made that decision in relation to the attack on the crimea bridge. they believe he was already planning that deal. we are hearing from president putin who is calling the attack on that bridge terrorism. he says russia's military will retaliate. >> josh letterman in london, thank you very much. that will do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now. hi there, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. a sweeping story in "the new york times." the disgraced expresident's plans for a second term in office are pages straight out of an autocrat's play book. moves that would amount to nothing short of a wrecking ball to american democracy. consisting of the very same things that have not just landed

him under criminal scrutiny and investigation by the justice department but that have already led to federal indictment. the "new york times" reports that team trump plans to get rid of any and all road blocks to interference by the white house in any independent government agency. from that new reporting, quote, donald trump and his allies are planning a sweeping expansion of presidential power over the machinery of government. if voters return him to the white house in 2025. reshaping the structure of the executive branch to concentrate far greater authority directly in his hands. trump and list associates have a broader goal to alter the balance of power by increasing the president's authority over every part of the federal government that now operates either by law or tradition with any measure of independence from political interference by the white house. that is according to a review of his campaign policy proposals and interviews of people close to him. the expresident's allies are trying to ensure the next time

trump needs to get the justice department or the department of homeland security or any agency related to go along with his political vendettas, there will be no one and nothing standing in his way. once again, go from this new "new york times" reporting, quote, he intends to strip employment protections from tens of thousands of career civil servants, making it easier to replace them if they are deemed obstacles to his agenda. and he plans to scour the intelligence agencies, the state department, and the defense bureaucracies to remove officials he has vilified as, quote, the sick political class that hates our country. it should come as no surprise that the people who are drawing up plans for a purge of the government, they're the very same people who enabled trump in the run-up to the january 6th insurrection. including former white house personnel chief, once described in the atlantic as, quote, the man who made january 6th possible. that piece of reporting from back in november of 2021 said

this of him. mcentee and his enforcers made the disaster of the trump presidency possible. they backed his manic drive to overturn the election and helped set the stage for the january 6th assault on the capitol. thanks to him, in the end, the elusive adults in the room, those who might have been willing to confront the president or try to control his most destructive tendencies were either silenced or gochblt job mcentee is reported in the "new york times" as calling for a complete overall of the executive government. plans by the disgraced expresident and his team to remove any and all obstacles to his power in a potential second term that would amount to a death to american democracy is where we begin today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. former u.s. senator claire mccass kell is back with us.

agent pete strock is here. former adviser to president obama is here, and with me at the table onset, katie. katie, what is stunning about your colleague's reporting is that this isn't hidden. this wasn't a product of stellar investigative reporting which all these journalists have incredible body accomplishments in that category. these are stated public positions of the twice impeached, twice indicted expresident. >> absolutely. and one of the bylines on this piece, he reported a similar story just after trump left office when he was down in mar-a-lago regrouping with his allies, trying to figure out what to do. they started coming up with the plans even then. this is something that not only has trump and his allies been planning for a long time. they've been remarkably consistent. their goal is to ensure whoever the president is can use the power of the executive branch

with basically, complete impunity. of course, you can say that's not very far thinking because of would they want a democratic president to have all those powers? probably not. i don't think that's their goal. and my sense is their goal is to not ever give power back to democrats. this is a way to ensure that trump and his administration continue to stay in power. >> there is an incredible little anecdote where they measure the success of this plan, i think you could describe it as shock and awe, right? you shock the system by saying we'll eliminate the independence of the justice department. it will be used as a political arm of the white house. they measure the success of the plans, which you're right, it has been reported that they've been underway since after the failed coup. by the fact that either republican candidates for the presidential nomination had adopted the same thing. ron desantis has a very similar view of killing or extinguishing

the independence of the american justice department as donald trump does. that was really a harrowing piece of reporting in here. >> yes. if this were to come to pass, we're heading toward mutually ensured destruction. you think about why the rules exist, after watergate, the american people started to lose faith in the american government. they said how can we trust the american government? we know the white house has been using the justice department for such political ends. things were a little different then. we had a congress that was united in deciding that was wrong. >> anticorruption. >> we had a congress of both republicans and democrats believed that kind of corruption was wrong and they took measures to put in place safeguards so it wouldn't happen again. we don't have that this time. but americans will still believe that the government is corrupt. and once you lose faith in a democracy, once people really don't believe the system works

anymore, what do we have? so much of our system is based on faith and trust. >> to the guy who wrote the book on how democracies die and erode, ben rhodes, i mistakenly chalked a lot of it up to reflexive fetally to trump. this is the path to ending democracy. as someone who has been voughting from the roof tops, i wonder what you make of this reporting from the new york time? >> reporter: well, i think it is entirely skin with what we've seen happening around the world. what is clear to me, the trump people are not only learning from his first term what he didn't put in place, his most virulent autocratic henchmen until the end of the administration burks they've studied the play book in other places. if you look at what has been done in say, hungary, where he's

been a model. he eviscerated the independence of government. everybody reported to him and served his agenda. that allowed him to exert a tremendous amount of control over every aspect of hungarian political life. that allowed for a tremendous amount of corruption where he was enriching cronies who were financing his politics and making sure that no opposition emerged and he was weaponizing the tools of the state to go after critics of him and his party. so whether they're in civil society, journalists. that's exactly what is happening here. this is all in plain sight. this is a play book used in many other countries. we americans like to think these things don't happen here. what we saw on january 6th is anything can happen here. if he has the sanction and the validation of an election, there is no reason to think he won't do these things here. and we've also seen republicans use state legislatures as laboratories to test these things out. to give governors greater

executive power or to take power in democratic governors. this is something they've been working on for years. this is what the 2024 election is all about. is this the kind of single party autocracy that we want to risk havinged under donald trump? or do we still believe in checks and balances in the american system of democracy? >> let me do something i try not to do very often unless totally necessary. let me play you what trump is running on doing in his own words from podiums with cameras in the back, out loud and proud. >> we are a failing nation. we are a nation in decline. now these radical left lunatics want to interfere with our elections by using law enforcement. it is totally corrupt and we won't let it happen. 2024 is our final battle. with you at my side, we will demolish the deep state.

we will expel the warmongers from our government. we will drive out the globalists, cast out the communists, marxists, we will throw offer the sick political class that hates our country and rout the fake news media. we will defeat crooked joe biden and we will drain the swamp once and for all. >> so ben rhodes, i stopped being a republican for a lot of reasons. i worked in the republican administration. you know what that is like. you forge real friendships with the people, they're ad your wedding, they're there when you face a tragedy. the reason i stopped being a republican is because people i love dearly say and do nothing when that happens. that's not someone even flirting with autocracy. that is someone deep in the tank of delusions and propaganda. i searched high and low. i didn't find anyone. any elected republicans in the

house or the senate rebuke the comments. chris christie is running against him. bill barr came out and was a star witness for the house select committee. i've looked everywhere today and i haven't found anyone rebuking not just lies but dangerous lies. as katie just said, as a journalist, you have to stay open to the possibility this will come to pass and this plan will be put into action if he's reelected. it will be the fault of, and the blood of our dead democracy will be the hands, on the hands of elected republicans who said and did nothing. >> there is something really chilling here. two things, there is a straight up us versus them rhetoric. you can put those words in the mouths of any number of autocrats. the dehumanization of his opponents and the intention of

using government to punish his opponents. that's one big flashing light. the other is, he's tied up his own personal fate with this election. it's all or nothing. this election may be the thing necessary to keep him out of prison, right? so this is xs tension for trump and he's making no effort to hide his fundamentally autocratic intentions. the other thing you see in any system of government that shifts from a democracy to an autocracy, at some point, there have to be enablers, business people who decide i know this is wrong but it's easier to go along than it is to stand up to it. it's easier to maybe take my little piece on the back end of the autocracy than risk anything by standing up to it. this is not about whether we have differences about the size of government or how much taxes there should be or whether this foreign policy is better than that. this is about whether we're a

democracy. he's standing up and saying my agenda is to dismantle american democracy and make it a tool of my personal interests to punish my enemies. that's where we're at. and anybody who doesn't see that has been willfully blind for the last six years and doesn't really seem to believe enough in what this country is supposed to represent and do anything about. >> and for him to be taking after a group that includes liz cheney, a conservative's conservative. bill barr who did more to aid him in the justice department than probably anyone in our country's history. chris christie, a long time. it isn't a right-left choir. and one more for you. i think the mistake people like rupert murdoch is thinking it won't happen to us. but trump can turn on a dime. the notion that taking over the agencies that control the airwaves, which is also in this program that he wants to exert presidential and power over that. it doesn't mean anyone will be spared. he could wake up on the wrong side of the bed.

read something true or false on social media and turn on anyone. and i wonder what you think about the fact that there is such a lack of bipartisan cross sort of civic cultural and business life reaction to this reporting. >> well, i think there's something sort of numbing about trump. but the reality is, of course he goes after the broadcasting. of course he wants to get his hands on that. vladimir putin when he came to power made dwigss oligarcholiga. he controlled the airwaves. they think because they're powerful that they can manage the autocrat and i think that's a severe mistake that people like rupert murdoch have made. he managed that situation all the way to january 6th. and that was something that people probably thought could never happen here. i think we have to condition our

imaginations to be able to see the future that donald trump is telling us that he wants. this is trump presidency picking up on january 7th. that's what the inaugurational day will be. the trump presidency from the day after the insurrection. that's what he wants to do. i think what we see a much greater awareness in this country than 2016. the americans standing up and across the spectrum and in one form or another, rejecting the extremism. this is the last play for donald trump. and i think we need more people to step forward who haven't or it will be way too close for comfort heading into the election. >> so pete strzok, you've been on the other side. here's some of the people that he wanted tad his bidding this. describing exactly what he wanted his department of justice

to do. >> my recollection is the president said something like, well, we can get, some people say we can get to the bottom of this if the department sees the machines. it was a typical way of raising a point. and i said absolutely not. there is no probable cause. and i won't seize any machines. >> let's look at another one of your notes. you noted that mr. rosen said to mr. trump, quote, doj can't and won't snap its fingers and change the outcome of the election. how did the president respond to that? >> he responded very quickly and said, essentially, that's not what i'm asking you to do. what i'm asking you to do is say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the republican congressmen. since dhs had been mentioned, the president yelled out to his secretary, get ken cuccinelli on the phone. and she did in very short order. mr. cuccinelli was on the phone. he was the number two at dhs at

the time. i was on the speaker phone. the president essentially said, ken, i'm sitting here with the acting attorney general and it is your job to seize the machines and you're not doing your job. and mr. cuccinelli responded. >> so in this plan on paper, and is animating presidential stump speeches. there would be no mr. barr, whatever we think of him. there would be no mr. donahue. there would be no resistance to seizing the voting machines. i wonder what you think needs to happen for people to understand what that means. >> it's pretty tough. i think the tendency is we look at the last administration and say well, democracies survive. it was on the emergency table bleeding out. now we say everybody is up walking around. the fact is, what we are facing, i don't think a lot of people

understand how horrible it can be. i remember interviewing mike flynn in the west wing weeks after the inauguration. nobody expected to be this. they didn't have people in place. that is completely different now. we see lists of people being drawn up to put immediately into position should trump return to power. and another thing they've learned is the importance of having people who are loyal in those positions that control the people who investigate you. who can issue subpoenas toward you. who can arrest you. who can put you in jail. who carry guns. all those places, whether it is the fbi, the department of justice, the department of homeland security, the department of defense. i think the people around trump understand how critical it is to put loyalists in those positions and absolutely try to bring them to heel and pursue the agendas. and as everybody said this afternoon, trump is not hiding at all what he plans to do. he plans to investigate joe biden. he man's to investigate his enemies. he plans to fire his enemies.

it is all there in black and white and it's coming if he's reelected. >> we need to get more into this. and as pete is describing, what is on paper, what we can analyze the campaign position papers that happen to be, as we said, torn from the pages of an autocrat's play book. much more on all this, including picking up on pete's point, what it would take the hire the staff in a very authoritarian second term. the litmus test that would be disqualifying. plus, as the last year has shown, abortion is bringing people out to vote against republicans which is why republicans in ohio are pulling out every last trick in their bag of tricks to make it harder for those votes to count. democrats are fighting back with a very provocative new ad campaign telling republicans, out of the bedroom. we'll show it to you. later in the broadcast, we'll look to a big day in the

classified documents case. the judge would consider how material gets handled and when this might all really start. that's after a quick break. that's after a quick break ists tourists that turn into scientists. tourists taking photos that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪ hey, dad. i got an a on my book report. -and i scored a goal on ashley. -that's cool. and i went for a walk in the woods and i didn't get a single flea or tick on me. you are just the best. it's probably because of that flea and tick medicine you've been ordering from chewy. we are very proud of you. you never stop surprising us, bailey. right? i'm great. you are great. i wonder if bailey's ever done a book report. be nice to your sister. what flea bit him? pets aren't just pets. they're more. this flea and tick season, trust america's #1 pet pharmacy. chewy. (vo) crabfest is back at red lobster. trust america's #1 pet pharmacy. when you can choose your crab,

and one of three new flavors like honey sriracha... ...this is not your grandpa's crabfest... ...unless grandpa's got flavor. dayumm! crabfest is here for a limited time. welcome to fun dining. okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health. yaaay! woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪

ision loss with 30 grams of protein. and if you're taking a multi-vitamin alone, you may be missing a critical piece... preservision. preservision areds 2 contains the only clinically proven nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. preservision is backed by 20 years of clinical studies.

so ask your doctor about adding preservision and fill in a missing piece of your plan. like i did with preservision. now with ocusorb better absorbing nutrients. we are back with claire mccaskell. with everybody that has been mentioned with all this new reporting, i'm dying to hear your thoughts. >> i think people need to remember how all of these checks and balances came about. first, it was our founding fathers and the way they wrote

the constitution. you know, most democracies, whatever party controls the legislative branch also controls the executive branch. but not in america. they wanted there to be this division of power. they wanted there to be compromise. they wanted there to be no one who had the ability to put their finger on the scale. and that is what they're really trying to destroy here in a way that's very unamerican. the other thing i think we have to remember is the issue of corruption. when he says he wants to do away with civil service protections, what he's really saying is, he wants to put people with not great integrity or character in charge of all these agencies. they're in on his plan. and then he wants them to populate these agencies with loyalists. that is the old school way that was full of corruption and that's why the civil service was born. so we could get out of the situation where people were paying money to people who were

running for office in order to make sure they got a job. and then they were expected to continue to support the person who gave them that job. and many of them never even showed up for work because they were there. because of who they supported. not because of their ability or their intellect or their experience. and the third thing that i think is important to remember is how chaotic this would be. this is, as kelly said in the "new york times" article, this would be four years of chaos and warfare between the courts, congress, and the executive branch. this would not go down easily. this would be a full-bore fight. and i think you sue at the kind of people in the streets that you're seeing in israel right now when you have that coalition over there trying to defang judiciary's power. >> i think what the reporting proves is that we would be lucky if it was four years. he wants to seize every lever

which does not preclude canceling elections. i want to read more of it to you. the meticulous preparations for a second trump term. what would prove disqualifying. if you kind of have shown yourself to have fought against the trump administration or there are issues where you've been counter to it, that's according to paul dans, director of the 2025 presidential transition project. you know where people stand by where they sit. their allegiances over time can give people a pretty good picture. blaming trump for the ransacking of the capitol in 2021 or supporting his impeachment that followed, for example, would be enough to keep someone off the list. he says, quote, i love you. so which people would be disqualified? everybody but the insurrectionists and and the insurrection caulk us in congress? >> everyone would be disqualified if they didn't

pledge that donald trump should be in power of everything in america. and it is very, very scary. and this is very serious. and you are right, nicole, to continue to bang your drum about why aren't the republicans rising up in horror? why aren't business leaders rising up in horror? who is funding the heritage foundation. i'm so old. i remember when it was about conserving conservative principles. this is crazy town. the heritage foundation is now fully embracing crazytown. anybody who works that there who has any ounce of integrity or character or intellect should speak up now and anybody funding that organization should pull their funding immediately. >> where are we? understanding where republicans

stand. i think you did the first and definitive body of reporting when it was unearthed about the republican who's held the line at doj but barely. this reporting would annihilate their ability to even do that. where, what have you heard in terms of pushback? >> what is interesting is it will be republicans who prevent this from happening. official trump is elected, all the people need to be confirmed by the senate. if you imagine a world where trump is the president, and we have a split senate and republicans are in control because it is 50/50 which is not out of the question. or they would control with 51 seats or more. even 50/50 split. it is up to republicans to stop this plan. would trump would want and need to do is nominate people who are in many ways not qualified for their jobs. johnny mcentee, the head of personnel. he wasn't somebody with long years and decades of experience.

>> didn't he have vetting issues himself? >> and there have been people. even if you look at jeff sessions. the first attorney general under trump. people were willing to support jeff sessions because he came out of the senate. you didn't have to like his politics. you didn't have to agree with him on race, policing, civil rights, but there was a belief among his peers that he would defend and upheld to constitution and in key ways he did. you have to imagine trump will not be nominating people even of that caliber. so it will be up to republicans to keep this from happening by not confirming these picks. of course, trump can put an acting head who can do a lot of damage in that time but it would slow down the process a lot. >> pete, i feel like the january 6th select committee gave us a real window into how hairy things were with all the acting folks that trump happened picked for the final days of the

administration. where do you go in imagining what this could possibly look like? >> i go to a place of night players. i go to people lining cash patel and rick rendell and the rest. i look at who he would install. he could put in any number of acting folks. the fact is, if we think we're going to rely on congressional republicans, the fact of the matter is that trump goes too these rallies. he is laying out these plans to the cheers of easily 20 to 30% of the electorate. and any expectation that any republican in congress who is relying on those votes to stay in congress will push back against him is sadly mistaken. so i have no expectation that there will be anybody qualified. there won't be the rex tillersons and general kelleys and the mcgans of the world who tried to keep a left and right

limit on trump. they won't be around the next time. they'll be these underqualified loyalists who are there with trump because they could not be with anyone else. and they'll be doing what trump wants. and there won't be a lot keeping them from doing that short of i think an abundance of lawsuits. i would expect our judicial system will grind to a halt. his various policies. personnel policies or any sort of regulatory policies. but i just see a nightmare. or a series of nightmares. >> i think we have to put a pin in this and come back with a solution. because i hear liquor cabinets opening up all across our viewing audience. i think what you've all left me with is that a political solution, a message to the country that is the democracy, whatever the political message is, so the people really understand what is on the line. this is not hidden. this is not stuff he's talking

about in the back of a plane that a reporter overheard. this is stuff that is coming out of his mouth at rallies. the maniacal people working for him are putting this on paper. this is the plan. thank you so much for starting us off on an admittedly grim topic. katie comes back in the next hour. when we come back with such, such, such immensely high stakes in the fight for reproductive freedom in america. it is no wonder ohio is trying to work in their state. and something everyone is talking about, it highlights just how bizarre and potentially unpopular the latest gop maneuvering really is. gop maneuvering really is.

♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ hi, i'm todd. i'm a veteran of 23 years. i served three overseas tours. i love to give back to the community. i offer what i can when i can. i started noticing my memory was slipping. i saw a prevagen commercial and i did some research on it. i started taking prevagen about three years ago. i feel clearer in my thoughts, my memory has improved and generally just more on point. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription.

hey all, so i just downloaded the experian app because i wanted to check my fico® score, but it does so much more. this thing shows you your fico® score, you can get your credit card recommendations, and it shows you ways to save money. do so much more than get your fico® score. download the experian app now.

at denny's, we're celebrating baconalia. with new creations starring black label® thick cut cherrywood bacon. ready to satisfy your bacon obsession? at denny's... it's diner time. and now, rewards members get 2 free strips of our new premium bacon for a limited time.

this is american infrastructure, a prime target for cyberattacks. but the same ai-powered security that protects all of google also defends these services for everyone who lives here. ♪ equal parts raunchy and profound. an instant finalist. it is from a liberal pac called progress action fund. they want people in ohio to vote against what is called state issue 1. state issue 1 would require any proposed amendment to the constitution of the state of ohio to receive the approval of at least 60% of eligible voters voting on the proposed amendment. advocates for reproductive rights insist it is a way to circumvent basic democracy, basic majority rule in order to prevent the legalization of abortion health care ahead of a

referendum asking that question in november. before we play the ad, which as i said, a little raunchy. and we understand it running on connected tv's online platforms and streaming services in ohio. a little heads up. the primary reason it is so effective is it is pg-13 rating. a little ris kay. if there are any little ones in the room, you may want to tell them to go get you a diet coke. the key thing about this is to get to you pay attention. it got my attention. >> do you have a condom? >> yeah. >> sorry, you can't use those. >> what are you talking about? who are you? >> i'm your republican congressman. now that we're in charge, we're banning birth control. >> this is our decision. not yours. get out of our bedroom. >> i won the last election. i'm not going anywhere. i'm going to watch and make sure you don't do anything illegal.

>> good luck getting that ad out of your head. ohioans will vote. you know, claire, oz lost because he said it. i'm surprised that it took this long to put what oz said into an ad. he said when you're in the doctor's office, it will be you, your doctor, and a republican official. that's what this would look like. >> exactly. the republicans in ohio are being incredibly hypocritical. the secretary of state actually said at a republican rally, 100%, they put this on a statewide ballot issue in the middle of summer all by itself because they're trying to stop ohioans from being able to protect reproductive rights in the fall. this is all about stopping the majority of ohio having their say. the last poll in ohio said 59%

of ohio wanted there could be less restrictions on abortion. and that is really what this is all about. it is about the government if your bedroom. it is about the government taking away your freedom. and it is pretty outrageous. the ad is terrific, by the way. people will not forget it after they see it. >> what i like about the ad. i'm guilty of this, too. we can cover abortion as a women's problem. but the reason it is such a potent issue, men are for access to legal abortion as well. the reason the red tide didn't come to pass, as powerful as women are, men are also voting against the extreme bans and the extreme pro-life candidates. i like that this ad puts the man back in the conversation. >> and to her point, it's jarring. you don't blank you're watching at first. okay. let me sit through this. as it plays out, you see it

getting creepier and creepier. the language, the authoritarian tie. >> he looks like a republican. >> saying i am in your bedroom and i'm making policy for you. to your point, as you bring in the men in this conversation, yeah, in some ways, you can't marginalize it. you can't project outward and say i'm going to be an al eye. no. not only am i an al eye but i'm part of a conversation. and i need to be able to support myself but also the women in my life on these issues. incredibly important. i would also say that as far as the ballot measure goes, there are similar measures in arizona, pennsylvania, iowa, south dakota, and i like this. not that we have to fight for this issue but aware in california. we put almost everything on the ballot. there are other states that didn't have as much ballot activity. and now it's a mobilizing issue

because you're getting people out to go vote on these ballot initiatives. it has impacts if you're running for governor, you can raise money off this issue. so for democratic governors, democratic state legislators, this is a really important time to mobilize your base and be able to raise money off this thing. >> and let me just be, this may be remedial from all may democracy hawks who watch this show. the reason, claire, they're trying to change the threshold is because abortion is a loser for republicans. they can't defeat access to reproductive health care if they go to any electorate in kansas, for example, in ohio, with a 50/50 proposition. that's why they're changing the threshold. they know the majority of americans. this is signaling everything that anyone needs to know about what a weakened state republicans are in politically

because of their support for this supreme court and because of their support for the extreme bans. >> they are putting up a flashy anyon sign that says, we know we don't represent the majority. we know we are out of step with most people in our state. and we are not going to change our view. instead, we're going to make it harder for the majority to have their will. and that is really, really just like our last segment. very unamerican. and very autocratic. and it is awful they're trying to do this. hopefully, like basil said, it will be a motivator. this has been a law in ohio since 1912. had the 60% threshold been in place, there is one ballot issue that sit notable that wouldn't have passed. that was allowing black men and women to serve in the national guard in ohio. because it didn't get 60%. minimum wage would not have

passed in ohio because it didn't get 60%. those are the kinds of majority issues that would be denied by these republicans trying to pull a fast one and deny the majority their say in november. and this is very important. tremendously important for sherrod brown and control of the senate. all of this comes into play together. whether or not mitch mcconnell is running the show or whether or not the democrats maintain control of the senate. ohio is ground zero. >> we'll stay on it. up next for us, new and politically the struggling ron desantis campaign. ling ron desantis campaign.

i've never been healthier. shingles doesn't care. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache,

shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today.

why didn't we do this last year? before you were preventing migraine with qulipta®? remember the pain? cancelled plans? the worry? that was then. and look at me now. you'll never truly forget migraine. but qulipta® reduces attacks, making zero-migraine days possible. it's the only pill of its kind that blocks cgrp - and is approved to prevent migraine of any frequency. to help give you that forget-you-get migraine feeling. don't take if allergic to qulipta®. most common side effects are nausea,

constipation, and sleepiness. learn how abbvie could help you save. qulipta®. the forget-you-get migraine medicine™. there are some new political warning signs less than two months into ron desantis's struggling and ailing campaign effort. the reality check for the florida governor who has largely blamed us, the media, and everyone else for his plunging popularity. first, the latest filings suggest that financial solvency is actually a major threat to ron desantis, or d-satnis or whatever we're going with. he tapped out top donors burning through $7.9 million and he's still struggling to maintain a small base of donors. there's word that he has just fired roughly a dozen staffers

and even more dismissals and firings are expected in the coming weeks. it is being spun as a cost-cutting measure according to a source familiar with the filings. one source said desantis strike isn't rising. 20% is not what people signed up for. >> yeah. burning through cash and staff this early is a terrible, terrible sign. he did what you're not supposed to do. he let donald trump define him. he hasn't been able to spiral out of that to chart various proactive and determined course against him. he doesn't really go after donald trump the way would you want somebody to go after donald trump. in a way that chris christie is doing that. now, chris christie hasn't done very well in fundraising. at least -- >> that's about viability.

and money is always a first primary. so what can help him down the road is if if you have other gop candidates start dropping out. he can make up some of the donors. but right now, it seems like the donors feel, you're not our guy. and all signs point to another donald trump nomination. >> claire, ron desantis maybe the worst political candidate i've ever observed from afar in republican politics. he's really bad. and he's bad at the things he's good at which makes him a fun story to read about. the people covering him have a delicious front row seat to this amazing preordained implosion politically. he's not going anywhere. he has no idea who he is or why he's running. and it that i refuse to condone the relevant activity. well, he's better than trump or worse than trump. the voters aren't into him at

all. >> yeah. he won that re-election in florida. and he and his wife thought that was his coronation to america's favorite candidate. nobody in their right mind hires 100 staff, more than 18 months out from the election. that's a huge staff. that just dictates a high burn rate. and you mentioned, nicolle, and it's really important to underline this, you cannot get elected to major office in america without a foundation of small donors. it is no longer people's living rooms and checks with commas in it. it is people online giving you 20 bucks a month or 10 bucks a month, believing in you. that is how you gain support in order to be credible in today's elections. and then the whipped cream and cherry on this sunday, he's behind trump by 20 points in florida. he thought he was the second

coming. they even made an ad likening him to god in florida. and here florida's saying nah, we like the other guy better, you're just mini me. you know, stay out of this race. so the future does not look bright for ron desantis. >> it's also not knowing where he stands on trump that's deadly. you are for trump or you are against trump. >> that's right zpp presidential campaigns are also about building sociopolitical movement. whether you agree or disagree dwonld trump has done that. that's where the small donors come into play. but for ron desantis minus that do you have big donors coming and saying we want to make you, we want to actually create your candidacy and put you over the top? you don't see that happening either. so it seems like -- and i guess one could argue that even his arguments with disney show that he doesn't know how to -- >> well, he lost. if he'd been a mickey slayer -- he lost his fight with disney. >> that's exactly right. so you don't know how to win in that regard when you take on

that giant. but look at what you're doing with big business and the biggest employer anyway. you're not playing this game the way you need to play it and that's cost him. >> clearly. we'll keep watching. pop some popcorn. basil schmeichel, claire mccaskill, thank you for spending time us with us today. all of you at home don't go anywhere. we have an update on that abortion ban we told you about in iowa on friday. a junl has just ruled on that. we'll tell you in a couple minutes. d on that. we'll tell you in a couple minutes. even a little blurry vision can distort things. and something serious may be behind those itchy eyes. up to 50% of people with graves' could develop a different condition called thyroid eye disease, which should be treated by a different doctor. see an expert. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com 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.

breaking news just this

hour. a judge in iowa has granted a temporary injunction against that state's so-called fetal heartbeat law, blocking enforcement of the state's new abortion ban. the law banned abortions at six weeks before the vast majority of women know that they are pregnant at all. it has set off fiery protests inside the state house before its passage. now, this injunction issued by district court judge joseph seedlin means that abortion is once again legal in the state up to 20 weeks, which was the case before the new law. the injunction will remain in place while a challenge brought by abortion providers and the american civil liberties union in iowa plays out in court. the bill was passed and signed into law last week. we told you about it last week. by iowa republican governor kim reynolds. she issued a statement saying in part this. "i will fight this all the way to the iowa supreme court." we'll keep on this and follow the story as it continues to develop. up next for us, what to expect in tomorrow's classified documents hearing.

the first real test for trump-appointed judge aileen cannon. all the headlines coming up. don't go anywhere. don't go anywhere.

first, there's an idea and you do something about it for the first time with godaddy. then before you know it, (it is a life changer...) you make your first sale. small business first. never stopped coming. (we did it!) and you have a partner that always puts you first way. (no way!) start today at godaddy.com. 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 goli, taste your goals. matching your job description.

this is a law passed in 1977. presidential records act. neither the archivist nor congress has the authority to veto under the statute this responsibility is left solely to the president of the united states. your favorite president. me. they indicted me. think of it.

>> in other words, whatever documents a president decides to take with him, he has the absolute and unquestioned to do so. this is a law that was passed and signed. and that's the law and that's the way it is and it couldn't be more clear. >> no, no. wrong. wrong. totally wrong. hi again, everyone. it's 5:00 in new york. that is not at all how the presidential records act works. never has been and never will. every time trump opens his mouth, though, he spews out a new excuse or new fabricated explanation for why he was found with all sorts of classified government documents. and this iteration, like all of the ones before it, is completely inaccurate. legal scholars were quick to debunk trump's new definition of the presidential records act. laurence tribe, harvard university professor emeritus, said this. "no such law exists, period, end quote. national security attorney

bradley moss said it would fail in court. former congressman adam kinzinger weighed in, "of all the not true things this is the not truest." end quote. but the presidential records act actually says unsurprisingly for those of us who have watched trump for this many years, is the opposite of what he's saying. quote, it establishes that presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the archivist as soon as the president leaves office." trump making his bogus claim right before tomorrow's pretrial hearing in the criminal case into his mishandling of classified national defense documents. all eyes will of course be on judge aileen cannon, the trump-appointed federal judge presiding over the case and whether she will entertain the request by trump's team to delay, delay and delay again. the ex-president's lawyers asking to push the trial until after the 2024 presidential election, to which doj responded, i don't think so. earlier today doj released a protective order. it pertains to the handling of

the classified information involved in this case and reads in part, "the defense may not disclose classified information to the defendants unless that same information has been previously disclosed to the defense by the defendants or provided by the government with markings indicating it may be disclosed to the defendants. any classified information the defense discusses with the defendants in any way shall be handled in accordance with this order and the attached memorandum of understanding including such requirements as confining all discussions, documents and materials to an accredited scif." looking ahead to tomorrow's pretrial hearing in the classified documents case is where we begin with some of our most favorite reporters and friends. former senior national security official at the department of justice brandon van graph is with us. also joining us former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst joyce vance is back. and back with me at the table "new york times" reporter and msnbc contributor katie benner.

so brendan, i've been glued to your twitter feed searching you by name every time these things break to get a translation of classified documents trials for dummies. but take me through what this exactly pertains to. and for some of these documents it may actually be the first time trump sees any of them in a scif. >> that's right. so taking a step back, any time in any criminal case the government provides materials to defense counsel and the defendants there's a protective order that occurs, even with respect to unclassified information. and what we're talking about here, whats with foiled earlier today, is the department of justice filed their proposed protective order for classified information. and it contains a number of provisions but part of it is you need a security clearance in order to handle classified information and not all at the provision you just showed, it's not all information that gets provided to defense counsel can

be shared with the defendants. and i think it's important to underscore this, which is this is a standard protective order. in fact, i'd invite your listeners to compare this to the protective order that was in the case involving the national guardsman in massachusetts that posted a bunch of classified information. some of these passages are ieblt v identical. in fact, the real only difference that i can see is that this protective order shows that some of the classified information in this case is also subject to the atomic energy act, which is it's nuclear-related information. but otherwise this is precisely the protective order that individuals have to sign to access classified information. >> brandon, one of the things we are trying to decipher without your intimate understanding of what a trial involving classified materials looks like and its rhythms is which things trump will exploit absent the careful considerations that need to be put in place to protect

national defense materials. what is your read of how this process should go and what is your read of the pockets or windows of opportunity for trump's attorneys to carry out what they've now made clear is their goal, which is to delay this trial until after the 2024 presidential election? >> i think there are two pieces. and it's what i think we're going to focus on, what the court will focus on most tomorrow, which is the real focus is going to be on scheduling. the department of justice has proposed a number of dates. and as you noted, the defendants have said we shouldn't have any dates here, this needs to occur after the election. and what i think we're going to see the department of justice do is show we've provided now almost all the unclassified discovery in this case. in fact, we also gave them a guide to how to review that information and what's most important. and they're going to say that we actually are ready to produce almost all of the classified documents. in fact, they're probably going to say tomorrow it's sitting in the courthouse.

all you have to do is sign this memorandum of understanding and you have this classified information. i think you're going to see the government very clearly say there's no reason for delay, they have or should have this week just about all the information they need in order to prepare their defenses and pretrial motions. when you talk about the other side, i think going back to this protective order is a really good place because watt government said is we can't provide classified information until this protective order is signed and the defendant's counsel said we object but they didn't tell us what their objections were. and they wouldn't talk to us overt weekend. and so we're filing this without any understanding what their objections are and the point is they're telling the court that this is a cause for delay and i suspect one of the reasons for the delay is a point you just raised, which is one of the things that this protective order has. and again, this is a standard protective order, is the defense counsel cannot automatically

share classified information with the defendants. and that is standard. that's not saying that most declassified information can't be shared. but there will be some classified information the government is saying which will not be shared with the defendants and that provision alone is likely something that defendants object to. >> what do you -- what will you be watching for as you again with sort of your expert antenna evaluate how aileen cannon makes a decision tomorrow? >> so one is -- in fact, she just issued an order saying that she wants the defense to be prepared to make particularized objections to the doj's proposed scheduling. so one thing to look for is to see how judge cannon really presses the defendants for dates and objections to the dates proposed by the department of justice. another piece is -- and this is a bit obscure because we're talking about timing, the court

where this case is has an obscure practice when it comes to classified information, this law, the classified information procedures act, which is that it allows magistrate judges to hear issues involving cepa and jung cannon is a district court judge. it's in essence sending these issues to another judge. and the point here isn't to get into the differences between a magistrate judge and a district court judge. the point is i want to see whether judge cannon is actually going to take these hearings and these filings on herself, which will expedite the process, versus sending them to a magistrate judge, which can then be appealed to judge cannon, which would be a source for delay. so i think that's another piece. and finally i'm going to be curious to see how the department of justice articulates that limitation that you referenced in terms of the defendants not being able to necessarily access all the classified information. >> brandon, you first mentioned

cepa on the day of the indictments when you were on with me and my colleagues rachel and joy. and i remember going like this so i could look down at my phone and google it. i've now become an expert. but let me just ask you about -- would that be -- isn't judge reinhart a magistrate judge that's been involved in this case since the beginning? would it be someone with knowledge of the case? would that be a bad thing? or are you saying that if she doesn't refer it to a magistrate judge it would actually go faster, would signal some recognition that speed is a shared priority with the government? >> all you've done is confirm i did a terrible job of explaining. >> it was just a lot. it was a lot on day one. >> it's a lot to process. it wasn't a question as to sort of who the judge is, whether it's judge -- and their experience or background here. it's that in most courts when there are issues involving classified information the

district court judge, in this case judge coop, is the one that hears the issue, reads the filings and issues the order and if either party has an issue with that then it can be appealed to an appellate court. this court is unique in the country, which it allows magistrate judges like judge reinhart to actually weigh in on and be the judge that hears these issues initially. and my point is if a party has issues with what a magistrate judge rules with respect to classified information they then appeal it to judge cannon and then judge cannon would go through the entire process again, probably have another hearing, more filings, and then issue a ruling and then that could be appealed. and my point is it injects delay into the process because perhaps right now the most important thing we're looking for is can these proceedings, can this trial occur within a reasonable period of time. >> and joyce, i think the reason i really wanted to understand that from brandon, who has explained this to all of us now so patiently he deserves some special medal for tutoring

anchors in these kind of legal matters, as you do you. but i think we're all going to be trying -- to reading into judge aileen cannon. the nrkts nshlths has some incredible reporting that not only has she never presided over a trial involving classified documents, she hasn't presided over all too many trials, i think just a couple. and so knowing that trump, again -- what's so amazing in year seven or wherever we are is everything is on paper. and he's on paper out in the open fighting these counts and this indictment with a strategy that amounts to one thing. delay. delay until after a presidential election. hope to win. pardon himself. so when we watch what happens tomorrow and watch whether judge aileen cannon takes a path that will result in a delay, is it fair to wonder if she's trying to aid him either wittingly or unwittingly? >> whether it's fair or not, that's the question that we'll all be asking, nicolle.

that's the whole reason that the federal judicial code of conduct suggests that judges should recuse from cases if a reasonable person might have doubts about their ability to conduct themselves impartially. and based on her past history, in putting her thumb on the scale of justice very heavily for the former president, i think people will have those questions about her regardless. brandon does a great job of explaining how this process involving classified material plays into trump's love of using delay as a strategy in litigation. and it means it's not just a one-time question but at every stage in the proceedings trump's lawyers will have the opportunity to inject delay and it will be up to judge cannon to either hold their feet to the fire and keep the process moving or to let them play that old game and perhaps get this case postured in a way that makes it impossible to have a trial

before the election. that's why we'll be watching her early rulings so carefully, to see if she's going to do her job or if she's going to do trump's job. >> and you know, katie, we've been here before in watching trump. it's almost with impeachment one, right? where the call was what the call was so all he had was to say it's a perfect call. that's where he is now in the classified documents investigation. the presidential records act is sort of this year's "it was a perfect call." the defense is nonsensical. even it would appear to trump people. but what do you make of how it's a bifurcated defense, right? its purpose is for rooms like that one, not the courtroom. >> absolutely. so trump's defense, how he's going to defend himself publicly on the campaign trail and radio interviews, et cetera, is going to sound very different from what his lawyers say in court. his lawyers are not going to go into open court and say before a federal judge something untrue about the presidential records act, which is available for all to see. they would be disbarred.

i mean, you're going to see a very different court proceeding that's extremely technical in nature as brandon and joyce have described for the next probably few hearings. and what's so interesting is that trump can use that to his advantage because very few people who support him will be really paying this sort of close attention to those hearings that you will be paying and other lawyers will be paying attention to. they are going to be listening to him and his representations. and what will be interesting is whether or not a judge steps in and says that these false representations of what's happening in the courtroom must stop. and that is another thing that we'll be watching for when we look at judge cannon in the hearings to come. because there is going to be sort of an unstoppable force, immovable object effect when it comes to trump's rhetoric and what has to happen in the courtroom and whether or not she decides that that can go on or whether or not she decides that's actually undermining the integrity of the court proceeding will be really interesting to see. >> you know what will be interesting on that front, joyce, is whether bill barr, who's been -- it is not an exaggeration to say he's been a

cheerleader of the strength of the evidence in the government's case since the earliest stages of it. and chris christie as well. to see if any of what katie's saying, what trump has communicated to his base is a nonsensical, legally unsound, factually inaccurate defense. but whether any critics on the right can break through is sort of an open question. >> right. you would think there would have been breakthrough on this issue because when you learn the former president, right? has nuclear secrets at his resort club with guests wandering in and out, that really should have been ball game. and the reality here -- and nicolle, this goes to something you and i have talked about before, is the importance of transparency in this process. right now we have a trial where there will not be cameras in the courtroom because that's how the federal system works. even in some of these early hearings the court has told reporters that they can't bring electronic devices in and can't tweet the hearing in essence.

and so a focal point as we move forward here will be how possible is it to get accurate information about what's going on and about the former president's conduct to the american people? >> one of the open questions is the jury. the times also has some incredible reporting on how pro-trump the jury pool is. obviously jack smith knew that. i think we sort of underestimate his ability to maybe examine these things on strength of the evidence. where do you come down on what doj was thinking? >> i think it was essential for the justice department to bring the case of the classified documents in florida. that's where the documents were held. it's where trump is accused of lying about the documents. it's where he's accused of conspiring to continue to hide them. and it's where walt nauta is accused of also conspiring to hide these documents, moving them back and forth all around mar-a-lago. that people coming to look for them couldn't find them. so to not bring it. you can't really even imagine the contortions, the legal contortions the justice department would have had to go

through to justify moving it to a different court with a friendlier jury. it would have looked highly political and something this justice department has already said they don't appreciate in other cases including the abortion pill case that happened in the one federal district court in texas where the people who brought that lawsuit against the use of medical abortion pills knew that they would get a very kind ruling. so it's different. it was a civil versus a criminal case. but even so this justice department has said they don't think that's what the doj should do or anyone should do. you should bring your cases based on the strength of the evidence. and as you've mentioned there are many people including bill barr who say this is very strong evidence. so i believe that, you know, americans will listen to the evidence and decide for themselves. >> we will be listening to brandon van grack. brandon, i'll give you the last word on what -- sort of a viewer's guide to what happens tomorrow. >> well, i think maybe i'll point out two things, which is one is it's important to understand how unremarkable this

protective order is is and what the government is requesting with respect to how this classified material should be handled. in addition to this is a standard protective order, there is case law supporting it. i think the other piece is how remarkable it is that the government is ready to produce all this discovery. it is in essence this week in a position where it will have produced or can produce just about all the information it needs in this case. the case was only charged five weeks ago. that's not how these cases occur. so i think it's remarkable and shows how the department of justice is willing to move mountains to try to get this case to trial as soon as possible. >> brandon van grack, katie benner, thank you both so much for starting us off this hour. joyce sticks around. ahead for us one maga republican senator's blockade on military promotions over the pentagon's abortion policy is doing grave harm to military readiness and u.s. national security. now another is being slammed for outrageous comments he made

calling the pentagon policy, quote, abortion tourism. reaction to those new comments by senator tom cotton after a short break. plus, brand new reporting from the news outlet that broke the story about billionaire republican donor harlan crow and the financial benefits he's given supreme court justice clarence thomas over many years. there are now new questions about whether crow broke the law by taking thomas on vacation on his luxury super yacht. and a dramatic account of russia's brutal and illegal war in ukraine from a war correspondent who's been there from the very start. "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. don't go anywhere. s after a qui. don't go anywhere. unfilled cybersecurity jobs in the u.s. the google cybersecurity certificate was made to fill that gap and help grow the workforce that's keeping us all safe.

i was told my small business wouldn't qualify for an erc tax refund. you should get a second opinion from innovation refunds at no upfront cost. sometimes you need a second opinion. all these walls gotta go! ah ah ah! i'd love a second opinion. take the first step to see if your small business qualifies. (vo) in three seconds, this couple will share a perfect moment. take the first step to see (woman) is that? oh wow! but we got to sell our houses! (vo) don't worry. sell and buy in one move when you start with opendoor. (woman) yes! (vo) close in a matter of days. start with an all cash offer at opendoor dot com

3... 2... 1...

if you thought that the republican party could not sink any lower, one, i'm jealous. but you know, after following the saga of alabama senator tommy tuberville as he's single-handedly blocked military appointments and threatens on a daily basis national security over the pentagon's abortion policy, think again. on friday the republican-controlled house passed the national defense authorization act. it included an amendment that would put a stop to a current pentagon policy that simply reimburses military personnel if they have to travel out of a state or location to undergo abortion health care. the bill also prevents the pentagon from covering some health care costs for transgender service members, and it now heads to the democratic-controlled senate where those amendments will likely be stripped out. it is worth noting that military personnel do not choose where they work, where they are stationed, and if they are serving in a state where abortion is banned they may not be able to access life-saving

medical procedures due to state laws there. but when arkansas republican senator tom cotton was asked about this policy and his position on it and the house amendment blocking it, here's how he put it. >> the military should not be paying for abortion tourism. >> so what should women who are in uniform in a place where they cannot access abortion because they are there on orders, what should they do? >> well, if they want to take that step, they have 30 days of annual leave. it shouldn't be taxpayer funds giving them three weeks of paid uncharged leave and then also paying for travel and lodging and meals, something we don't even give our troops when they have a parent die or a sibling die or a beloved grandparent die. >> joining our conversation, former u.s. senate candidate and retired marine corps lieutenant colonel amy mcgrath. also joining us former congresswoman and msnbc contributor donna edwards. amy, you shouldn't get three weeks off if you need miscarriage health care.

you shouldn't get three weeks to to recover from the tragedy and grief and the loss of it all. no, sir rie bob, says tom cotton. >> well, senator cotton -- first of all, it's insulting. it's insulting to any woman. it's insulting certainly to women in the military. but take that aside. you can debate all you want about pentagon personnel policy. what soern cotton and the likes of senator tuberville are doing are hurting our national security by holding up positions in order to push their right-wing, far right-wing agenda on this. women in the military, as you pointed out, they don't get a choice where they are stationed. and sometimes when you need this health care you have to go three or four states away. and what the military's doing here is no different than what the military would do if a woman in the military were stationed,

you know, in a third world country. they would help you get that health care. and so to me it's outrageous. and it's also important to note that senator cotton, he's fund-raising off of this. that's what they do. they say something outrageous and then they fund-raise off of it. so unfortunately, it's hurting our national security. >> he may make money, donna, but 93% of all americans oppose some of the bans that are being backed in places where american men and women are stationed. 87% oppose the bans that eliminate exceptions in cases of rape and incest. 93 oppose the bans in cases where the mother's life is on the line. that isn't just a statistic or question asked. the amanda zarosky who was pregnant with her daughter willow had a tragic miscarriage and almost died because she couldn't access health care in texas. what tom cotton is for is for a woman in the military not having access to what could be life-saving health care.

what is the -- what is, one, the remedy for women in the military and, two, the political price that tom cotton pays for having this position so wildly outside the mainstream of u.s. public opinion? >> well, i think first of all it's important for viewers to be reminded yet again that abortion care is health care and that women in the military just like women in the civilian sector deserve to be able to go to their facility, physician of choice to be able to do that. and unfortunately, of course, military women, as amy has described, are restricted because they don't get a choice of where they are. what's striking to me is that no matter what the statistics are in terms of the number of americans who really support abortion services for women, that that doesn't seem to stop the republican party at all from going to the most extreme position.

and i think that, you know, this is going to play out at ballot boxes but for right now the only stopgap is going to be the senate and hopefully getting to a conference committee that is able to strip some of these most egregious provisions out of the -- it's striking because in the almost ten years i served in the congress the ndaa passed with 300, 350 votes. it was not controversial. it was highly bipartisan. and they have turned support for our defense services into a controversial party line vote because of their holding on to these extreme abortion policies. >> amy, you've boiled it down in pretty magical and compelling terms, that you could fly a $700 billion jet loaded with bombs but you wouldn't be allowed if you were still serving to make decisions about your health care. the public gets this.

and this isn't a right-left thing. this is increasingly not a red state blue state thing. abortion bans are failing in red states. this would put the military outside of the mainstream, and that seems dangerous to military recruitment, military readiness. who has that conversation with the country? >> well, unfortunately, i think it's now front and center in the political world. you know, the republican party is taking these culture wars and inserting them into the military. and it hurts. who has that conversation? well, i think democrats have to stand up in the house and the senate and have the backs of women in the military right now. it is a military readiness thing. and look, if you don't believe me, what senator tuberville is doing in particular, multiple secretaries of defense, past secretaries of defense on both sides of the aisle have come out and said this is actually hurting our national security,

holding up these positions in order to push through your agenda. you can debate that pentagon policy all you want. but you don't hold up 300, 200, 300, 400 positions and hurt our national security in the process. i happen to believe that if you're a woman in the military that you don't get a choice of where you get stationed and you deserve, you earn, you deserve that health care. you would give it to any man if he needed a procedure that could only be available three states over. you would allow him to go there. the military is simply doing the same thing here. >> and as women deserve for us to keep it front and center and to keep talking about it. amy mcgrath and donna edwards, thank you forring doing just that. i appreciate both of you. when we come back, another big drop from propublica. this one on the potential illegality of billionaire donor harlan crow taking supreme court justice clarence thomas on luxury vacations aboard his

super yacht. the reporter who broke that story joins us after a quick break. don't go anywhere. don't go anywhere. tourists that turn into scientists. tourists taking photos that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. 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. every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food.

supreme court justice clarence thomas once again encircled by scandal. the embattled justice has been criticized for accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and travel from right-wing activist donor harlan crow, the billionaire who has repeatedly pushed back on efforts by the senate to get him to provide information about his

financial relationship with justice thomas. now new reporting by propublica's paul keel uncovers crow used trips like thomas's to dodge his own tax burden. "tax data obtained by propublica provides a glimpse of what congressional investigators will find if crow were to open his books to them. crow's voyages with thomas, the data shows, contributed to a nice side benefit. they helped reduce crow's tax bill." senate finance committee chair ron wyden telling propublica this, quote, these new details only raise more questions about mr. crow's tax practices, which could begin to explain why he's been stonewalling the finance committee's investigation for months. now, it customs as the senate judiciary committee which has also sought to compelling information from harlan crow plans to consider legislation this week to establish a new code of ethics for supreme court justices. let's bring in the aforementioned propublica reporter paul kiehl.

he broke this new story, this you new reporting about harlan crow and his tax practices. joyce vance is back with us. you have to take us through more of this reporting because it's just fascinating, paul. and behind every sort of tantrum, whether it's alito or crow or refusal to cooperate appears to be a new scoop by propublica. so take me through what you've uncovered. >> right. so what we were able to show with the tax data that we have in addition to other records is that going back to when the crows bought their mega yacht, the michaela rose, it's 162 feet, it's a number of bedrooms, massive dining room. it's a luxury yacht. they had bought it in 1984 and they formed a company at the same time that they bought the yacht. what they say in the documents is that was for the purpose of leasing out the yacht. but we were looking at this tax data we have for the years 2003 to 2015. we have the tax data not only for harlan crow but his father,

trammell crow, who's the one who sort of sfounded the family fortune and kind of co-owned this company with crow. and they were taking tax deductions over this time period, a total of $8 million between the two of them. and to do that you have to be operating like a for-profit business. you don't get to deduct like your hobbies or any sort of personal expenses. so there's a standard for that, and that is that you're actually trying to make a profit with your business. but when my colleague spoke to staff who'd been on this yacht, sometimes for decades, they were not aware they were on a vessel that was being leased. they couldn't recall that ever happening. and we had other information, other documents that showed them really struggling to show that they were in fact leasing the yacht. and after we started this reporting crow's lawyer in a letter to the senate finance committee said, well, what happened with the yacht is crow

would essentially lease from himself. so one of his -- here one of his companies would pay this company that owned the yacht for when he would use it himself including trips involving justice thomas. and that's what the business was. and when we went to tax experts with that they were like, yeah, that doesn't sound -- that sounds like something that should be aggressively audited is what they said. >> and what it seems to annihilate is any pretense that he was on a friend's yad for a family friend cruise. these were business trips from crow's perspective and from crow's tax records' perspective more importantly, right? >> right. the business was leasing his yacht and he was using his own yacht at the same time. the thing about yachts under irs rules is they're treated as entertainment vehicles. you can't take a yacht to a business meeting and say i was just -- i was just taking my yacht, it was the best way to get to my business meeting. the same way you can't do with, say, a personal jet. he was saying when he was taking

justice thomas on these trips he was leasing from himself and that was the business that was going on. >> what would the remedy be for keeping -- for not allowing this to be hidden? i mean, it seems that what you have unearthed is under every rock that propublica aggressively and successfully turns over you find information that seems to violate the spirit of transparency, of ethics, of separation of the supreme court from people with interests before it. what is that is being talked about would be a remedy for this? would it be in the transparency piece of it? would it be in the ethics piece of it? would it be in the disclosure piece? what solves for this? >> right. well, i think, yeah, the big thing is the supreme court essentially polices itself. they do have laws that were passed after watergate that, you know, do lay out some rules, but

obviously the justices have interpreted them rather expansively. so there is the bill that has come out of the senate that would require more spes fisty, would set up a code of conduct which they don't have currently. so that is something with respect to the supreme court that would create some more, you know, clarity. and more broadly the senate finance investigation is -- was seeking a lot of information from harlan crow like, you know, propublica's been able to report a lot of details about these trips but we're not saying we found every little thing. and so but crow has been fighting that request quite hard and making rather broad claims about separation of powers and that sort of thing, essentially senate doesn't have the authority to investigate him because it's attached to the supreme court. it's not only the senate finance

committee but also senate judiciary committee which is developing legislation around this. this story today is sort of a taste of the sort of details that might come out if crow were to, you know, be responsive to those inquiries. >> joyce, we owe propublica a debt of gratitude for all they have uncovered because we haven't had any government organization investigate the supreme court. this is all from sort of traditional investigative journalism. it is all rooted in some documentary evidence. i want to read a critique of what all this has left the court smelling like from michael posner, senior judge posner on the u.s. district court for the district of massachusetts. the recent descriptions of the behavior by some of our justices and particularly their attempts to defend their conduct have not just raised my eyebrows. they've raised the whole top of my head. lavish no-cost vacations?

hypertechnical arguments about how a free private airplane flight is a kind of facility? a justice's spouse prominently involved in advocating on issues before the court without the justice's recusal? wow. the core of our federal judiciary comprises roughly fewer than 1500 men and women. much depends on this small cohort's acute sense of smell. its instinctive, uncompromising integrity and its appearance of integrity. if reports are true, some of our justices are sadly letting us down. for the country it feels ominous. what in the world has happened to the supreme court's nose?" i would say this is generous that they just smell bad. but this is the most generous read of the current standing in terms of the american public's view of the u.s. supreme court. >> it is a generous read but it's coming from a sitting federal judge. even though he's a senior judge, it is tough to underline how

much that says about the mood even inside of the judiciary about the supreme court's failure to police itself. >> paul kiel, it's a really important contribution to our understanding of these entanglements. and that we went all this time without talking about this, talking about what one does when they have a superyacht is remarkable too. so for that education we thank you. paul and joyce, thank you so much for being part of our coverage. when we come back, a long-time highly regarded war correspondent with a front row seat to russia's invasion and war in ukraine will be our next guest after a very short break. don't go anywhere. t after a verk don't go anywhere.

as the war in ukraine continues to rage on, we are constantly reminded of the toll the war is taking on the ukrainian people, the civilians. perhaps no one knows the ukrainian people better than "financial times" ukraine reporter christopher miller. he's out with a tremendous new book called "the war came to us: life and death in ukraine." miller, who has covered ukraine for more than a decade, takes us into ukraine's past to tell us how we arrived at where we are today. miller describes in the opening pages the horror of what happened on february 24th, 2022. that was when russia's invasion began. from his new book, "the blasts illuminated the sky with such an intense glow that it penetrated the curtains on my windows and

shot out the cracks at their sides like lasers. each shock wave from the blast hit the hotel with a massive thud and shook it violently. the shape and scale of putin's invasion was becoming terrifyingly clear. this was not a special operation focused on the donbas. this was an all out assault meant to destroy ukraine. a second world war-style blitzkrieg was unfolding before our eyes. the world had been turned upside down overnight." joining us right now from kyiv is "financial times" ukraine correspondent christopher miller. his fantastic new book "the war came to us: life and death in ukraine" comes out tomorrow. we get a sneak peek of it. it's amazing. i'm going to read some more from it. but it reminds me that it is impossible to tell our viewers or anybody here what's happening there without you seeing and telling us that story from right there. and it reminded us of the role that war correspondents play. the book is amazing. i got it and tore right through it. but take me through what it's like to write this right now at

this -- the war is far from over. so much suffering has happened. so much is still happening before you every day. tell us about writing this book. >> yeah. i mean, just the -- i mean, sitting down and trying to write when so much of this is happening in real time around me was a challenge. the invasion of crimea and its first annexation and the war in the donbas. eastern ukraine in 2014. looking back, you know, i saw clues about what could happen in the future and these things i thinkhe even myself that certaiy our policymakers in the west may have overlooked. that for example, this was just a w precursor in 2014 to the fu scale invasion that launched in

february of 2022. and that's the time in between was really this period of time when russia was rebuilding its military, planning for i this operation before launching this invasion that l it did. just, i mean, on a day-to-day basis, trying to write while missiles are crashing down over kyiv. running in the east or the south to report posed its own logisticals challenges but als thege loss of sleep and certain trying to filep stories for th financial times while doing this was difficult, but certainly i felt it was necessary to write and provide the ground level view of events. >> it is certainly i think gripped the american people at a time when people are so divided. support for ukraine among the

public reallyr isn't that divisive. but i think there's a tendency to not really go face-to-face with the horrors of war. o you're right about bakhmut. i'll sneak in a short break but if you could stickor with us, il read that? we'll be right back. read that? we'll be right back. ght off pols so they can get away with ripping us off. that's changing now. joe biden passed a plan to jumpstart clean energy production in america. it's creating good jobs that can't be outsourced and will lower energy costs. $1800. that's how much a new report says the inflation reduction act could save just the average american family on energy costs. [narrator] learn how the inflation reduction act will save you money.

only at vanguard, you're more than just an investor, inf you're an owner.act our financial planning tools and advice can help you prepare for today's longer retirement. hi mom. that's the value of ownership. ♪ ♪ ♪ cargurus. shop.buy.sell.online.

i'll always take care of you. ♪ i'm gonna hold you forever... ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ be by your side... ♪ ♪ i'll be there... ♪ 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. ♪ we're back. it's about ukraine, feels like it's also about what you do.

quote, the air raids filled with the metallic smell of blood and stench of rotting flesh. a young soldier was splashing soapy water on to a dozen bloody stretchers. a group of soldiers nearby smoking and talking. the commander tapped my shoulder and told me to follow him inside. the hallway was filled with soldiers and civilians on the floor. inside the trauma ward, two soldiers were lying on operating tables. doctors and nurses surrounded each. one was naked and unconscious. blood was dripping from the table to the floor beneath him. the second man was awake and half dressed and screaming this pain. there were injuries to his back and right thigh which had been torn apart. two nurses wrapped him, quote, make a picture, the commander said. show the world what is happening here.

this passage was about returning to bakhmut in august of 2022 and it was a harrowing and important tale but also feels like it's what the ukrainian people need from us to see what's happening there. >> yes, that's absolutely right. the ukrainians are desperate for the world to know about russia's war. what is happening here. this is a brutal, horrific war. people are dying by the dozens if not hundreds on a daily basis. soldiers and civilians, as we speak right now, are dying on the front lines in southern and eastern ukraine and you know, at any moment, there could be an air raid siren and russian suicide missiles could come crashing down. the thing with bakhmut, it's a place that's special to me because it was the first place that i live for two years when i first arrived in ukraine. so returning to it in a time of war, destroying, seeing these

young men lying on stretchers was terrible and it gave me a real sense of what ukrainians are going through on a daily basis here. >> the book is harrowing and heartbreaking and beautiful and really important. the war came to us, life and death in ukraine, is out tomorrow. christopher miller, thank you so much. i hope our conversations are to be continued. thank you for spending some time with us today and congratulations on the book. >> thank you. it was a pleasure. a quick break for us. we'll be right right back. k bres we'll be right right back.

thank you so much for letting us into your home. the beat with melissa murray starts right now. >> thank you. welcome to the beat. i'm in for ari. we're tracking several developing stories including a big legal setback for donald trump. late today, the supreme court rejected his efforts to