's being questioned about donald trump's activities and white house activities in the days leading up to january 6th is bound to get an earful about things that we've all reported on for more than a year. and that includes, as you may well remember, nicolle, that donald trump also planned to march on the capitol. for two weeks, he was communicating with his agents about his desire to do this, his white house deputy chief of staff and former detail leader tony ornato was hoping that donald trump would sort of forget this idea that he would march on the capitol with protesters coming to washington, the ones he summoned on january 6th, and at the very last couple of days, donald trump made clear, oh, no, no, no, i haven't forgotten. i really want to march on the capitol. you'll also remember the march

on the capitol is illegal. there was a permit for a rally, but not for a march, and internally, trump supporters who supported this rally were communicating their nervousness about the fact that it would be illegal to announce a march, and yet trump supporters were doing just that, promoting this almost as a cage match that would head up to the u.s. capitol on the day that congress was slated to certify the victory, the presidential election of president-elect joe biden. what else is it that jack smith is going to learn from agents that julie's described well in this story? what else are they going to learn? they could learn about donald trump's state of mind heading into january 6th. cassidy hutchinson's testimony, which you aired just now about donald trump being completely comfortable with his supporters

having weapons, pistol, rifles, knives, flak jackets, bullet proof vests, bear spray, all of these things were being communicated to him in a risk assessment on the day of, and yet, he said i don't care. take the magnetometers down. they can come and march with me to the capitol. that idea of sort of pointing the armament and pointing the weapon at the capitol really terms you a lot about donald trump's state of mind and agents who are on the right shoulder of the president can give you an eye into that that no one else can. >> you know, carol, a lot of what we know is in this frame of great reporting, great journalism, and you did a ton of it as well as a congressional investigation, and we don't know when we have these conversations how much jack smith has been able to pierce beyond the body

of information we have from news reporting and from the committee. but it was a sense until the very end -- i mean, i remember asking congresswoman zoe lofgren until like the last 12 hours that the committee existed about secret service response to their efforts to get all their messages, and it's clear that in the end they got some emails where they couldn't get text messages, but they were never able to fully pierce the inner conversations that agents were having amongst themselves. it feels significant that this reporting suggests a half a dozen agents have been before the grand jury. that seems like a significant difference between how far congress was able to get and how far jack smith may now be. >> well, of course. i mean, once you get somebody in a subpoena, grand jury testimony, they're under incredible penalty and pain to remember it accurately, and to tell you the full story. and i have to say, you know, we all should keep in mind the dueling heart of a secret

service agent. they have historically believed that they keep the confidences of their president so that they can keep that president close and safe. that if they start blabbing about what they see inside the oval, that that is going to be violating their sort of bond, their duty of trust and confidence with the commander in chief. but here we have a situation where a president, a former president is under investigation and so are his allies for potential crimes, and that trumps the duty to keep the confidence of the former president. however, i think it's really important what you just said, nicolle. it's an advancement because you no longer need a text that says bobby ingle told tony ornato x. you get to ask did the president reach for your clavicle? did the president lose his mind when you told him you're not going to go up to the capitol?

you get to ask tony ornato, assuming tony is one of the individuals. he's somebody that jack smith it seems to me would want to talk to. he gets to ask tony ornato, so did you tell the president or who did tell the president that there would be weapons in the crowd, and he said let's take them all to the capitol. those are important conversations and they're under pain of perjury if they're not told truthfully. >> i have some of this testimony, i'm going to play it for you in a second, harry. i just want to underscore what carol leonnig just said. in very much the same way that the audiotape of trump, one, articulating his possession of still classified documents, and two, articulating his knowledge that an ex-president can no longer declassify anything, including his own shoe if it happened to be in that box of stuff, this seems to open the door to his state of mind that he wanted his armed supporters insides mags and he wanted to go with his armed supporters, and i'm thinking of another piece of

evidence that i didn't pull for today, but i will tomorrow, and that is the radio traffic not from d.c. police, not from capitol police, but from the presidential detail, and the only reason they would have radio traffic of a surveillance trip down from the white house ellipse, down to the capitol reporting that they see a guy in a tree with an ar-style weapon, a guy in fatigues, a guy in olive pants with another long gun is because they planned to move the president from one spot to the other. there's no other reason, and i'm also thinking about all of cassidy hutchinson's testimony that liz cheney pulled out of her explaining what an otr movement is. it's one that's not on the schedule. fewer people know so there's less preplanning and less security needed because not as many people know where the president will be. that's what trump planned. he planned an otr trip down with the armed supporters of his to the capitol. that seems like pretty solid

evidence of his intent to obstruct an official proceeding, harry. >> i actually think it's more. i think the let my people go through the mag no, ma'am ters is strong evidence of his state of mind. the more he is screaming at the secret service, the more we know he has planned to go to the capitol, and the more we know he has planned to go to the capitol, the more he looks like a participant in a conspiracy to engage in insurrection, the very charge that people have already been convicted of that were on the ground. so this little epepisode, i thi, matters a lot. as carol was saying, secret service does not normally like to testify. you may remember this from the clinton years where they wanted to resist, but i think the fact that all these tapes went missing under somewhat suspicious circumstances is -- were impelled or gave smith a stronger argument. look, we really need this now

for a criminal investigation so it has to yield. so i actually think this shows him with a very rich piece of evidence on exactly the conspiracy. and remember, we just know six secret service people have testified sometime in the last year, this investigation was opened in april. could be more, could be fewer, but at a minimum, they're not -- they're not in the front seat. they're on the stage with him. they hear everything, and if they're forced to talk, we're going to hear everything. >> that's such an important point, and i noted this too, in julia's reporting that they're there under subpoena. it's the same thing that mark -- mr. short said when he was asked on fox news about responding to the congressional subpoena. i was there under subpoena. they seemed to be saying that to an audience of exactly one, donald trump, harry. >> yeah, i mean, they don't want to do this. to carol's point their argument is in the future the president's

going to run from us rather than be protected from us because he won't trust us not to talk, ask that's been the secret service institutional position for some 30 years, but it yielded here because, a, it's criminal, and b, they really need the evidence because they themselves -- we don't know how it happened, but it isn't pretty, i don't think, somehow managed to lose all the texts from january 5th and 6th. >> you know, carol, i want to play that section you just described. here's cassidy hutchinson and liz cheney sort of testifying to what was conveyed to trump in terms of knowing ahead of time about violence. >> remember mr. ornato had talked about intelligence reports. i remember mr. ornato coming in saying we had intel reports saying there could potentially be violence on the 6th. >> the secret service was looking at similar information and watching the planned

demonstrations. in fact, their intelligence division sent several emails to white house personnel like deputy chief of staff tony ornato and the head of the president's protective detail, robert ingle including certain materials listing events like those on the screen. the white house continued to receive updates about planned demonstrations including information regarding the proud boys organizing and planning to attend events on january 6th. >> carol, there's also the haunting testimony, again, from folks on the vice president's staff that they were planning the day before for extra security for mike pence because they thought he was threatened, and unfortunately, they were right about that. do we have the full picture of what the pence detail and the rest of secret service who were instructed to take trump to the venue where we also know he was

indifferent to threats against pence's life. do we have any visibility into what they were saying to one another, and might that be another thing that jack smith is probing? >> well, i think it's very conceivable. i know for myself i don't feel like i have a full enough picture of pence's detail and their coordination with the white house. you know, at the white house, there's a big board. i won't go into all the specifics, but the big board tells you exactly where every important vip protectee is at any given moment. so the white house secret service headquarters is kind of managing where is our people. where's our president? where's our vice president? where's our national security adviser? what's their status? the vice president is number two, but by a long shot in terms of your security priorities at the secret service, but it is worrisome that while the secret service is taking in all of this material in the days before

january 6th, warning, foreshadowing about attacks, a takeover of the capitol, violence and promises and pledges to attack police, you know, you're going to have to be ready to draw down on the cops, it is sort of worrisome to think that that information was not fully briefed and warned to vice president pence's detail and his security leader who must have felt themselves to basically be, you know, weapon -- i'm sorry, forgive me, target on their back. they are going to the capitol. everybody knows where pence is going, and yet, that's where the violence and where the bullet is aimed. so i'd like to hear more myself, and i wonder what jack smith will learn. i think there will be some stunning revelations on that side, and i also think it's really important to understand, remember, secret service officials as we reported in the attack at "the washington post," as sort of a breakdown of

everything that happened before january 6th and on the day of. secret service officials at headquarters were engaged in traffic saying you're not taking him to the capitol, are you? just confirm. call me, bobby. you're not taking him to the capitol, right? i mean, they knew how serious this was, and that morning before, they had -- you had mentioned this a little bit before, nicolle, when you were asking harry that good question about state of mind. in that morning, they have a whole team of countersurveillance units, device in plain clothes who are secret service officers patrolling the area, and they see large numbers of rally supporters dropping off essentially their armament, their big bags of weapons. their bags of other items and not going inside the

magnotometers. >> we lost carol. i've got a thunderstorm above my head, so consider yourselves warned. suffice to say, the secret service coming in responding to subpoenas, a huge development. no one better to talk to about it than carol leonnig and you, harry, you are sticking around a little bit longer with us. when we come back, special counsel jack smith's other investigation into the ex-president and his request to start the classified documents trial months from when the judge put it on her schedule, watching for how donald trump and the judge respond to that one, that story is next. plus, we'll look at the aftermath of the most serious challenge in decades to the longest serving russian leader since stalin. and what this weekend's rebellion could mean for the conflict in ukraine, with russian president vladimir putin speaking out angrily and publicly in the last hour. we'll tell you what he had to say and why it matters. and later in the broadcast, the ex-president telling his supporters that his legal woes,

that his very real criminal indictment was an indictment just for them. his dangerous and bizarre and desperate spin on the criminal case against him. all those stories and more when "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere.

♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ ) ( ♪♪ ) -awww. -awww. -awww. -nope. ( ♪♪ ) constant contact delivers the marketing tools your small business needs to keep up, excel, and grow. constant contact. helping the small stand tall. (jennifer) the reason why golo customers have such long term success is because we focus on real foods in the right balance constant contact. so you get the results you want. when i tell people how easy it was for me to lose weight on golo, they don't believe me. they don't believe i can eat real food

and lose this much weight. the release supplement makes losing weight easy. release sets you up for successful weight loss because it supports your blood sugar levels between meals so you aren't hungry or fatigued. after i started taking release, the weight just started falling off. since starting golo and taking release, i've gone from a size 12 to a 4. before golo, i was hungry all the time and constantly thinking about food. after taking release, that stopped. with release, i didn't feel that hunger that comes with dieting. which made the golo plan really easy to stick to. since starting golo and release, i have dropped seven pant sizes and i've kept it off. golo is real, our customers are real, and our success stories are real. why not give it a try? wake up, achievers. you're making the most of every hour of your life. except the hours that you're sleeping. so why do we leave so much untapped potential on the table?

this is a next level bed, for a next level you. my circadian rhythm is kicking your circadian rhythms butt! it's not a competition. i know, but i'm still winning! so, it is a competition. the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is now only $899. plus, 48-month financing on all smart beds. shop now only at sleep number switching gears to the case of the twice indicted, disgraced ex-president donald trump's mishandling of classified documents, special counsel jack smith is asking for the trial to be pushed back until december. according to "the new york times" reporting on this, quote, in their filing, prosecutors

said the additional time would be needed to obtain security clearances for defense lawyers and deal with the procedures around classified evidence. it would also give defense lawyers more time to review the volumes of materials prosecutors have turned over to them, according to the filing. the original trial date was set by federal judge aileen cannon. given the unprecedented nature of this case, and the combination of classified evidence is not a surprise that prosecutors have asking for more time. for the first ever trial of an ex-president, a december trial is still relatively speedy, but with donald trump who's pleaded not guilty who's running for president in 2024 the clock is ticking on jack smith and his team and the country before the election gets into full swing. joining our conversation betsy woodruff swan. harry's still with us. this seems like a clash of two

worlds, right? and one is jack smith, a prosecutor and a national security expert who's probably at best indifferent to the political seasons but certainly aware of them, and the other side is donald trump who seems to be first, second, and third a political animal. >> yeah, and he always sees these legal challenges that he faces throughout, you know, pretty much the last four, or eight years or so, he always sees them through a political lens, either as challenges that are politically helpful, helpful legal arguments he can make or of course as problems that are problems solely because of the way that they could affect his political future, and of course, that's part of the reason that so many of his responses to these legal issues throughout the course of his time in public life have been essentially the strategy of stepping on a rake. that's how he handled it

initially when he had that travel ban targeting travelers from majority muslim countries. rudy giuliani and trump himself signaled that this was -- this was deliverance on the muslim ban that trump promised to bring about during his first campaign for president, and from then going forward, trump himself and his allies regularly make these public statements related to his legal issues that are, to put it gently, often profoundly unhelpful. and that's not a fluke. that's because he sees these challenges through a political lens, and of course trump without question is thinking about ways that if he becomes president a second time he can dramatically overhaul the relationship between the white -- with the white house and the justice department and find ways to essentially puppet master the way that that law enforcement agency works in the united states to his own political advantage. >> i mean, harry, that is the

view from earth too, right? were the mishandling of classified documents, it isn't just an issue of whose stuff he had in his boxes with his pans and his underwear, but the lives of the people who created the information that's on the paper. i mean, absent from everything trump and his allies have t utter about this case is any recognition of why this matters. why a classified document is something that is protected by the government at all, and it seems that even his republican opponents for the nomination of their party are calling him out on that. >> yeah, it's been a breathtaking silence on exactly that point, and the people in the republican party who have been departing from the party line have said exactly that. come on, guys, this is not some misplaced boxes, et cetera. this put people at really severe risk, and it puts us in severe difficulties going forward trying to persuade people to

join us and maybe put their lives on the line. just quickly on this request for -- it's what sounds like a request for a delay. i think it's actually a request for a speedy trial. everyone understood the august date wouldn't hold, and i think smith is well aware that trump is going to be looking to delay at every turn, and this is his way of saying december, but i mean it, and by then, we can really handle the one most challenging and time consuming issue, the classified documents, and now when -- if and when trump comes in and says, oh, my lord, we need until august or whatever, the contrast will be stark. one more quick point to see about delay strategy, tomorrow co-defendant walt nauta is actually being arraigned with his new lawyer. we'll see if that lawyer says, oh, your honor, i just need two months. i'm new to this case. it's so complicated, et cetera. but i think actually smith is drawing an early line even though it seems like he's the

first out of the box to recommend a delay. >> harry, let me hit you with some new reporting and see if you can make sense of this for us. this is from "the new york times" over the weekend that smith's team provided the defense lawyers with an estimate of 84 witnesses who might be called to testify. and just in a few minutes ago, the judge has denied that list. what would judge saying that the special counsel hasn't explained why 84 witnesses would be necessary. what's behind some of that back and forth over the list of witnesses, harry? >> well, that's -- it's interesting, and as you say, it is news. first, the big point was that they gave it over at all. they didn't have to do it yet. i assume she is saying i'm not persuaded yet. we need that many, you're going to have to show me, government, that you need to march in what's going to be weeks and weeks of trial. and by the way, the government said 84 and there may be more.

the big point is they've given them that road map, which the government rarely does, and is basically saying have at it. do your worst. here's what we're going to be coming at you with, and we're not playing hide the ball. we're ready to go. >> betsy, do you have any reporting specifically on trump's reaction to the two most prominent prosecutors ever associated with him, bill barr and chris christie saying he's guilty as you know what? >> there's no question that trump is app plek tick with bill barr and the fact that his former attorney general who was loyal almost until the last second has now turned around and leveled, shall we say some really eyebrow raising criticisms of trump himself. trump has gone out of his way to go after barr -- >> he sounds like jack smith's like unwanted spokesperson. i mean, he's out there talking about the strength of the government's case all day every day. >> like jack smith's evil twin almost, and it's sort of -- it's just almost like this funny

little parody of him that bar is doing. and of course trump finds this appalling, very upsetting, and part of the reason for that is that it's provided this amazing ammunition to trump's critics and to very sensible journalists asking good questions as to why so many of the people who trump thought were the very best people he was bringing in are now saying stuff like this guy has real problems, the type of sentiment that barr himself has brought out regarding trump. i haven't heard as much about trump's specific view of chris christie, i'm sure he'll be airing those with a great deal of alackty as the campaign cycle continues and as christie backs more of a foil to him in this primary season. >> harry, i always find it fascinating in a political context and in this case a legal context when the public -- the voiceless middle, plenty of

-- the vast majority are in the middle. when they hear the same thing from bill barr and chris christie as they hear from anyone on earth one viewing the facts as they are, that he commits his crimes in broad daylight, he lies and deflects about why he committed them. in this case he told brett bret baier they're mine, and he blunted out a presidential records act which has nothing to do with presidential documents and boxes. what do you make of sort of the action to communicate something seemly across the partisan divide on an issue so sensitive as the rule of law. >> you would think and hope that's exactly what it would do. we talk about a broad middle. to me it's not clear if it's broad or narrow. there is obviously a core group of supporters who like the idea that the establishment and doj and even bill barr are totally wigging out at the terrible

consequences, but there must be, mustn' t there a group that said, my gosh, he really put the nation at risk. if nothing else, if there's any other choice we should take it because this is exactly who he is going forward. i think everyone recognizes exactly who he is and his consummately selfish motives, and for his core supporters, they say that's great, right on, and just sticks it to the deep state. but there has to be a middle somewhere of some thickness that says this is not who we want as our commander in chief. >> well, this might date me, but it used to be really important on the right to preserve and protect our intelligence and our abilities to have an edge in u.s. national security, our military. i mean, the greatest consumer of u.s. intelligence is the military. so used to be priorities on the right, but again, that makes me

sound old. betsy woodruff swan, thank you so much for jumping on, and harry litman thank you for starting us off today. up next for us, we will switch gears and turn to a volatile situation in russia with the reader of the armed rebellion in exile, vladimir putin still trying to assert himself publicly. we'll dig into all of it with some of our favorite friends from the region next. riends from the region next

your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do.

indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire i will be a travel influencer... hey, i thought you were on vacation? it's too expensive. use priceline, they've got deals no one else has. what about work? i got you. looking great you guys! ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ ♪♪ alex! mateo, hey how's business? great. you know that loan has really worked wonders.

that's what u.s. bank is for. and you're growing in california? -yup, socal, norcal... -monterey? -all day. -a branch in ventura? that's for sure-ah. atms in fresno? fres-yes. encinitas? yes, indeed-us. anaheim? big time. more guacamole? i'm on a roll-ay. how about you? i'm just visiting. u.s. bank. ranked #1 in customer satisfaction with retail banking in california by j.d. power. and there he is. chaz. the rec league's self-crowned pickleball king. do you just bow down? no you de-thrown the king. pedialyte. 3x the electrolytes.

. we gave putin no excuse to blame this on the west or to blame this on nato. we made clear that we were not involved. we had nothing to do with it. this was part of the struggle within the russian system. i told them that no matter what happened in russia, let me say it again, no matter what happened in russia, we the united states would continue to support ukraine's defense and its sovereignty and its territorial integrity. >> that's president joe biden earlier today on the events of the weekend, dramatic. members of the armed mercenary force the wagner group nearly reaching moscow only to abruptly turn around and stand down with their leader heading into exile in belarus. it has everyone scrambling to understand what will happen next in russia and ukraine. a visibly angry putin addressed the public in the last hour saying the wagner group miscalculated. he thanked the military and said

blackmail attempts to produce unrest will fail. this is a story about a villainous war criminal, and a more villainous until their dramatic bust up this week was basically putin's military fixer carrying out brutal acts on the battlefield. ambassador mcfall, former ambassador to russia described them on saturday as events were unfolding as quote, two thugs. one of them, the leader of the wagner group, yevgeny prigozhin released a message today claiming he did not intend to overthrow the putin regime. "the washington post" adds this reporting, quote, prigozhin said in his video message that the rebellion, which he refers to as a, quote, march of justice, came after orders that would have resulted in the absorption of wagner mercenary forces in ukraine into the conventional military beginning july 1st. one of the biggest questions right now, what does it all mean for the largest land war in europe since world war ii and the biggest foreign policy

crisis facing the united states and our allies with the greatest consequences for democracy there and around the world. to help us answer those questions, joining us live from kyiv, my colleague ali velshi who is back in ukraine. are you in kyiv, my friend? did i get that right? >> reporter: i am, yes, yep. >> okay, also in kyiv our friend igor novikov. i have this idea that after this you two will have a wonderful cocktail together and solve all the world's problems. ali, you were on your way to the region when i jumped downstairs on saturday, and i was so excited to hear what you would report when you got there. first, you tell me what you've learned since arriving. >> reporter: well, i think there are a whole lot of layers to this cake, right? what this means, as you said, joe biden talking about what this means to to the world and nato and the commitment to ukraine. what it means to ukraine that russia is in some sort of chaos or disarray, and what it means inside russia. and all of those are independently important.

you noted that when vladimir putin spoke just a little while ago, he was visibly angry. this is not a guy who normally looks visibly angry on tv. in fact, joe biden had said we were not involved in this. that's a message putin seems to have gotten. he says they, and he's referring to the wagner group and prigozhin and armed rebels. he said they wanted russians to fight each other. they rubbed their hands dreaming of taking revenge for their failures at the front, but they miscalculated. this is where the rubber hits the road. this counteroffensive in many cases has been led by the wagner group. they've done some of the harshest fighting and brutal fighting around bakhmut and places like that, and he is calling those failures. wagner group had prigozhin has for over a year been saying that the failure of russia to take ukraine was based on bad information that was given to putin, wrong expectations, and military failures. so basically they're all blaming each other for the fact that ukraine still remains an independent and free country

with the support of the united states and nato. ukrainians are looking at this and saying it's not clear what success looks like here, but there is some advantage to the idea that russia, their invade er is in chaos, and they have had gains, though small, they have had gains, what putin calls the so-called counteroffensive. it's about ten villages and hamlets, little places, but the ukrainians are moving forward, and the sentiment that i am reading hear is that as russia remains in disarray, that is advantage ukraine for the moment. >> because igor anyone anywhere understands that an effort going well doesn't result in one of the key military leaders marching on the nation's capital that houses the other. i mean, tell me what the real talk is among ukrainians and in zelenskyy's inner circle about what this means is really going on and the recognition that the war is going not so well for

russia. >> well, nicolle, let my by saying that this whole situation is incredibly surreal, and i'm trying not to laugh about it. the address that putin gave an hour ago they teased it was something that would change the course of history and literally ended up -- you remember donald trump's address when he was selling like baseball cards or nfts or something like that, it was very similar in magnitude. so putin looked shaken, and the whole situation, when the convict running a convict army turns against his war criminal president, it reminds me of the lord of the rings when they attack mordorf for some reason. for us it's surreal. we're always cheering and rooting for both sides of this argument, but we also have to take into terms a few very important issues. first of all, any chaos in russia risks escalation of atrocities against ukraine. so putin will be tempted to distract the attention from his

failures in the rotten system to actually doing something horrible in ukraine. second, they already mentioned it a few times ago, prigozhin who's fallen out of favor, exiled in belarus, if some of the wagner forces join him in belarus, he becomes a wild card for putin with, you know, the kremlin having possible deniability because of the seeming conflict. if prigozhin does something out of belarus, putin will pretend to to have plausible deniability. we're definitely monitoring everything closely. >> you know, that is interesting, ali, that even something that's bad for putin could also end up being bad for ukraine and their civilian population has borne the brunt of a lot of this vicious and brutal war. do you pick that up in your

conversations in your coverage? >> yeah, it comes down to what this means for putin and his legacy. this is one of the most serious things that's happened to what was the soviet union, the russian empire, and the russian federation, you know, in years. it's not just the most serious thing that's happened during vladimir putin's reign. when you think about this, when coups fail, sometimes the leader uses that as an opportunity, as igor was saying to show how strong they are. at the moment, the way to do that is to show your strength in ukraine. is he going to double down on things. we have reports that the cooling pods at the zaporizhzhia power plant have been mined. can you imagine if they explode those. there are things that can happen that could be escalatory just so that vladimir putin can put a stamp on this and say i'm actually in charge. and then the other message that's important is that vladimir putin is the strong man of the world. for all the strong men and authoritarians and dictators around the world, they've been looking to him. he has got to look weak. whatever the internal politics

and the machinations of this clown car coup were, this is a guy who had an armed rebellion within 150 miles of -- 150 kilometers of his nation's capital. what's he going to do about that to look tough. also, wagner is prosecuting wars all over africa on behalf of russia. so there's a lot of things at play here. the idea that prigozhin has just gone to hide out in belarus, which by the way also doesn't make sense because the belarusian leader is a puppet of vladimir putin. none of this makes sense. we're seeing the tip of the iceberg, and there's a whole lot of stuff going on below that we're not clear on. if you're in ukraine, and you're ukrainian today, yeah, i think igor is right, you're cheering for both sides, but there is some danger you'll feel the fallout of this. neither prigozhin nor putin were going to be good for russian, neither were going to be good

for the democratic opposition in russia. so we still have to see how this plays out. we don't know what an angry putin does. >> yeah, i want to -- i have to sneak in a quick break, but on the other side, i want to ask you what he does about, you know, the images tell the whole story, right? the russian military's convoy to kyiv was the stuff of late night comedies. i mean, broken down, out of gas, out of food, abandoned. it's an image that will last forever in the history of russia probably everywhere but inside russia. and yet, prigozhin's military convoy as it was zooming towards moscow, people in the streets weren't throwing eggs at them. they were cheering for them. they were cheering for the wagner group. and now that the world has seen that and that putin has been humiliated by his own little war criminal version of mini me, i want to ask you, i want to press on this door ali's opened, what does he do next? no one's going anywhere. we'll be right back with igor and ali on the short side of another break. stay with us.

to a child, this is what conflict looks like. children in ukraine are caught in the crossfire of war, forced to flee their homes. a steady stream of refugees has been coming across all day. it's basically cold. lacking clean water and sanitation. exposed to injury, hunger. exhausted and shell shocked from what they've been through. every dollar you give can help bring a meal, a blanket, or simply hope to a child living in conflict.

please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today with your gift of $10 a month, that's just $0.33 a day. we cannot forget the children in places like syria, born in refugee camps, playing in refugee camps, thinking of the camps as home. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, your gift can help children like ara in afghanistan, where nearly 20 years of conflict have forced the people into extreme poverty weakened and unable to hold herself up, ara was brought to a save the children's center, where she was diagnosed and treated for severe malnutrition. every dollar helps. please call or go online to givenowtosave.org today. with your gift of $10 a month, just $0.33 a day. and thanks to special government

grants that are available now, every dollar you give can multiply up to ten times the impact. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special save the children tote bag to show you won't forget the children who are living their lives in conflict. every war is a war against children. please give now. are we saying there's a chance that when we push that button... we destroy the world? detenator's charged. i don't know if we can be trusted with such a weapon. but i know the nazis can't. three... two... one...

we're back with two of my favorite humans, ali and igor are with us. igor, what does putin do, and maybe the better question is how does ukraine exploit this very public humiliation of vladimir putin? >> well, first, some military goals that we need to accomplish. and obviously, if you know, the lack of the wagner group, who are arguably better trained than the russian regular forces and plus forced to die without any other option on the table,

without them obviously the russian defenses are going to be somewhat weakened especially around bakhmut. but i think the most important thing now is to deal with the information warfare and propaganda because, i mean, the king is naked. stark naked. and we can see it now. i think one of the biggest conclusions i can make from this clown coup is the fact that the russian general population doesn't care one way or the other. they don't support prigozhin en masse. at the same time most of them don't support putin either. so they're incredibly passive. and therefore, if we can get the elites to clash i think the regime change is becoming tangible. and i think we're now seeing the countdown for putin's demise. >> and igor, is it -- i think one of the things maybe we get wrong here is that the greater threats would be from the dissidents, from the left, the people we support, people like navalny.

but it would appear that the people cheering prigozhin and the wagner group as they drove toward moscow were enthusiastic about someone more putiny than putin. where does the greatest threat to putin come from inside russia? >> nicolle, first of all, that's the biggest misconception people in the west have. if you study the russian history, you'd realize that none of the russian coups had anything to do with the liberal left. and i would say that the likes of navalny and everyone else are useless in changing the regime in russia. the change will only come from either complete, you know, dissipation of the system, the system that is rotten, or from the struggle of the hard-liners is usually the case in russia. but i think it's not the left that's going to bring about the change. i think the house of cards will eventually and very suddenly collapse and i think it's going to be bloody and it's going to be incredibly theatric and quick. >> you know, ali, this is what

former intelligence officials told me they were watching, igor just articulated, will russians kill russians. the answer on saturday was no. but that is -- it feels like a break glass moment should that come to pass. >> well, i mean, vladimir putin specifically said that in his speech today, in his angry speech, a little while ago. he specifically said they wanted us to fight with each other. he acknowledged that that was actually the goal here. you're right. i mean, igor's right. this is not a good choice between vladimir putin and prigozhin. but for ukrainians there is some hope in the idea that that -- there's a crack in the russian regime and you are seeing that in a moment where ukrainians both have and needed motivation in the spring counteroffensive. it does seem to be energizing them. when you see the messages being put out on telegram from the leaders in ukraine, from zelenskyy, the speeches that they are giving. they are capitalizing on this

moment, that there may be an opportunity, there may be something wrong with the russian armor. they've known that for a long time. but maybe the at the top. this is for the moment motivating. i think everybody is waiting to see what happens next, and it's a big mystery because we don't know what happens next. igor points out a lot of the fighters who were at the tip of the spear in the fight against ukraine are now not going to be in ukraine or they're not working for prigozhin, they're working for the russian army. that's a whole different story. there's a lot to still see here, but for the moment ukrainians are taking advantage of the fact that they have a counteroffensive under way, they are gaining ground and they do think that russia is faltering. >> ali, we're going to tune in and watch you at 8:00 p.m. eastern. i'm not good enough at math to figure out what time it will be for you. some 2:00 in the morning. igor, thank you for staying up. >> 3:00. >> 3:00. there we go. i wanted to talk to you both since saturday. thank you so much for making time to talk to us today. we're really grateful.

up next for us here, the consequences for the republican party in this country of their continued enabling of the criminally indicted twice impeached ex-president donald trump, who is now a candidate once again. a very short break for us. we'll be right back. don't go anywhere. l be right ba. don't go anywhere.

what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

narrator: it's called, “shared leadership.” driven by each community in a groundbreaking setting: california's community schools. where parents and families, students and educators, make decisions as one. creating the school and shaping futures - together. based on the needs of their students... ...steeped in local culture. curriculum from cyber security to gardening. and assisting families with their needs: wellness centers, food pantries, and parental education. california's community schools: reimagining public education.

so i started at the agency in 1980. there were 60 stars on that wall. there are three times that now.

to be casual with them is unimaginable. i told you last time that the idea that a president is less responsible and less concerned is unimaginable to me. and yet that's the memt in which we find ourselves. >> hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in the east. that was former deputy director of national intelligence sue gordon, growing a little bit emotional as she talked about what to members of the cia is sacred ground. the wall of stars at langley headquarters. in honor of cia officers who lost their lives serving our country, anonymously, without places or roads or stamps named after them. it is the same spot, the same hallowed ground where the disgraced twice impeached, now twice indicted ex-president stood on his first full day as president of the united states of america and bragged and hechtored and frankly lied about the size of his crowds.

as sue gordon correctly points out, that is at its core what the jack smith documents case is about. it's about the people, the nameless people on that wall. it is about the willful retention of classified material and how that put those american lives at risk. it has nothing to do with any other human being other than the guy who allegedly did it. that would be prup. and the guy who allegedly helped him do it. that would be walt. this weekend trump put a wild alternative fact spin on those events. >> every time the radical left, democrats, marxists, communists and fascists, indict me i consider it a great badge of honor and a badge of courage. essentially i'm being indicted

for you. >> "i was indicted for you." i committed crimes for you. what, they were going to get to rifle through the boxes with his pants and underwear, read his classified stuff? it's so stupid it's hard to even read it on the teleprompter with a straight face. so we won't. but as insane as it is, as insane as he is, it wasn't met with particularly loud or unanimous rebukes or blowback from the vast majority of the republican party. people who by now will have heard it. with one notable exception. one. former republican governor, current republican presidential hopeful chris christie. he called bull, bill barr's favorite word, on trump's, quote, i was indicted for you lunacy. watch. >> he had the audacity to say that he got indicted for us. now, i don't know how it benefited the american people for him to take highly sensitive

intelligence and secret documents out of the white house, to stonewall the government on returning them for over a year and a half, to subject himself to a raid by the fbi even though they had asked him voluntarily to return this stuff, and to then be subject to an indictment which is obviously going to be one of great trouble for the country, because no one wants to see this happen. donald trump says that's for us? i mean, it's absurd. >> he's a complicated messenger, right? we know that here. we've put some of what makes him complicated directly to him. but it is important that republicans hear what he said. and it is somewhat refreshing to hear that there's at least one, right? at least one person in the republican party willing to say what needs to be said. particularly when they're pretty good at it, as marco rubio can attest to. but christie wasn't totally

alone. this time last summer, it was actually almost one year ago, it will be one year wednesday, when millions of americans were glued to their tvs watching cassidy hutchinson testifying publicly. the january 6th committee's summer series of public hearings, hearings that proved powerful, not just because of gripping testimony from the likes of cassidy hutchinson and election workers like shay moss and ruby freeman or capitol police officer caroline edwards and many, many more but also because of the bipartisan nature of the rebuke of trump's conduct on january 6th. judge michael luttig was one of them. now, here's who he is and why he mattered. he's a legend in conservative republican circles. and when vp mike pence needed legal advice about what vp mike pence could legally do and not do during the joint session of congress, he called judge luttig, who not for nothing told him no, no, no, you cannot wave a wand and declare trump the next president. as judge luttig testified last

summer, had mike pence followed trump's orders and eastman's orders, it would have brought the nation to the brink of collapse. >> that declaration of donald trump as the next president would have plunged america into what i believe would have been tantamount to a revolution within a constitutional crisis. >> and now, one year and two indictments later, judge luttig is spitting fiery truths once again. showing us all what it looks like for a republican to put the constitution and the country over party loyalty. in a blistering op-ed published by the "new york times" judge luttig puts the republican party on notice about the dangers

today of continuing to enable donald trump. quote, the former president's behavior may have invited charges but the republicans' spineless support for the past two years convinced trump of his political immortality. in a word, the republicans are as responsible for trump for this month's indictment and will be as responsible for any indictment and prosecution of him for january 6th. quote, if the indictment of trump on espionage act charges not to mention his now almost certain indictment for conspiring to obstruct congress from certifying mr. biden as the president on january 6th, fails to shake the republican party from its moribund political senses, then it is beyond saving itself. nor ought it be saved. a wake-up call on blast from a far right conservative legal mind. that's where we start the hour with some of our favorite reporters and friends. former acting assistant attorney general for national security at the u.s. department of justice our friend mary mccord is back.

plus former chief of staff at the department of homeland security and author of the'll forthcoming book "blowback," miles taylor's back. also joining us writer at large for the bulwark and msnbc political analyst tim miller's here. and democratic strategist and director of the public policy program at hunter college, our friend basil smikle is here for the hour. miles, i feel like there's a piece of this that you and i have seen the same way since the beginning, about the counterextremism effort inside the republican party has to start with people who still have credibility inside the republican party. and that does not include you and me anymore. so i do not -- i do not frivolously amplify the voices of chris christie. judge luttig has shown that he is willing to put the constitution ahead of the country. but these voices now blasting the right and the rest of sort of the calcified zombie establishment, this is new, and this is a new moment with the

president indicted by the government he once led and running in a weakened position. what do you make of what you're hearing? >> it's really, really important. and you know this maybe better than anyone, nicolle, and tim really knows this too because he was on the front lines in 2020 of trying to get, you know, republicans out there to flip and support joe biden. a lot of those figures frankly now can't do it in this next go-around. a lot of us have been branded as rinos and we won't be listened to by the republican base. but there are a small number of people who can still turn the tide. judge luttig with his exceptional integrity and his eloquence is perhaps one of them. chris christie is one of the few in the republican field who can do it. the thing that i take issue with, though, is the optimism unfortunately. "the new york times" labeled the piece -- it's not too late for the gop. i'm not so sure that that's the case.

congress at this point has been gutted of moderates. when donald trump became president, i think pew said roughly 55% or 60% of republicans in congress were moderates. that number's been statistically decimated since then if you look at the numbers from five thirty eight blog. when you talk about who's going to staff the next republican administration, the big conservative think tanks, heritage, the american foreign policy -- or sorry, the america first policy institute, which is the big trump maga think tank, they're all putting together slates of maga people to go in. so make no mistake. even if a rational republican somehow emerges from this field it's going to be maga foot soldiers that go into the next gop administration. that doesn't give me a lot of encouragement. and the people like chris christie or will hurd or asa hutchinson are all polling below 1% right now. and i've got to remind folks, donald trump is polling -- the oddsmakers, rather, have donald trump at a 30% likelihood of being the next president of the united states. again, remember, on the eve of 2016 when he won they only gave

him a 9% chance. that's how much maga has overtaken the republican party. so i think it's important for these voices to be amplified. but i'm skeptical about the impact they'll have this go-around. >> so mary, i want to come to you on this idea of countering extremism. maybe not at a political level but as a movement. one thing that seemed to be missing ahead of january 6th but after trump's defeat in early november was a rebuke from mitch mcconnell and kevin mccarthy. their public posture was let him cry it out. and they didn't demand that every republican go on the record when asked who's the next president and say joe biden. and it allowed for violent extremism not just to fester but to organize and to plot and to arm themselves and to communicate on twitter and on public platforms about their plans to attend an insurrection.

in january in washington. it seems that putting some different messaging out there is better than what we had in november of 2020. >> i agree wholeheartedly. and i will say that judge luttig, who i've had the great fortune to get to know a little bit over the last several months, is really an excellent messenger for this. i mean, if you look at his positions on legal issues and things, he is a true dyed in the wool conservative. right? but he respects the rule of law. he understands the importance of national security and protecting our nation's secrets. he has respect for the constitution. and democracy and the peaceful transition of power. and you will of the things that donald trump doesn't stand for at all. and that's why i think it's so important that he did come forward and talk about the things he said in the "new york times." pardon me, i'm visiting my

parents' house and that's their answering machine. >> i love that. i love that they have an answering machine. i feel like i want to go get one and plug it in. >> i know. >> and a phone on the wall. i miss those too. >> yeah. i mean, with a cord. right? anyway. the other thing i was going to say is that listening to donald trump saying i was indicted for you, right? what could be more antithetical to the rule of law. first of all, it sounds to me like he's got some sort of religious complex there for that, and i can't stop but -- you know, help but remark on that. but he also seems to be suggesting to everyone what i did was perfectly fine, i did this for you, it would be perfectly fine for you to do all of the sort of law breaking that i've been engaged in. and again, i just -- with every word out of his mouth he seems to be more and more trying to agitate that base. so it's so important for people like judge luttig, and there are others. i saw alberto gonzalez is

starting to write about this. of course we have bill barr. i have my problems with bill barr but i'm glad that he's at least saying look, any attorney general, republican or democrat, would understand the importance of this mar-a-lago case. >> tim miller, you had a front row seat to the impact chris christie had in the 2016 primary. and it did not accrue to his political benefit. which put him in the position to endorse trump before any other establishment republican. but he did damage marco rubio's political arc. he damaged marco rubio's brand. he humiliated him on a debate stage. chris christie has an interesting skill set as a politician. he's a former prosecutor. and that he's willing to deploy it forcefully, 24/7, in the media against trump is a variable we haven't watched happen yet. >> yeah, that's true. my front row seat is kind of why chris christie is such a tough

one for me. i try to just step outside myself and say yes, objectively this is good, objectively someone with his skill set going after donald trump on fox in particular is good. i hope that he can get into other conservative even further maga conservative media outlets to carry these arguments. it's important that these arguments are being made and he's making them well. in 2016 -- this is the thing that's so frustrating about chris christie, is that he was the person to do this. that was not his skill set, getting into a fight on the debate stage was about the opposite of what jeb's skill set would have been. actually governing, caring about policy, things like this. nobody with the skill set actually tried to take on trump in 2016. and so christie's failure to do that and his endorsement of trump is what grinds my gears so much about him. but we're here now. and i think it is really important that, a, they're people with credibility, which i think barr is another good

example of this, are carrying this message. but b, that christie can do it in a way hopefully that humiliates him a little bit, that takes a little bit off of trump's jib. i mean, even now you see desantis and pence when they disagree with trump it's so passive. they can barely say his name. and trump needs to be gone through directly. people need to point out the fact that trump isn't getting indicted for you. he doesn't care about you. he's done nothing to help these people. the only person he cares about is himself. you know, chris christie, given his past relationship as someone who's capable of doing that. so despite my frustrations, to say the least, it's better that he's doing it than not. >> let me just say, i share them -- you were on this show when he read a book about conspiracy theorists and he didn't mention fox news. and i found it so intellectually

dishonest i lost it. i completely agree with you. my only point is we sometimes, especially us, like the brokenhearted ex-republicans who thought it meant something, i think we view trump's place in the party as calcified. and i think what luttig and christie and barr represent to me is a variable that trump hasn't had to run with. he hasn't had to run with the headwinds of two of his biggest enablers pushing against him. he has not had to run for the white house against chris christie and bill barr. and i think that i'm at least interested in watching to see can they -- he's already unelectable nationally. can they chink away at him in any way that makes it a political death wish to nominate him again? do you think that's a realistic question to have? >> i think it's a good question to have and i think it's important that people are doing it. and i think it's our role -- my role as a pundit, as a former

member of the republican party, to be like yes, i encourage this, i hope people do it. as miles said, that's what we were doing in 2020. i knew that me as a 2016 never trumper had no credibility. we needed to recruit people from within the administration. and that is true now. we need to recruit people that went with trump far longer than they should have. that includes chris christie. and they need to make that argument. and that is -- all the research shows that's the only way to get through to republican voters. to have those voices doing it, not us. that said, i think our feeling that things have calcified might be right. so i think that it's worth a try. the threat is so great that someone should be out there trying that the things is we really needed this between -- earlier than this. but at least between 2020 and that second conviction vote because we had a -- they, not we. i was gone. they had a chance to be off this train. had chris christie and bill barr and all of them, go down the list, mitch mcconnell, had they

all done the right thing and convicted this guy for attempting a coup, we wouldn't be having this conversation. we'd get to talk about other stuff. and since they didn't do that republican voters now really believe that trump got screwed over. they believe, many of them, not all, but many of them believe all this nonsense. so once they believe those untruths and once it's been eight years where they've been told these untruths, having someone tell them actually that's not really the case and trump's a fraud, now it's a tough task. but i'm glad that chris christie and bill barr are doing it. but there's no doubt it may be too little too late. >> basil, i'm sorry to drag you into our ex-republican therapy, but i need you. i need the reality check of it. i mean, listen, i remember in 2015 and '16 when i started losing friends by saying trump wasn't just an embarrassment to the republican party, he was an embarrassment to the country. that something had happened, right? that there was this split screen and a lot of people that i

thought were normal and rational and sane were going to go along for the ride with trump, who was so obviously narcissistically interested in politics and never a sort of servant leader as matt dowd calls it. i wish i'd been wrong. i wish it turned out -- oh, jim comey, he'll learn on the job, mattis, i'll be -- you know, everyone who went in has something uglier than egg on their face because they were all made fools of by trump and his pathologies and his criminality and his disregard for the men and women on the wall of the cia that sue gordon is still so moved by. and my question for you is how do we cover this moment? how do we look at people who were once happy to be along for the ride and now some of the folks screaming the loudest about the dangers of donald

trump? >> well, let me tell you why i think it's so difficult to do that. because as you're talking about this therapy session, as mary was talking earlier about religious complex, it took me back to my 12 years of catholic school where i had to learn how to wear a jacket and ties and shoes that could hold a shine. because that language always stuck with me. so when you think about trump's language in this moment when he says, you know, i was indicted for you, it just reminds and should remind all of us that trump doesn't see himself as a candidate, he sees himself as an evangelist. he's not campaigning. he's proselytizing. and if you look at it through that lens, you realize why it is so difficult to extricate so many folks who joined in on that movement to bring them back to some semblance of reality. he sees himself as a martyr. and quite frankly, if -- i think the argument that folks are using against what he's doing,

chris christie included, they make -- they're intellectually persuasive but i don't know that they're emotionally compelling. and that is the charge that i think for any of the candidates they're going to have to rise above and figure out a way to cut through that. as we're all talking about that. what is emotionally compelling for so many people that are tied up in what amounts to a religious fervor for donald trump, how do you tell them and convince them that they've got to go in a different direction? if we're thinking about how other candidates evolve and get stronger in their anti-trump position, my first question is where are the big donors? are they going to find a way to make a candidate that is the trump alternative? i'm not sure that they will. and even if they do, will all of the candidates down ballot sort of buy into this same message that we've got to move on from donald trump? i'm not sure -- i'm not sure

that that happens. i don't know if it's too late for the gop but they are incredibly entrenched and if chris christie or anybody else is going to sort of take the lead on this i always go back to that image. is chris christie going to be the guy that sides with donald trump or is he going to be the guy that embraced barack obama when the then president came to help him after superstorm sandy in what is that, 2012? is that going to be the guy that we'll see is mong other republicans that are running for this nomination? >> it's so interesting. there's one way to flush them out. you're so wise to bring this up. trump speaks to the gut and something somewhere else, right? with his base. it's about toxic masculinity. it's about this irrational, at this point maybe knowingly false stuff. can any of the republicans or president joe biden fight at that gut level with him is one important thing. the other is what you're saying. because if chris christie believes what he's saying, the

only intellectually honest position is that if he isn't the nominee he'll vote for joe biden. if bill barr believes what he's saying, the only intellectually honest position is to say that if trump is the nominee he won't vote for him. to my knowledge that isn't either of their positions. i want to keep pressing on this story you've all opened. no one's going anywhere. when we return, we will also talk about how the twice impeached, twice indicted ex-president is quietly steering money that he's raising from his supporters, this fervent base, to pay his personal criminal legal bills. we'll have new reporting on trump's latest grift after the break. plus, the lies and disinformation being spread against election workers and the arizona election official who is seeking to do something about it. and later in the broadcast we'll be joined by the facebook executive who blew the whistle big-time on the social media platform and warned that democracy itself is in danger. frances haugen will be our guest later in the broadcast. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. break. don't go anywhere.

wayfair has nice prices so you can have nice things. 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 ♪

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. ♪ tourists tourists that turn into scientists. tourists taking photos that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪ so, you've got the power of xfinity at home.

now take it outside with xfinity mobile. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. 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. save hundreds a year on your wireless bill over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. and right now, get up to $1000 off select samsung phones. switch today.

grifter's gonna grift. while the disgraced ex-president prepares for at least two criminal trials in the coming months, his 2024 campaign has increasingly become more of a side hustle to soften his growing legal peril and help fund it. with his small donors. according to new reporting, having duped once again and contributing more than they may realize, "the new york times" is showing that trump made a previously unnoted adjustment in february or march ahead of his two indictments, to direct more of his political donations to

the political action committee he uses to pay his legal bills. from that reporting, quote, when trump kicked off his campaign in november for every dollar raised online 99 cents went to his campaign and a penny went to his save america pac. now his campaign share has been reduced to 90% of donations and 10% goes to save america. everyone's back. miles, that's his legal defense fund. this is a story that gets replayed over and over and over again. after he lost the election in 2020, he raised money from his donors, let's say small dollar donors to pay for his failed and dimmed legal defense. he's doing it now again to pay for his personal criminal defense in these two cases and counting. it's part of what everyone's talking about, right? his supporters who have this gut emotional attachment to him, seemingly willing to be swindled. >> well, that is the one area, though, nicolle, and i'm sure tim might be able to back this up with data.

the one area where we see even the possibility of, you know, shining a light into the maga base on who trump really is is when they feel like they've been swindled. that's the one line of messaging that does reach some people. and make no mistake, donald trump is basically pickpocketing his supporters. i talked to michael cohen about this a long time ago, and cohen was still one of donald trump's lawyers when some of these draft legal structures were created, and cohen had said to me that trump created them to be able to personally benefit. that's not legal. now, i don't know if in this case any laws have been broken, but today i posted this quote from my former boss, john kelly. there was a point during the administration where he sat a group of us down. he said, "i want to be clear with you. one third of the things donald trump proposes to us are stupid. one third are basically impossible to implement. and the other third are just flat out illegal." now, this is either number one or number three. but regardless, those people need to know that they're being

taken for a ride. and we were talking in the earlier segment about how donald trump said to a crowd i was indicted for you. i would actually say it's an indictment of them. the 65 million people who voted for him. this is now all coming back on them. those of us who went into the administration thinking we could nj donald trump, this is on us too. it was a huge mistake. and anyone who can still make that mistake, to bring this grifter back in office, knows full well what they're walking into. unfortunately, the polls just don't show that. the polls show he's still the leader. and that's an indictment of anyone who would support him. >> mary, again, i like to push this through the national security, the domestic security and the counterextremism frame because donald trump's political fate, one, doesn't interest me and, two, i think one may fuel the other this time. and i wonder if you think that it is time for some of the security voices who continue to be mostly quiet -- i mean, the people that know best what a

threat he is have only now very reluctantly taken some public positions. they still by and large are uncomfortable with a public role in describing trump as a threat. would that help on the counterextremism front? >> this is so interesting because on friday afternoon right before i appeared on your show i appeared in a webinar that the american bar association had with a bunch of national security experts including myself to talk about the rule of law and talk about politicization of the intelligence community, or perceived politicization of the intelligence community. and harking back to something sue gordon said on friday, you know, the intelligence community prides itself and it's just -- it's in its very ethos to not ever involve itself in politics. they need that for their credibility. they need that for their independence. and it's what they all firmly believe. they're there, doesn't matter if they're working for republicans

or democrats in the white house. their mission is to use their authorities to collect intelligence, analyze intelligence in order to protect the national security, and this is intelligence that is used by our department of defense and all of our other national security agencies. and so they're in a little bit of a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation because the whole point of that webinar that the american bar association put on was is it okay for former intelligence officials to sort of be speaking out about these kinds of things. and there are some people who criticize them from speaking out. and others don't. in my own view is no one i know who is formerly in the intelligence community and that includes not only sue gordon but people like john bren sxn michael haden and james clapper and others, when they arespeak speaking they are speaking not to affect politics but they're speaking because of their deeply held and strongly felt obligation to national security.

and they see donald trump as a national security threat, which he is. he was when he was president. he's been one since he left. and he will be one again if he's ever the president again. and that i think to your point, to your question, and i'm sorry i took so long to get there, is yes. i do think they need to speak out about the heart of what this is about. >> i mean, look, that's everything. there's one purpose of these conversations, is to arrive at what would make the country safer. and it's not that forever and ever it's a democratic president over a republican president. it's that right now if the choice is between donald trump and joe biden there's only one that isn't a national security threat. and the people who've called him a threat are by and large lifelong republicans or people who've never been political before in their lives. and the asymmetry that keeps benefiting donald trump politically is that all of the non-partisan people don't want

to come out and say it that frankly. but tim, that has been the truth since donald trump descended the escalator in 2015. >> it has been. and again, boy, do i wish they would have spoken out more aggressively in 2020. we recruited them as hard as we could. luckily, joe biden won anyway. you know, could have been more of a blowout. but here we are today. we do need them. and here's how these two stories connect, right? is that we need these people to speak out because there is a certain segment of voter that has gone along with trump, stereotypically it's your college educated "wall street journal" reading type voter, right? that is gettable. that is persuadable by elite messaging, particularly national security messaging. there's another type of voter that trump appeals to that gets turned off by that. and that's what shane goldmacher has been reporting about, trump fooling his own supporters, his robbing his own supporters. there was another story in addition to this one about how

he took money that -- he prechecked a box that said every month you're going to pay me. a lot of these folks are working-class folks. they thought they were paying him once and he took money from them every m. you know, going at him on that, no republicans have had the you know what to do that, to go there and to say actually, no, you haven't been fighting for the maga voters. you've been screwing them over. time and again. and i think a combination of that message with the elite national security message kind of reaches the two different persuadable groups here. one isn't good enough without the other. >> and i feel like in another six months you know what's going to be out the window. it's going to be candid and raw as these conversations always benefit from all of your candor and all of your expertise. mary mccord, miles teller, and tim miller. thank you so much for having this conversation with us and starting us off this hour. basil sticks around for the hour. when we come back, the arizona republican election official who has had enough of kari lake's

lies about him, about the election, and the threats that he continues to face to this day because of those lies. that story's next. as americans, there's one thing we can all agree on. the promise of our constitution and the hope that liberty and justice is for all people. but here's the truth. attacks on our constitutional rights, yours and mine are greater than they've ever been. the right for all to vote. reproductive rights. the rights of immigrant families.

the right to equal justice for black, brown and lgbtq+ folks. the time to act to protect our rights is now. that's why i'm hoping you'll join me today in supporting the american civil liberties union. it's easy to make a difference. just call or go online now and become an aclu guardian of liberty. all it takes is just $19 a month. only $0.63 a day. your monthly support will make you part of the movement to protect the rights of all people, including the fundamental right to vote. states are passing laws that would suppress the right to vote. we are going backwards. but the aclu can't do this important work without the support of people like you. you can help ensure liberty and justice for all and make sure that every vote is counted. so please call the aclu now or go to my aclu.org and join us. when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special we the people t-shirt and much more. to show

you're a part of the movement to protect the rights guaranteed to all of us by the us constitution. we protect everyone's rights, the freedom of religion, the freedom of expression, racial justice, lgbtq rights, the rights of the disabled. we are here for everyone. it is more important than ever to take a stand. so please join us today. because we the people means all the people, including you. so call now or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty. income tax. sales tax. gas tax. californians pay some of the highest taxes in the nation. but now lawmakers are proposing a so-called “link tax” that would charge websites every time they link to a news article online. experts warn it could undermine the open internet, punish local newspapers, while subsidizing hedge funds and big media corporations. so tell lawmakers: oppose ab886,

because another new tax is the last thing we need. paid for by ccia. taking a page right out of the trump playbook, kari lake, who ran for arizona governor in 2022 and lost still has not admitted defeat. her constant pushing of conspiracy theories and lies about her election even in the

face of facts that debunk those lies has riled up her base of supporters, who of course feel wronged and cheated. which is where steven richer, the maricopa county recorder, comes in. the man leading elections in arizona's largest county, republican, filed a lawsuit against lake over the threats he has received because of her lies. in the complaint richer alleges that lake, her campaign and a non-profit organization tied to her repeatedly and falsely accusing him of causing lake's 2022 defeat. lake and the two organizations, the complaint alleges, falsely claim that richer, quote, sabotaged the election to prevent republican candidates including lake from winning. joining us now is mayor kohna county recorder steven richer, who filed that lawsuit against kari lake. it's a pleasure to get to talk to you. i want to know what it is that represents a breaking point that gets you to take this extraordinary step and file a

lawsuit. >> well, this -- so thanks so much for having me. but this lawsuit is the product of actually a great deal of forbearance and restraint because this has been going on for a long time and i waited until the election was over and then i waited until the first lawsuit was over and then i waited until the appeal was over and then there was another trial but it just kept on going and going and going. and at some point i said she's not going to get a new job because this is the job, i am the job. and so there's just no end in sight. and so at that point i decided i needed to do something different, i needed to put an end to this somehow because i have every right just as every other american does to have my good name cleared. >> can you just tell people what it's like and whether it's surreal to be a republican and then to have your name smeared by the lies told by a republican candidate. >> it's absolutely been disorienting. she and i are not political opponents.

we probably agree on a lot of public policy issues. but she has defamed me time after time. and i understand the frustrations of having lost an election. but she has leveled some very specific allegations accusing me of doing truly horrific things and disrupting this election process and betraying my oath of office, betraying the country, betraying the state. and that simply isn't true. and so i, like i said, it's time to set the record straight, and that's why i'm filing this lawsuit. >> i asked about that because i wonder if you think even winning this lawsuit will help. >> i think it will because it will be a clarion call to anyone who's listening that not only have these claims been adjudicated false in multiple election lawsuits that she's already lost but on this very specific point yes, they are false and it is also malicious. and so hopefully that will put an end to it because at some measure it's certainly not us just saying that those things

are false. it's certainly not us just asking politely. but perhaps if there's a judicial order saying these things are false and you need to stop, otherwise you're going to keep accruing damages that will detract from whatever your political aspirations, your political goals are, and so hopefully this will be more meaningful in a way to put an end to these false statements about me. >> do you still want to be a republican? has anything that you've experienced in the face of election lies, which aren't just happening in arizona, obviously this is donald trump's playbook as well, is it still a party you're proud to be a part of? >> the last few years have certainly been interesting. but i've been a republican for a long time. i'm an alumnus of american enterprise institute, cato institute. went to university of chicago because i believed so strongly in free market ideology. so those are still the ideas to which i subscribe. it is very disappointing, as judge luttig wrote in the "new york times" just the other day,

that the republican party has shifted from some of those free market rule of law principles into some of these new i guess creatures of idolatry, creatures of fascination. but mostly just that aren't premised in any fact. and specifically why i'm filing this lawsuit is because these things simply aren't true, they've been adjudicated as false by multiple courts, and i have a right to not be lied about and not have truly awful lies said about me, and so that's why i'm doing this. >> who won the 2020 election, and when did they win it? >> who won the 20 -- the presidential election? i hope that's clear at this point. president biden won the 2020 election. >> i guess what i'm saying is the lies started there. kari lake simply puppeted them. is there anything the republican party could do as it continues down this path that would make you break with them or are you in for a dime in for a dollar?

>> gosh i don't know. but it's certainly disheartening. and as somebody who believes strongly in the rule of law and you've seen so many courts reject them time after time. and certainly if the leaders of the republican party continue to be people who the day ends -- or the day begins and ends with election denialism, then that's increasingly less a party that i feel at home with. my party is, again, about free markets, about rule of law, about individual responsibility, not about these fanciful illusions that somehow someone was wronged, somehow other republicans won on the ticket that was run by republican election officials, somehow that magically happened but you know, a few candidates with particular grievance were somehow cheated out of this. i mean, it's illogical and it's frustrating. and right now it is causing me personal harm. it's causing me and my family personal harm. the ways in which this has manifested are multitude. you know, personal attacks, even

people arrested for some of the threats against me. some of the changes in my political fortune. what we've had to do at our workplaces, both my wife and i. certainly my entire team can attest that the maricopa county elections center is something of a fortress now. and so all of that is the unfortunate biproduct of some of these falsehoods. >> and it's a tragic story that we've heard. brad raffensperger and his wife tell. rusty bowers tell. and so many of the family members that are only now at risk because they love people in the political arena. i'm certainly very sorry for what you and your staff and your family have been through. i hope you'll come back and keep us posted on the fate of your lawsuit against kari lake. stephen richer, thank you so much for spending some time with us today. >> i appreciate it. i hope this is a turn for the better. thank you. >> good luck with everything. when we come back, facebook whistleblower frances haugen and the very real fear that disinformation spread on social media could have a big impact

heading into the 2024 election season. stay with us. with us you like t? 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. (pensive music) (footsteps crunching) (pensive music) (birds tweeting) (pensive music) (broom sweeping) - [narrator] one in five children worldwide are faced with the reality of living without food. no family dinners, no special treats, no full bellies. all around the world, parents are struggling to feed their children. toddlers are suffering from acute malnutrition, which stunts their growth. kids are forced to drop out of school so they can help support their families.

covid, conflict, inflation and climate have ignited the worst famine in our lifetime. and we're fed up. fed up with the fact that hunger robs children of their childhood. fed up with the lack of progress. fed up with the injustice. help us brighten the lives of children all over the world by visiting getfedupnow.org. for as little as $10 a month, you can join save the children as we support children and families in desperate need of our help. now is the time to get fed up and give back. when you join the cause, your $10 monthly donation can help communities in need of life-saving treatments and nutrients, prevent children from dropping out of school. support our work with communities and governments to help children go from short-term surviving to long-term thriving. and now thanks to special government grants, every dollar you give before december 31st can multiply up to 10 times the impact.

that means more food, water, medicine and help for kids around the world. you'll also receive a free tote bag to share your support for children in need. childhood without food is unimaginable. get fed up. call us now or visit getfedupnow.org today.

i'm here today because i believe facebook's products harm children, stoke division, and weaken our democracy. no one truly understands the destructive choices made by facebook except facebook. we can afford nothing less than full transparency. as long as facebook is operating in the shadows, hiding its

research from public scrutiny, it is unaccountable. until we have transparency and our ability to confirm ourselves that facebook's marketing messages are true, we will not have a system that's combatable with democracy. >> it was an earthquake and you may remember it when it happened in 2021. francis haugen took 22,000 pages of documents from facebook, which has since been renamed meta and revealed to the country and the world the damaging secrets about the inner workings of the social media giant and how facebook knew that its platforms were causing harm to children as well as to american democracy. now, two years later with the 2024 election approaching, haugen is out with a new book titled "the power of one." the tells the story of how she decided to blow the with whistle on facebook. frances haugen, thank you so much for being here. >> happy to be here.

thank you for inviting me. >> i have been always been a facebook skeptic. their pr people stopped calling me a couple of months or maybe about a year into me having this show because they seemed to really really embody a strategy of working the reps and playing a real inside game in washington, and i wonder if you can talk about how that maybe got them a little more leeway or kept what you revealed so dramatically and effectively secret longer than it should have been. >> well, one of the things that most people aren't aware of is that amongst the big tech companies, the one that spends the most on lobbying is meta, facebook. they know that the place where they can be regulated is the united states and they have a strategy of intention that willy investing in safety systems in the united states but not abroad because they know they're at risk here. so i'm not surprised at all that even people on the outside are noticing the strategy because they've doubled down on it so

hard compared to other companies. >> so frances, i want to bring basil in on the questioning. we have a lot of these confers conversations about it. can you explain to someone without a tech background what the threat is of social media platforms right now to the 2024 election? >> so many people say, you know, if there's a danger on these platforms the solution to bad speech is more speech. one of the things that most people aren't aware of is what you see on social media isn't representative of what people are saying on social media. let's say 100 things were written by your neighbors, by your friends and family, only a small fraction of those actually end up making up most of what you see in your feed. that's because when things get posted, things like large groups, you know, a group with a half million people and they start a fight in the comments,

every time a comment goes on that thread, it becomes a new post that could show up in your feed, and that crowds out a calmer response or someone you know who did the research and may say something less sensationalistic. when you have an information environment where the loudest voice wins, the most extreme voice wins, that rapidly polarizes society. you can be in one camp or the other but you can't occupy the middle and the middle is what holds america together. >> basil. >> you know, when i talked to -- frances, good to see you -- when i talk to my gen x friends, whey lament about when they engage in social media, they're not telling the difference between information and wisdom, and one of the things i notice with my students sometimes is they get a lot of their information from their news feeds but i was wondering do you feel that young people, as you're talking about in your testimony, have they become more discerning about the

information they're receiving and processing it differently now that, thanks to you and so many others, folks are alerting them or us to the dangers of social media? >> one of the steps that seems counter intuitive is when you actually pull people, like do you pay for media? do you pay for a subscription to a news source? the rate at which people pay for their media is quite not what you would expect, millennials, gen z, are willing to subscribe to news sources they believe in. in some ways, there's wisdom there. people are realizing if you're the product, you're getting your news from a system that is supported by advertising. you know, it's not really optimized for you. it's optimized for the advertiser, maybe you want to invest in another news source. at the same time, that's still quite a privileged position. many young people might not be able to afford a subscription or if they have to trade off between things, they might not make that choice.

i think it's a divergent thing that we're still having media environments where algorithms are choosing what we see, not necessarily people we trust. and that as long as those algorithms have biases towards more extreme content, you're not going to get a whole and complete picture of the world. >> i guess my last real quick question for you is it driving the polarization in politics or reflecting it, frances? >> great question. >> so we know there have been changes. so one of the core disclosures that i came out with in 2021 was that facebook used to prioritize content that you would see in a different way. so prior to 2018, and i don't want to say there was no polarization before 2018, but before 2018, they would decide what content to show you based on the chance that it would keep you on the platform versus it would elicit a reaction from

you. and they made a change to say, content that gets a reaction is more valuable because they found that it caused the original people who made that content to produce more content in the future. we have political parties on the left and right across europe at least within six months of that changes say we noticed different content is being distributed now. like if we don't go extreme, our content doesn't get distributed. so we can't say, is 60%, is 30%, is 80% of the polarization, you know, attributable to those kind of algorithmic decisions but we know that it did increase things, made things worse in 2018. >> it's amazing. the book is super important. it's called the power of one. frances haugen, thank you so much for spending time with me and with basil. and basil, thanks to you for spending the hour with us. another break for us. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. 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. ♪ ♪ tourists tourists that turn into scientists. tourists taking photos that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪

thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these times. the beat with ari melber starts right now. we begin this week with news at home and abroad. jack smith now barrelling into the coup part of his trump rope. new testimony courtesy of nbc news' brand new report that they're getting this testimony from donald trump's own secret service agents. you may have seen that alert across your phone or in earlier coverage on msnbc. we have that story coming up. while the