the clip that you showed, if i would want to deliver one message at a moment like this, congressman from florida who said you can't worry about the efficiency of your home if you don't have a job, will you can't worry about the efficiency of your home if you efish asbestos of your home if you don't have a home. you're going to start seeing people -- we're already seeing -- i live up very near vermont and many people have lost their homes in this off the charts flooding, and we're going to see people impacted in incredibly direct ways, and people need to, you know, go to their congress people and demand action because this situation, you know, is -- this is a slow moving train, and you need to start rapidly moving it in the right direction. >> elizabeth, thank you so much. that is "all in" on this thursday night. walx wagner tonight begins right

now. thanks, chris. and thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. we start with breaking news out of "the new york times." special counsel jack smith has interviewed donald trump's son-in-law and former top white house aide jared kushner. "the times" reports in an interview last month the special counsel focused on whether trump had privately acknowledged that he had lost the 2020 election. in other words, when trump claimed the election was rigged, did he know he was lying? did trump have corrupt intent when he allegedly tried to subvert the election? also today jack smith's senior assistant special counsel, a lawyer named tom wyndham, was spotted leaving the d.c. federal courthouse for a second time this week. mr. wyndham is one of the top prosecutors working on special counsel january 6th's probe, a role he played before jack smith was appointed special council. and this afternoon he was back in court indicating the grand jury is meeting. so with all these new details at

the special counsel's office it really does seem jack smith is getting that much closer to indicting trump on his actions around january 6thch and the clock is ticking. fulton county georgia d.a. fani willis just had two grand juries impanelled tuesday. one of those grand juries expected to ask whether or not willis should indict trump in her state. and the first of those grand juries began hearing cases today. now, federal prosecutors do not exactly love when parallel local investigations outpace their own. they want their evidence and their theory of the case to be the first version that the public hears. so d.a. willis poses a problem for special counsel smith. d.a. willis has signaled he anticipates announcing an indictment potentially as early as july 31st. that gives special counsel smith 11 business days to make his own

announcement, assuming he wants to make it first. and that is not the only calender jack smith has to worry about. there's been endless speculation what the 2024 race means for smith's prosecutorial decisions. earlier this week in jack smith's other case against trump for trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents down at maur trump trump asked the judge to postpone the trial in that case until after the 2024 election. well, today jack smegt's team responded saying team trump and their arguments had no basis in law or fact and that the complications of a presidential candidate's trial were actually reasons to start the process sooner rather than later. one wonders if that might apply to certain other federal trump investigations as well. that was all to say there are a number of reasons why it looks like jack smith is going to

indict trump and soon, like in the next 11 business days soon. what exactly could that indictment look like? luckily we have two handy potential road maps here. number one, we have the other criminal indictment mr. smith has already filed against mr. trump, the charges he brought against him in the mar-a-lago documents case. and number two, we have this -- this thing. a group of seven highly respected defense attorneys and former officials put together a comprehensive model prosecution laying out what they think the charges against trump are likely to be. joining us now is dawnia perry, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and one of the authof this weighty prosecution and daniel with the national security division which handles things

like the mishandling of classified documents. i could not think of two better people to talk to about all this tonight. in terms of the inferences we're making based on jack smith's position in and around mar-a-lago, is it fair to look at that as a road map? >> in some ways he is. he clearly looks for a stream lined case in the mar-a-lago case, and they focus very narrowly. they didn't include a bunch of extra defendants and they seemed to stream line the evidence. that may not be the case, it may not even be possible in the january 6th case. just the nature of that case probably involves a lot more people, a lot more witnesses, and frankly there's a bigger story to tell. >> i want to get to the actual potential charges as written about here, but before i do that, dave, just purely in terms of the timing the response from the special counsel's office saying a special election isn't

a reason to slow down a criminal trial, it's a reason to speed it up. one would think that applies to january 6th, too? . >> of course. if there's a public interest to resolve this quickly after election that applies with equal force to the case that's yet to come. >> dania, when you thought about these various factors, let's start with the timing, what do you think special counsel smith is concerned about when he thinks about the 2024 presidential election? >> well, i think you had it exactly right in your introductory remarks. there's an election coming up, he wants to get ahead of the cycle. he made that very clear in his filing today in the mar-a-lago case, and he is also mindful of the fulton county d.a.'s investigation. and as you point out federal prosecutors usually win these turf wars. we were looking at the calender

too and mindful of the clock this is why we worked night and day to get this prosecution because i strongly suspect all with my coauthors based on many, many decades of collective experience if this indictment if it comes will be coming in the next as you say probably 11 business days. and so i think all of that is top of mind for special counsel smith and his team of intrepid prosecutors. >> dania, let's talk about what is outlined. there are three charges you talk about explicitly in here. one, conspiracy to defraud the united states, two election scheming, to stop mike pence from certifying the election january 6th. and three, this is most explosive and not everybody's on the same page about this, insight an insurrection and giving aid or comfort to insurrectionists. can you talk a little bit about that last charge and why that

was included in here, because that from a layman's perspective seems like the most complicated to charge. >> absolutely. and that's kind of why we had to include it because if ever there was a case for bringing this very little used statute, this is it. and as we point out in our white paper, it has seldom been used since the civil war, and i agree with david and his remarks, this should be stream lined as the other indictment is, but it's going to be difficult for the prosecutors to do that given the defendant here, the wealth of information, the possibility of so many defendants, and so i think they could keep it to probably two charges, but if they really want to bring the most apt case -- it kind of stands on its own, it's unique by its very nature. and so if ever there was a case

for bringing this, such a charge as i said i think this is it. and if you really analyze as you show on the table there many, many pages given the facts, the law, the precedent, this actually fits and so i think it's something that certainly the prosecutors must have spent a lot of time, spent a lot of ink discuss. and to me if there is an indictment that would be the wild card if they decide to bring one under this civil war era statute. >> yeah, i mean, dave, what do you think about inciting insurrection? honestly it is hard to retell the events of what happened that day, the evidence that the public has been presented with, without using the phrase

inciting an insurrection describing the actions of the former president. >> you're absolutely right. and most of the time i would say it's one thing to say that colloquially, but how does the law define these terms? how's it different from a revolution? i think the draft -- >> the draft prosecution. >> exactly. i think it does a good job of explaining how those terms apply, and really is the best interpretation available of those terms. it's a pretty good case there this qualifies as an insurrection as something that would have to be litigated. i think there would be interesting issues of proof around the president's mental state. >> we know jared kushner has gone in and testified whether the president had corrupt intent, whether he knew he was lying in and around his claims

the election was stolen. there are other people that have testified, members of the inner circle in the trump administration. how much does it matter that the prosecutors can show he had corrupt intent? >> as we analyzed in the prosecution memo, if the prosecutor brings a very narrow charge, in some way it matters not at all. if the prosecution can show that mr. trump was aware, for example, that the slate of electoral certificates that was submitted to congress was false, that could be enough in and of itself. if he knew that there was no legal authority whatsoever to put pressure on vice president pence to essentially overturn the will of voters, that could be enough in and of itself. if he willfully incited his crowd to an insurrection, that

could be enough. so that's why -- that's kind of the narrow case. but as a matter of jury feel, as a matter of telling a narrative ark it of course would be helpful to be able to tell the jury, to persuade the jury that mr. trump at the time knew that, in fact, the election was not stolen and that he had actually lost the election. and from what we've heard from reporting, you know, up until today there are many people who will say, yes, he was aware. now, mr. kushner may have said the opposite and there's good strategy reasons for the prosecution to call jared kushner into the grand jury to tell that story even if it doesn't actually support the prosecution. it can draw the sting. it can help them to anticipate what the defenses will be. so there are other reasons we don't actually know what he'll testify to, but according to reporting he testified, no, in

fact, the president thought he had legitimately won. i still think if there are witnesses who will tell that, ultimately it'll not prevail as i said it's a naro case and doesn't require proof whether the election was or was not stolen. but also there's enough people telling him there was no proof it was. so that's more of an insanity plea than it is actually a good faith defense in my view and the view of my coauthors. >> you know what, david, it reminds me of the bedminster tape that prosecution did not charge trump on. they did not charge him on dissemination. but just having the tape of trump acknowledging the classified information was not his to divulge and potentially waving around classified documents with people with no security clearance, in the court of public opinion that matters. that is the evidence the public needs to understand just how wrong the behavior was. and i wonder if it's sort of the same thing in terms of corrupt

intent. is it to just explain to the public he knew what he was doing was wrong and that's why we're going to trial with this? or is it more meaningful than that? do you feel that actually needs to be proven in court as part of a potential indictment? >> i think it's both. >> that is also a very lawyerly answer. >> i apologize. >> it's okay. >> it doesn't go away. the bedminster tape and the incitement to insurrection statements they have something in common, which is the defense there is some defense of hyperbole or boasting. when i think about proving state of mind it's not so much whether the president knew he was losing an election was he wulinally inciting an insurrection or just talking, was he just blustering, and so that would be an interesting line. and i think there's a lot of collateral evidence, evidence surrounding him about what

people were saying to him and what he knew was going on at the time. that would really feel need into this. >> do you think jack smith could be making room for further prosecutions down the line at the state level? we know he just brought brad raffensperger recently, the current georgia secretary of state. we know today "the washington post" is reporting arizona is escalating its own probe into election activities in and around the 2020 election. looks like they may have their own fani willis investigation. there's a lot happening at the state level both from the feds and from state level a.g.s. is it possible we could see a situation where former president trump is charged and then the investigations and indictments continue on after that? >> yes. i started my career at the manhattan d.a.'s office and as much as people like to joke about state and federal, and federal and local, there is sometimes cooperation. and if something can't proceed in one system, the authorities

will cooperate and let it proceed in the other. the factor will be the appetite for one of these cases. >> that is the big answer that needs to get resolved in the next 11 business days. thank you both for your time and great wisdom this evening. we have a lot more to come tonight. what it might mean to have a presidential nominee standing trial on multiple criminal indictments while he is running for president. my former travel buddies from show time's "the circus" will be here on set, all of them to talk about that very weird split screen after the break. and later this hour screen actor guild president fran drescher joins me as 150,000 tv and film actors prepare to go on strike tonight after failing to reach a deal with studios. stay with us. >> how do they plead poverty losing money left and right when given hundreds of millions of dollars to their ceos? it is disgusting. shame on them. e on them.

[ tires screeching ] jordana, easy on the gas. i gotta wrap this commercial, i think i'm late on my payment. it's okay, the general gives you a break. yeah, we let you pick your own due date. good to know, because this next scene might take a while. for a great low rate, go with the general.

i've known him for 22 years. when i was doing these cases in new jersey and i would put political figures in jail he would say to me i could never do that, i could never go to jail. and i'll tell you no matter what he says, no matter how he's bragging and going on and on about him not going afraid, he goes to bed every night thinking about the sound of that jail

cell door closing behind him. >> there are two things looming over the 2024 campaign. donald trump and the multiple criminal charges against him. he remains the front-runner in the republican field, and yet there is a pretty decent chance he will have to appear in court as part of two federal cases at the same time he campaigns for the presidency. so what does that mean for the already circus-like atmosphere of the 2024 campaign? well, i have just the people to ask. joining us now are the co-hosts and executive producers of show time's "the circus." my old traveling companions and dear friends. this is the most number of people we've ever had on the set. in a way, yes. john, i'll start with you. what does it mean? first of all, you have studied trump, the political creature, for many moons now and i wonder what you think the specter of potential multiple federal

criminal indictments does to him as a candidate. >> well, the thing you said in the lead-in is the truest thing, like hovering over the race are these two things, donald trump and the indictments. i have to say i've covered presidential campaigns since 1992, and i've never been more less interested in what's going on with republicans running around it country. it's ridiculous. it's a kabuki dance, it's got nothing to do with anything. the only story is trump. it's like when someone says oh, you've got to go to the steak fry and see when who else. the disposition of the republican nomination is really about republican voters and donald trump, the legal system and donald trump. the donald trump of it all is everything. the rest of these people are, to coin the phrase already used, clowns. compared to kim, he's had so much power in the party. he's transformed the party for years but really is evidence now into the huge cultive

personality and it's the republican party i not the maga party anymore. when the legal system gets him when and the rest of these guys are saying with all due respect there are some serious people in the race, less than serious people in the race. but really i'm going to pay attention to that? it all seems irrelevant. >> i guess you're not going to the steak fry with vice president pence. i do have to ask the idea trump is going to be wounded with these indictments. maybe with a certain sub set of the electorate, but as a candidate i feel you guys specifically are going to be hearing about this at every rally he holds because he does draw strength from controversy. >> and that's exactly what he wants. he wants to be the dominant piece of attention. that's why he ran in the first place. he didn't think he was going to be elected president but he just knew it was the biggest stage and hottest spotlight in the world. so the fact is he is going to absorb all of that, but he is a

twice indicted, first time in a hundred years to not be re-elected and lose the house and lose the senate. that hasn't happened since grover cleveland, and two indictments now and there could be a third and a forty. and the question is if one hasn't happened after two, why would anything happen after four? voters are going to say can this guy wip a general election and the answer is going to be no, he can't. >> you say that definitively. >> i think at a certain point, yes, they're going to say this guy can't win and that's when the bleeding starts. there's going to beenough polls between now and then to say, yeah, he's cleaning up in the primary but he's going to get crushed in the general. >> why does no republican take the bait, no fellow republican candidate -- >> other than chris christie. >> other than chris christie who's polling at like 4% right now. >> not that he's going to win

but -- >> you're saying there's a chance. >> do we have time to play this incredible sound on tim scott and pierce morgan. let's play it. >> to win the nomination you've got to knock out donald trump. how are you going to do that? >> well, everyone watching the show tonight can go to votetimscott.com. learn more about who i am. >> are you a better human being than donald trump? >> i think we all have intrinsic value in the eyes of god. >> you've got some people who are mad i don't love trump 100% of the time. i don't love my husband 100% of the time. >> i do. i love my husband 100% of the time. tee it up. here is a chance for you to say something great about donald trump than go to tim scott.com. >> politico had a story today that said donors are now worried that desantis doesn't have the

juice. >> donors are not the sharpest knives in the drawer. >> it's the most fundamental thing in politics you define the difference and say, well, i'll take the original. >> and no one's looking -- the whole theory of these donors is people want an alternative to trump. there's no push to have an altenative to trump. he has 51% of the primary vote right now. >> i want to challenge tim scott's -- speak for yourself, buddy. but here's the thing that's so hard about this. oh, yeah, you've got to take off trump. the large part and the republican base is so intense. i find myself intrigued. john ellis who's a very smart man in republican politics keeps saying you've got to figure out a way to hug trump while you shiv him. beating him up is not what the

republican base wants to see. people who vote in republican nominating politics don't want people to see someone saying donald trump's terrible, donald trump's this and that. hey, buddy, you made america great again, now hang out in florida. >> that's what desantis was trying to do. >> but desantis is so obviously -- so obviously not ready for prime time that it's kind of like he's not the -- it's just very hard. they're trying to find their way towards -- they have to do some contrast, but just beating the hell out of trump is -- we don't understand it. >> it's clear. >> they like him. >> can i ask one question to you, jennifer palmieri? what does trump do that he's got multiple indictments thus far.

>> i don't know he has to say something. i think he runs his race. what would he say? he would say there's a dangerous agenda that he -- that he followed, the maga agenda. you know, he disrupted our democracy, he doesn't respect our democracy. he doesn't have to go to the indictments. i don't see why he would ever have to be in a position where he has to comment any real way on the indictments. >> that's an interesting and important caveat, in a real way. >> because the whole argument is this guy is chaos and the indictments are another man fsation of the chaos. >> that was the argument of the candidacy in the first place, to restore the soul of america. >> he's a great contrast. obviously we've got a lot to talk about. keep your tushes in the seat because we're going to talk much more about 2024 and the republican war on woke, the craziness presently unfolding right now on capitol hill as house speaker kevin mccarthy

once again bends to the culture warriors in his party's right wing. stay with us. we're coming back after the commercial break. r the commercial break

i'm jonathan lawson here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan

available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information.

these are some of the things that were yelled at my sixth grader this year at west wilson middle school. you're going to hell. my parents say i can't talk to you because you're gay. fag. i bet if i kissed you, you'd

like it. you don't deserve to live. my parents say you're a pervert, and if i beat you up, they wouldn't care. you should kill yourself, die faggot, my 13-year-old. where do you think these kids are hearing it from? >> that is lindsey patrick wright bhch her child is in the sixth grade in tennessee, which a state that has passed more anti-lgbt laws in the last eight years than any other state in america. that question ms. patrick wright is asking at the end, where do you think these kids are hearing it from, is a direct indictment of the republican party, anti-gay, anti-transculture warerize going fought by republican lawmakers in schools, doctors offices and even the u.s. military. right now at the this very moment congress is in the middle of trying to pass the annual defense budget. and speaker kevin mccarthy has been cowed by the right flank of

his party which appears to be treating the bill like a culture war christmas tree, trying to hang dozens of amendments on the bill before passing it. the amendments would prevent the military for providing gender affirming care for service members, block abortion care and eliminate military programs that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. the list goes on. still with me on this big night of news the co-hosts of show time's "the circus." it's changed a lot and it's hard to articulate what the priorities are at this stage in the game other than the culture war, that all the other candidates seeking office -- >> it's so contrary to the message that attracted people like me across the bridge back in the 1990s about compassionate conservatism. i don't see an ounce of compassion anywhere. and i think the problem is going

to be republicans caught the car on this and it's now clore the party has been completely controlled by the fringes and if the fringes are controlling the dialogue and the agenda and they're just going to take it right off the cliff, and, listen, kansas was a great example on abortion, right? that's like one of the most conservative places in the country, obviously. and the abortion amendment that was passed there surprised everybody. i mean that should be the memo to republicans and they just haven't gotten it. >> tomorrow at a summit in iowa two of the six leading presidential candidates are going to be in the same afternoon session as the governor signing a six-week abortion ban into law. i mean and yet this is what republicans are doing to other republicans. >> and ron desantis tries to act like he did not -- >> yes. >> i know it happened at 11:00 at night, but you signed a six-week abortion ban. it is what you are for. when we went and covered the

glenn youngkin race in 2021, we spent time in fairfax county i think with a woman very concerned about critical race theory mom. those issues seemed like they were going to dominate in 2022 but look what happened. >> it's taken over the republican party. >> the entire republican party and dobbs. >> critical race theory is a very different caste to that issue that 52% of the population is not african american. republicans have run race campaigns for a long time. you can do that because the math works in a lot of cases and they have confidence in it over the years. >> also those numbers are changing. >> they are changing but still not where the issue where a vast

majority of america or more than half the country the voters are women, and way more than half the country objected to what happened in dobbs. but you still see not just in this thing in iowa, today on the house floor there's an amendment to put up to basically ban abortions in the military. and all of the new york republicans who got elected and swung the house toward republicans there's five or six and all voted for that amendment. the senate's going to kill it. >> it's on the record, though. >> every democrat in the house is going bring it on. >> women that signed up to serve in the military denied a basic health care right that we've had for 50 years. >> unbelievable. >> yes, unbelievable. >> i do wonder as we talk about ron desantis who shrewdly signed his six-week abortion ban at midnight -- >> there's two words that you don't usually hear together, shrewdly. >> we are hearing that donors are less than enamored of

governor desantis and are looking for alternatives. rupert murdoch reported wants glen youngkin to throw his hat in the ring. do you see a different way -- has he done a better job? >> more fleece. >> that is true. >> a lot of it is style than demeanor. it's not that voters don't like him, he doesn't like voters. i was thinking about presidents that we've known, they loved campaigning, they love people, right? bush, clinton, obama, biden. this guy just doesn't like people and youngkin does. he's kind of a sunny, you know, throwback reagan-style republican. >> ish. he dips his toes in the culture war stuff, and my thinking it's like being pregnant. you can't be halfway there. you're either in the culture war, talking about critical race theory, anti-trans, anti-gay.

>> the republican candidate who talks the least about woke issues, donald trump. >> also not in iowa right now. >> he's asking the same questions. >> let's focus on criminal indictments. and that's the circus in which we live. >> let's go do a show. >> guys, i miss you. come back all the time, please. i know you're so busy, my friends, my former colleagues, thank you for this little reunion. i adore all of you. >> are we back tomorrow? >> every hour. cocktails next time. the circus on show time returns this fall. watch it. coming up fran drescher, beloved actor, comedian, and president of the screen actors guild, joins me to discuss the massive strike that is threatening to cripple hollywood. stay with us. >> this is a moment of history that is a moment of truth.

if we don't stand tall right now, we are all going to be in trouble. we are all going to be in jeopardy. o be in jeopardy with sensitivity, i see irritated gums and weak enamel. sensodyne sensitivity gum & enamel relieves sensitivity, helps restore gum health, and rehardens enamel. i'm a big advocate of recommending things that i know work. ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com.

this is a very big deal, and it weighed heavy on us, but at some point you have to say, no, we're not going to take this anymore. what are we doing? moving around furniture on the

titanic? it's crazy. so the jig is up, amtpt. we stand tall. you have to wake up and smell the coffee. we are labor, and we stand tall. >> that was the president of the screen actors guild, actor fran drescher this afternoon. she was announcing the union's unanimous decision to strike after four weeks of negotiations with the alliance of motion picture and television producers. after those negotiations failed to reach a deal on a new contract. comcast is one of the entertainment companies represented by that alliance. at midnight pacific time this evening the nearly 160,000 actors represented by the union will join member of the writers guild of america who have been striking for the past 72 days for their own contract. this collective action will be the first industry-wide hollywood shutdown in nearly 63 years.

joining us now is fran drescher, president of sag-aftra. thank you for making time this evening. i know you have a lot going on. i'll get right to it. two weeks ago you were quoted as saying the union was having extremely productive negotiations with the studios. can you tell us what transpired between then and now that is leading s.a.g. to strike? >> well, i think we were dealing with a lot of peripheral, you know, issues that seemed to be going well. and so i guess naively i figured it would continue to go that way, but as we got closer to the core issues, it seemed like we were either being stone walled or were further and further apart from coming into any kind of a meeting of the mind. and that came as a real disappointment to me.

i didn't expect it. and i really feel profoundly saddened we got to this point. we did everything we could to overt a strike including extend by 12 days in an unprecedented amount of time, and we really had to convince the membership that in earnest we thought that we would be able to carve deeper inroads. and that was why we felt if we could only extend a little longer that maybe we could overt a strike. but, in fact, they didn't come to the table that often. they canceled a lot of meetings. i thought maybe they were duking it out behind closed doors and they were actually going to come back with something of substance that was meaningful. and boy, did i get a surprise because we got bupkis basically.

and i think we were duped to allow for more promotion of summer movies before we, you know, struck. >> wow. can we just talk a little bit about the sticking points? because i know the union is asking for better pay. they want residuals on streaming, and there are some concerns about art financial intelligence. can you talk at all about what is most troubling to you about the latest bid from the studios? >> well, definitely everything you mentioned. i mean artificial intelligence is a threat to workers around the world. what we are doing here the eyes of the world are watching. we happen to be able to get a lot of interest because of the celebrity component of our labor force. but that doesn't mean what's happening to us is unique and

everybody is watching to see what happens because art ficial intelligence and the pursuit of greed by big business is systematically cutting labor out of their livelihoods, and we see that happening since the introduction of streaming as well as all different kinds of things that a.i. and digital has imposed on our industry. basically the entire business model has changed, and they're still just thinking that we're going to be satisfied with incremental changes from a contract that was forged in 1960, and it no longer applies. it's a completely different game. and so that became a mounting problem. and when you talk about what the journeymen actors, the journeymen performers, that is

the majority of our members who are just working class people trying to get jobs to feed their family and pay their rent. and this is the people that we are really going to the mat for because they are getting the worst and getting marginalized to an extent where it cannot be tolerated anymore. so, you know, it's imperative that we don't settle for a proposal that is a minimum which essentially ends up paying those people less than what we made in 2020 in real money. and that's what we're supposed to be satisfied now until through 2026? it's insanity. and those aren't the only things. you know, the old contract was

bases off of shows like "the nanny" that had great longevity and a long tale of revenue, and that was the name of the game. and everybody above the line up and down the ladder prospered from it. but now with streaming it's not like that anymore. it's in a vacuum. you're in a box. you're walled in, and there's no tale of revenue to follow. and it's not even based off of what it used to be based off of, which was eyeballs and ad dollars. now it's based off of subscriptions, so you don't even get the amount of episodes that we used to get. i used to do 28 episodes. now you're lucky if you get ten. how do you make a living on that? >> and i hear you on the changing nature of the industry, and it bears mentioning the

writers guild is also striking for many of the same reasons, the disruption in the industry. the studios often say disruption in the industry is making them rethink their revenue streams. i mean, how do you see your goals and the writers' goals dove tailing? do you think yours is going to help achieve. one studio executive said the studios are determined to break the writer's guild of america. are you guys going to be there to support them, and are you going to work hand in fist? >> let me just say that for anybody to say that shows the arrogance and complete disregard and disrespect for a community that contributes so much to the industry upon which they prosper. it's just unconscionable the complete disrespect to the people that contribute so much.

and we're experiencing it, too. i thought they would come to the table and really want to make a deal, but that was not the case. being stone walled and being faced with a kind of resistance that's almost irrational. i mean it's not just about money. there were things that they want to have our background performers work one day for and get scanned for a.i., and then they own the likeness of the person digitally and they could use them over and over again. what is going to happen to that hardworking background person? they're going to be out of business. this is the kind of thing that's happening all over the world. >> the issues that are being brought up are so novel, and yet in some ways the struggle is the same as it ever was. fran drescher, the president of sag-aftra, thank you so much for your time tonight. >> i appreciate it. and you know what?

that's why we have unions because people don't do the right thing. >> it is why we have organized labor in this country. thanks for joining us this evening. appreciate it. we will be right back. us this evening. appreciate it. we will be right back.

it has been a big night of news here, and that is our show for this evening. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. >> we stand at an inflection point in history where the decisions we make now are going to determine the course of the history for the four or five, six decades. and this week we affirmed how finland and the united states together -- together with allies and partners are working in lock step, and so they're on a stronger, safer, and more secure path not for europe, not just for nato but for the world. >> president joe biden touting nato unity yesterday in finland on the final day of his european trip. the president also made