their job and their team and the fbi is supposed to gather all evidence and sift through it on a factual basis. we did learn a lot from that committee. its referral is definitely echoing differently tonight. that does it for me. "the reidout" with joy reid is up next. good evening, everyone. welcome to "the reidout." we have a lot of breaking news tonight. and none of it sounds very good for the twice impeached, twice thedited or should i say soon to be thrice indicted former president. that is because nbc news has confirmed special counsel jack smith has informed trump he is a target of the special counsel's investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election. trump decided to break the news himself, via social media post just as he has done with most of his other recent legal woes. and being named a target almost certainly means he will face

arrest and his third indictment this year. this indictment would be far different. never in the 247-year history of this country have we faced what trump attempted to orchestrate. a former president doing everything possible to overturn a free and fair election to try to stay in power. including unleashing a violent mob of his supporters on the u.s. capitol. supporters who were even calling for the hanging of his own vice president. meanwhile, just today in michigan, the 16 fake electors trump tried to use to claim he had actually won that state were all indicted for their participation. this comes as lawyers for the former president and the special counsel were battling it out today in a florida courtroom in front of trump appointed judg aileen cannon over whether trump could postpone the trial in the classified documents case until after the 2024 election.

unlike that case, a potential jury trial in this january 6th investigation would take place here in washington, d.c. and would probably not be argued in front of a judge who has shown more favor to the man who appointed her than to the law she swore to uphold. joining me now is former senator doug jones, distinguished senior fellow at the center for american progress, barbara mcquade, professor at the university of michigan law school and msnbc legal analyst, and attorney kendall coffey, all three of my guests are former u.s. attorneys. thank you all for being here. and barbara, i'm going to go to you first because you have the great distinction of inspiring a very fascinating memo that was sort of a model prosecution memo that security put together. it was inspired in part by your work. i want to ask you to sort of talk us through some of the potential charges this could be. we don't know what they are. there will theoretically be a

speaking indictment. just to go through what the memo said. there could be conspiracy to defraud the united states, obstruction of an official proceeding, inciting an insurrection, and giving aid or comfort to insurrectionists. if you had to guess today what would you speculate these charges could be? >> well, joy, i would say the first two that you mentioned seem to me almost a certainty. conspiracy to defraud the united states, that is a charge that prosecutors use in all sorts of contexts when someone uses lies to try to interfere with a government process. it's done in tax cases, it's done in other cases. here, the theory would be that donald trump lied about a stolen election in order to obstruct or impede the lawful transfer of presidential power. the second charge that you mentioned about obstruction of an official proceeding also seems like a likely charge. it's one that has been filed against some of the other people who were at the capitol on january 6th. and it means to corruptly

interfere with an official proceeding, the joint session of congress, when the certification of the election was going to occur. those strike me as the two easy ones based on all that we know. a harder one and the one i will be really fascinated to see whether jack smith charges is inciting insurrection. this is one that is rarely charged. it's because we have such a high barrier under the first amendment as to what counts as protected speech and what crosses that line. i think some would argue the speech at the ellipse may cross that line. i'm not so sure because of the insertion of the word peaceful here and there. an interesting theory might be 2:24 p.m. tweet that donald trump sends after the capitol is under attack about mike pence not having the courage to do his duty, and sitting for 187 minutes watching the violence unfold and taking no action. so that could be that aid and comfort to insurrectionists. that's the third charge there, the insurrection piece that i'll be looking for, and that one is the only charge that could

potentially bring with it disqualification from serving as president in the future. >> and i notice that one thing that was not in the memo, barb, and that is not in your list is seditious conspiracy, which we know the doj, they're pretty much batting 1,000 on seditious conspiracy convictions of insurrectionists. oath keepers and proud boys. is there a reason that that does not seem to be anyone's take on what donald trump could theoretically face? >> so all that i am able to speak about or that these prosecutors who wrote this model memo are able to speak about is everyday in the public domain. what you would need to see is some public evidence that trump and others were conspiring with the proud boys or the oath keepers, planning that violent attack. we see some urging. we see perhaps some coincidence. we see some overlap and some connections. but unless you have evidence that they actively participated and entered the agreement to engage in violence to stop the transfer of presidential power

with those militia groups, then i don't think the case is there yet. now, it may very well be that jack smith does have evident he's obtained through the grand jury process thought is not yet in the public domain. if so, it could be on the table as well. >> let me play something liz cheney said in the january 6th hearings. at the time, it was kind of a bombshell. i was sitting there next to rachel maddow and nicolle wallace and we all went, huh. it sounded like she was presaging something that also could land at the doj, let me play what she said. it was warning at the end where she did those teases at the end of each hearing, and this was one of them. >> after our last hearing, president trump tried to call a witness in our investigation. a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings. that person declined to answer or respond to president trump's call and instead alerted their lawyer to the call.

their lawyer alerted us. and this committee has supplied that information to the department of justice. let me say one more time, we will take any effort to influence witness testimony very seriously. >> and doug jones, the presumption at the time that was cassidy hutchinson they were talking about who used to be represented by lawyers donald trump was paying for, but then got her own attorneys and decided to testify truthfully before the committee. do you see potential charges regarding that, intimidation of a witness? >> yeah, well, like barb said, we don't really know what's -- what jack smith has. we do know as former prosecutors, he's got a hell of a lot more than what january 6th made public. the committee made public. there's no doubt in my mind about that. we don't know who has since cooperated, who has been offered any kind of deals. that may or may not have

happened, but i think that the congressman cheney's comments clearly presage something that has been going on, and that was no surprise to people. that the former president may be contacting people on his own, calling people, doing whatever. that just seemed kind of obvious. now, that doesn't necessarily mean that it would rise to the level of obstruction or tampering with a wince. those are pretty serious charges too that they need to look very seriously at. but clearly, it is something that i think has been on the radar of the special counsel throughout this investigation. >> yeah, and kendall coffey, good to see you. it's been too long. i can remember consulting with you back in the day when i used to reach out to you to get advice when legal stuff would come along. great to talk with you. i remember you saying that the way that prosecutors look, particularly at public corruption cases is they don't go big. they go with what they can win on. they would rather win than have a dramatic charge. would you speculate that looking at the range of what you just

heard, it would be the occam's razor case, the simpler case, the obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud, the stuff that is obvious more than something more dramatic like a seditious conspiracy charge? >> that's how i would go about it. potentially there's a huge sea of potential cooperators. so many people charged, so many people involved. this could be something that sprawls and goes on for months if not years. but there seems to be a pretty narrow and effective path for prosecutors to follow, the things we have been talking about. obstruction of an official proceeding, various falsifications, false slates, false electors. i think a prosecutor wants to get a conviction and get this thing moved to a trial within a reasonable amount of time would head in that direction. >> let's just play some of the people who also seem to know what was going on, who we don't know if anyone else got a target letter because the rest of them probably wouldn't go on truth

social, nobody else goes on truth social except for donald trump, or go on social media and say they had a target letter, but here are people who participated in a certain way, people who spoke on january 5th about what was happening then and what would happen the next day. >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. it's all converging, and now we're on, as i say, the point of attack. the point of attack tomorrow. it's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen. it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. and all i i say is strap in. >> all we are demanding of vice president pence is this afternoon at 1:00 he let the legislatures of the state look into this so we get to the bottom of it. so let's have trial by combat. >> okay, and keeping in mind that, you know, we don't know whether any of those folks are a target, but former senator

jones, is there somebody there who ought to be a bit worried knowing that donald trump has received a target letter in your mind? any of those three, rudy giuliani, steve bannon, john eastman? >> joy, they all ought to be worried. i mean, and there's probably several more that need to be worried about this. this was not limited to those three. i mean, there were people in the meetings. there were people back and forth. we don't know what communications may have been occurring between any of those that have been convicted. that's the one thing that the january 6th committee never was able to get. that is those people that have either been found guilty, pled guilty, that are now maybe cooperating. as kendall just said, there is a sea of possibilities out there and just the conspiracy, the largest, largest investigation the department of justice has ever done. i think anybody who was near the proximity of the oval office and donald trump ought to have some

concerns about this going forward. i think they had them, by the way, not just with the target letter. i think they had those concerns. >> and i have a whole list. and i'm going to hold it. we're going to take a quick break. i'm going to put up my list of other people who maybe ought to be a bit concerned. my distinguished panel is staying right here with me because up next on "the reidout," judge aileen cannon presides over her first hearing in the trump classified documents case. so was this a reformed, chastened federal judge or something else entirely? "the reidout" continues after this. (ambience of room, crickets, scrolling content on phone) they're off from school, but not really home. images and videos. social media, fine-tuned to suck them in. and steal them away. alone you can't stop it. together we will. join us.

( ♪♪ ) my a1c was up here; now, it's down with rybelsus®. his a1c? join us. it's down with rybelsus®. my doctor told me rybelsus® lowered a1c better than a leading branded pill and that people taking rybelsus® lost more weight. i got to my a1c goal and lost some weight too. rybelsus® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. need to get your a1c down?

you may pay as little as $10 per prescription. detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b,

don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. serious or life-threatening lactic acid buildup and liver problems can occur. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. dovato may harm an unborn baby. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. so, you've got the power of xfinity at home. now take it outside with xfinity mobile. i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. like speed? it's the fastest mobile service around. with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only 30 bucks a line per month. that's hundreds in savings a year when you wave bye to the other guys. no wonder xfinity mobile is one of the fastest growing mobile services. you really shouldn't walk out the front door without it.

switch today at xfinitymobile.com. 3... 2... 1...

back with me are former senator doug jones, barbara mcquade, and kendall coffey. barbara, i'm going to put up this list for you. and it is interesting that the only target letter that we know of went to donald trump. but there are lots of potential witnesses, lots of people who testified in the january 6th probe, including obviously vice president pengs pence, mark short, you can go all the way through it to some of the people who seem a little bit more at risk. john eastman, yet people like pat cipollone who were white house counsel, trying to counsel him to stand down. justin clark, who was involved in trying to put a new attorney general in, or be the new attorney general, who would do the bidding of donald trump. so you can go all the way through it. people with small parts of involvement like newt gingroom, people like alley alexander who

were named like andy biggs was named as participants. do you see -- is there anyone who stands out to you as somebody who would be the waltine nauta in the case, meaning if donald trump committed a conspiracy to obstruct and defraud the united states, that implies he did it with someone. so is there somebody who seems obvious to play waltine nauta's role here? >> i don't know if it's anybody on the list you just showed of people who testified before the grand jury. when a client gets a subpoena to testify before the grand jury, a good lawyer will call the prosecutor and ask, is my client a target? and usually, if the answer is yes, they tend not to come testify. so the fact they testified before the grand jury raises at least some inference that they are not likely to be targets. now, it could be that they came in and testified and lied and they're being charged with a crime or that they have some sort of a deal where they're going to plead guilty to some crime and not others. but i would be more curious

about the people who are not on the list, the people whose names you did not show there, and some of the people in donald trump's inner circle. i don't want to speculate on who may or may not be charged with a crime and guilty of a crime, but i would think the people closest to donald trump who did not testify at the grand jury ought to be the ones shaking in their boots as to whether they are also targets. they have also probably received target letters. here's a bit of speculation i will engage in. there is reporting rudy giuliani went in and spoke with prosecutors in recent weeks. that might have been in response to a target letter. you know, we don't want to go to the grand jury, but if you give us some assurances you won't use his statements against him, he'll come in and talk with him. i would be very surprised if trump is the only person named in the indictment, but my guess is the people included are not testifying before the grand jury. >> i'm always fascinated by mark meadows because it seems like he's either prime witness for the proscaution or he's going

down. i don't see how it's one or the other. i want to for a moment talk about judge aileen cannon, kendall. so she has this hearing today. the way that it seemed to play out, and i'll just -- i'll pull what was reported in "the washington post." she appeared skeptical today about the former president's request that the trial be delayed until after the 2024 election. though she also appeared wary of prosecutors' request to begin the proceedings this year. there was an argument that was made by the defense that they should come back in november and then set a date. they obviously want to delay it as long as possible. can you talk a little bit about sequencing, you know, because jack smith's process, he's in both of these cases. does he want to see this january 6th trial, do you think, happen first or the other one first, or does it matter? >> i think he wants to get to trial as fast as possible. he's got two different judges right now, and he's going to see which one gives him the

opportunity. as we know, judge cannon's case is a sepa case, pretty hard to get those to trial in seven or eight months. but she's not going to want to be recorded in her legacy as a judicial shill for donald trump. she's going to want to get this right, if she can. and i think the fact she's saying kind of the soft no to the prosecution and i think a pretty definite no to the defense's wish that she basically give them a pass all the way until 2025 tells you that she is going to get this case to trial, and it could very well be somewhere toward the end of the first quarter of 2024. >> and doug jones, i want to talk about juries because obviously, a jury that you impanel here in d.c. is going to be more racially diverse. this is a largely african american city, and same with the case in new york. you're not going to get a full maga jury. does that weigh on jack smith's sort of calculations of which case is more winnable, because there is a likelihood that a jury in that part of florida

would be very maga friendly, the one in d.c. would likely be something else. >> you know, joy, if that was weighing that heavily, i think he would have waited on the cases. he went ahead and indicted a case. when a prosecutor gets to a point where they have an indictment, you can count on the fact they're pretty much ready for trial. it's just a question of getting the documents to the defense, making sure they have everything, that they have done their legal homework to know what is anticipated. so i think they made that calculation that they feel they're okay in that particular district. there will be a ton of jury work that goes on on this. this case will -- i guarantee you both sides are going to be looking at those jurors who get selected for this, and remember, there's going to be so many people who have heard about things, whatever, theyvoted for, they voted against, but the

issue is the judge is going to say can you be fair? can you put aside what you know, can you put aside prejudices for or against the defendant, for or against the government, and give both sides a fair trial and judge the evidence and the law. when people start shaking their head yes, it's really, you know, you have just got to hope that you have a fair jury at the end of the day, because when they sit down in the jury and take the oath, you never know until the jury verdict comes in. >> and real quick, kendall. right, it seems like jurors become very civic minded once they get that case. no matter even if they came in maga, we saw that in the case of the e. jean carroll case, a couple people who declared themselves very pro-trump, they still voted against him. >> yeah, and i think when they're inside the courtroom, they get very, very focused on what's going on in the courtroom. they're looking at the witnesses, they're studying everything. and ultimately, they want to get it right. they have to go home, they have to face their children, their family. they want to get it right.

>> last word to you on this, barb. there was the word superseding indictment was voiced by the defense in trying to push the trial back, really quickly, what is that, and could that change the way all of this looks right now? >> superseding indictment would be a second indictment that adds charges or defendants. we don't know whether that will happen. if it does happen, and it requires additional preparation, that could be a reason for additional delay. >> this is fascinating stuff. it's like taking like a mini law class talking to you guys because you're so smart. we really appreciate you being here. former senator doug jones, kendall coffey, and barb mcquaid, who is going to stick around a little longer. still ahead, the michigan attorney general announces new charges against the 16 fake electors from that state. as georgia's supreme court deals another blow to trump's attempts to duck, dip, and dodge his way out of that mess. back in a sec. ♪ the thought of getting screened ♪ ♪ for colon cancer made me queasy. ♪ ♪ but now i've found a way that's right for me. ♪

♪ feels more easy. ♪ ♪ my doc and i agreed. ♪ ♪ i pick the time. ♪ ♪ today's a good day. ♪ ♪ i screened with cologuard and did it my way! ♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪ i did it my way! ♪ we're in a race against the nazis. ask your provider for cologuard. they have a 12 month head start. 18. we've got one hope. our nations best scientists working together. here, secret laboratory. keep everyone there until it's done. you're the great improvisor. but this, you can't do in your head. this is the most important thing to ever happen in the history of the world. - 5. 4. they just fired a starting gun.

- 3. the president needs to know what's next. - 2. what's next? -1. 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. ♪ when i first learned about my dupuytren's contracture, my physician referred me to a hand specialist. and i'm glad he did, because when i took the tabletop test, i couldn't lay my hand flat anymore. the first hand specialist i saw only offered surgery. so, i went to a second hand specialist who also offered nonsurgical options - which felt more right for me. so, what i'd say to other people with dupuytren's contracture is this:

don't wait —find a hand specialist trained in nonsurgical options, today. i found mine at findahandspecialist.com. 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. [coughs] good to go. yeah, i think i'll get a second opinion. all these walls gotta go! ah ah ah! i'd love a second opinion. no. i'm going to get a second opinion. with innovation refunds, there's no upfront cost to find out. so why not check like i did for my small business? take the first step to see if your small business qualifies for the erc. (warehouse ambience) introducing togo's new french dip sandwiches featuring fresh artisan bread piled high with tender roast beef, smothered with melty provolone cheese and served with hot au jus for dipping. try the roast beef or pastrami french dips today only at togo's

another day, another looming indictment for donald j. trump, but he's not the only one facing legal trouble. late today, michigan attorney general dana nessel announced felony charges against 16 michigan republicans who signed paperwork falsely claiming that trump had won the 2020 election. the 16 people each face eight charges including conspiracy and election law forgery. here's video from december 2020 showing a crowd of fake electors trying to enter the state

capitol to cast their fabricated electoral votes for trump. they were denied entry because the actual legal electors who were there to cast their ballots for joe biden and kamala harris were already inside. per the michigan attorney general, the fake electors allegedly met in the basement of the state's republican party headquarters and signed multiple certificates claiming they were the duly-elected and qualified electors for president and vice president of the united states of america for the state of michigan. and that, the a.g. said, was a lie. >> the false electors' actions undermine the public's faith in the eintegrity of our elections and not only violated the spirit of the laws enshrining and defending our democracy, but we believe also plainly violated the laws by which we administer our elections in michigan, and peaceably transfer power in america. >> back with me is barbara mcquade, a former u.s. attorney in michigan, and barb, so we

know that in november of 2020, this is after the election was over, donald trump invited some michigan lawmakers to come to the white house. he called in a key county saying hey, i want you to come out there. the invitation came after he called republican members of the canversing board, including detroit, who later sought to rescind their vote certification. we know in november, he's trying to get michigan lawmakers to change the outcome of the election. but then in december, december 14th is the date when the electoral college formally meets and does what they do. now, you have these fake electors who are not these people. these are totally different people going in and signing these certifications. that's the crime they're being charged for. is that also a federal crime? because i am fascinated by the fact you have two states, georgia and michigan, where people are being either, you know, potentially indicted or indicted for this fake elector scheme, but is that also a federal crime, and could this bleed into all that's happening

in the january 6th cases? >> yes, in fact, i would be surprised if we did not see the inclusion of the fake elector scheme in a federal indictment. in fact, attorney general nessel when she first discovered the fake electors out of michigan, shared that information with the justice department and said you might want to look into this. this is probably part of the investigation you're looking into. she said she got frustrated waiting around for them to file an indictment and decided, well, they have also violated michigan law in her understanding. so because we live in a system of what is sometimes referred to as dual sovereignty, state laws and federal laws, there are a number of federal laws in addition to state laws that were violated. here, she charges things like forgery and conspiracy to commit forgery, election fraud. regardless of what other charges are filed against donald trump and these electors who are engaging in perhaps a nationwide conspiracy, right here in michigan, these 16, according to the charges filed today, engaged

in their own little conspiracy to say we're the duly-elected electors of michigan. that was a lie and that was submitted. so it's a crime under michigan law, it is a crime under federal law. and it could be that these 16 people find themselves charged in both places. or it may be that in the federal case, it's just the people who orchestrated it as opposed to those who also signed. >> some of these people should have known better. one is a grassroots vice chair of the republican party there. there's somebody who is a mayor of a small town in michigan. one of the co-chairs of the michigan republican party. now, here's the bigger question. you have now got the supreme court in georgia letting -- dismissing donald trump's claim that fani willis has to be booted off the case. that can't go through. let's say there is a, you know, state indictment of a bunch of fake electors in georgia. you now have this indictment in michigan of fake electors in michigan. if you're jack smith, do you want those cases to go before your case? or do you want to have your own

case? if you're in the justice department, do these state cases hurt your effort or enhance it? >> well, i think you always want to take the lead. you don't want to get behind anybody in line. i would think if fani willis beats jack smith to an indictment, you might have her say in terms of the timing. next year is going to be a busy year with the trial in manhattan plus the mar-a-lago, plus perhaps the georgia, and now maybe a january 6th case. so i think that jack smith probably wants to get ahead of them. they're probably communicating a little bit just for heads-up purposes so they don't step on each other. but each one is going to file their case when it's ready. i think every prosecutor wants to be as timely as possible with the passage of every day, witness memories fade and the ability to gather evidence diminishes. so you want to charge as quickly as you can. it just takes time to pull it all together. i would imagine that each of them will simply file their charges when they're ready. >> okay, i have so many more

questions. i'm going to have to have you come back. i have like another hour of questions. i'll have you come back. barbara mcquade, thank you. you're an mvp. we so appreciate you. coming up, what do you do when you're the so-called law and order party and it leader of your party, donald trump, finds himself in so much trouble with the law? that's easy, you just become the defund the doj and fbi party. simple. we'll be right back.

- "best thing i've ever done." that's what freddie told me. - it was the best thing i've ever done, and- - really? - yes, without a doubt! - i don't have any anxiety about money anymore. - great people. different people, that's for sure, and all of them had different reasons for getting a reverse mortgage, but you know what, they all felt the same about two things: they all loved their home, and they all wanted to stay in that home. - [announcer] if you're 62 or older and own your home, you could access your equity to improve your lifestyle.

a reverse mortgage loan eliminates your monthly mortgage payments and puts tax-free cash in your pocket. call the number on your screen. - why don't you call aag... and find out what a reverse mortgage can mean for you? - [announcer] call right now to receive your free no-obligation info kit. call the number on your screen.

reached out to me to ask if he could have a meeting with mr. meadows about receiving a presidential pardon. he talked about congressional pardons but he never asked me for one. it was more for an update on whether the white house was going to pardon members of congress. mr. gomer asked for one as well. mr. perry asked for a pardon too, i'm sorry. yes, he did. >> donald trump did not orchestrate the attempted overthrow of a democratic election by himself. he had a cabal of house republicans as his congressional henchmen and he rallied them at the white house a few weeks before certification just to make sure they were all on the same page. those 11 republicans and many more in the house were trump's happy little warriors until hundreds of deranged maga supporters stormed the capitol looking for blood, forcing them and their staffers to flee. today, these people who literally ran from trump

supporters are running towards trump and ditching the oath they took to uphold the constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic. foremost among them is house speaker kevin mccarthy who went from being tired of trump to just being tired of justice. >> i have had it with this guy. what he did is unacceptable. nobody can defend that and nobody should defend it. >> i think the american public is tired of this. they want to see equal justice and the idea that they utilize this to go after those who politically disagree with him is wrong. >> joining me now is congressman eric swalwell of california who is a house manager in trump's second impeachment. what does trump have on that guy? >> he made him speaker, right? you saw marjorie taylor greene waving her phone around after the 15th vote. she was passing the phone to all the holdouts. he's got the job title. marjorie taylor greene has the job, right?

let's be real. and i think he just wants to have that like placard hanging over his office. i don't think he really has any core set of principles. he's got the job. he runs the largest law firm in washington, d.c., insurrection llc, which has one client, donald trump. and they do his bidding every day. what is so disturbing about what he just said there is just because he is corrupt and his colleagues are corrupt, doesn't mean the prosecutors are corrupt. they project on to the prosecutors the way they would handle this, which is we would, of course, go after our political opponents if we were in power, so they think that's what the prosecutors are doing. >> ironically, donald trump is vowing to do that. if he becomes president, he's saying he's going to do what he's accusing this justice department of doing, which they're not. let's talk about some of your colleagues. we heard cassidy hutchinson naming several people who asked for pardons. as a former prosecutor yourself, can you think of a reason to ask for a pardon if you did nothing wrong and had nothing to do with

the insurrection? >> no. >> so are there any of them who you suspect might need a pardon still? >> well, look, these guys were accomplices in attempted overthrow of our government. by the way, i think this isn't talked about enough. this was a blow-out election. joe biden won by nearly 8 million popular votes and ran the table in many of these toss-up states. this wasn't florida 2000, to take us back there. this was a blow-out election by all proportions. and they still were not willing to give up power. yes, they became kind of like this pardon grab bag where they all in desperation because of their own culpability were desperately seeking to escape accountability. >> let's talk about barry ladder milk on the house financial services committee. his committee oversees capitol security. here he is giving a tour to some

folks who wound up being members of the crowd that stormed the capitol. i wonder how it feels for you to serve with people who may be aiding and abetting putting you and your staff, some of these are 20-something-year-old kids at risk and all those police officers who they then turned around and said we don't want to vote to give them medals for not letting people kill us. >> i'll say as the brother to two police officers, it's especially crushing because it was always hard for me to go home and defend democrats against my family who thought that democrats didn't back the police enough. and then to see these guys, the second that the police defended the capitol against donald trump's friends, they weren't backing the blue. they were backing the coup. that is personally crushing. but as far as a colleague doing this, tell me what's changed. what has speaker mccarthy done to make us safer or the circumstances less likely this would happen again?

if anything, he's put a bunch of green lights around the capitol that this is okay and there's not accountability. >> i want to put up the list of people who did vote against, because i think this was one of the most shameful days in republican party history. this was a congressional gold medal awarded to all the officers who responded on january 6th. some of whom are dead because they were brave and tried to do what police are supposed to do. andy biggs, loren boebert, michael cloud, andrew cloud who said it was a tourism event, but he was hiding behind a police officer on that day. matt gaetz, louie gohmert. bob goode, marjorie green, jody hice, thomas massie, barry moore. have any of them who are still serving expressed even in private second thoughts about backing the insurrection knowing they also ran? >> no, worse, they go to the d.c. jail to give comfort and aid to the insurrectionists who attacked the capitol, attacked

those police officers. and i'm telling you, joy, the only way, the only antidote to all of this is unity. where republicans and democrats are going to condemn political violence, where we're going to condemn the rhetoric and not going to politicize the good people in law enforcement who are just trying to apply the facts to the law. >> what do you make as a former prosecutor of the indictment? well, of the potential pending indictment, donald trump getting a target letter. is there anyone, if you were prosecuting this case, who else would you send a letter to? >> well, anyone who worked with donald trump, you know, to aim a mob at the capitol or to try and undermine the credibility of the election through fake electors. as a prosecutor, my closing argument would be quite simple. i would ask a jury, if you took donald trump out of the equation, if he had conceded when mitch mcconnell conceded after the electors in the states convened, if he conceded after the press had called the election, if he had conceded

after he had lost every lawsuit, if he had done that, would january 6th still have happened? i think the answer is it wouldn't. only he could have convened so many, such a violent way to attack the capitol. >> i would like ask this of this guy. here's mike pence. >> do you think that was an insurrection? >> it was a tragic day. i have never used the word insurrection, tucker. over the last two years. but it was a riot that took place at the capitol that day. >> i don't get it. i don't get it. they tried to kill him. they wanted to hang him. they brought a noose. >> a non-insurrection riot. right. >> do you understand -- can you explain this? >> no. it's the same reason that he accepted, i think, the vice presidential role, he wanted to be president, and is seeking any vehicle. i'm glad he did what he did that day, but had he done something like that much earlier, maybe

january 6th never would have happened. >> have you spoken with -- i did speak with one capitol police officer today who said, you know, rather than feeling like happy that this potential indictment is coming, it made him feel angrier. have you spoken with other officers and how are they feeling today? >> recently had a beer with mike fanone, who is still a subject of the attacks from the right. every day. and for them, it's just justice. i don't think they're rooting for donald trump to be in handcuffs. i think they just want to know he's going to be treated the same as everyone else and not treated better, and even worse because of who he is. >> congressman eric swalwell, thank you very much. always good to see you. >> still ahead, pbs amid increasing tensions inside and outside of his country. more next.

we're traveling all across america, talking to people about their hearts. how's the heart? - good. - you sure? - i think so. - how do you know?

let me show you something. put two fingers right on those pads. look at that! that's your heart! that is pretty awesome. with kardiamobile, you can take a medical-grade ekg in just 30 seconds, from anywhere. kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. kardiamobile is now available for just $79. order at kardia.com or amazon. detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults.

no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. serious or life-threatening lactic acid buildup and liver problems can occur. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. dovato may harm an unborn baby. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. is it possible to protect my business from cyber threats? i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. it is, with comcast business. helping every connected device stay protected.

yours. your employees'. even... susan? hers, too. safe. secure. and powered by the next generation 10g network. with comcast business, advanced security isn't just possible. it's happening. get started wih fast spees and advanced security for $49.99a month for 12 monts plus ask how to get up to a $750 >> today, israeli president i prepaid card with qualifying internet.

sock herzog met with president biden at the white house. herzog is set to address a joint meeting of congress tomorrow, which some progressive lawmakers are planning to boycott due to the country's treatment of the palestinian people. israel continues to encroach on the bus bank by a stab -- expanding settlements on palestinian. land earlier this, month the israeli army raided the west bank city of jenin and its biggest military action in years, claiming it was a counterterrorism effort.

the president of israel is not the head of government. that is prime minister benjamin netanyahu, who leads the most right-wing government in the country's history, which includes continuing to expand the settlements. he's also attempting to completely overhaul and take control of the country's judicial system, which israelis have been protesting for months. amid all, this president biden announced yesterday he has invited netanyahu to the white house. joining me now is the editor at large at jewish currents and msnbc political analyst. it is always great to talk to you, peter. let's talk about this. this is a far-right wing government. it includes a gentleman who called it mueller ben-gvir who is the minister of securities into charge of the police. this is what i will read about him from the new yorker. his role model and well spring has been -- argued that the idea of a jewish democratic state, nonsense, arabs were dogs who sit quietly or get the hell out.

for those from new york who -- most people don't, what does it mean to you haven't acolyte of the late mallorca hana in the government and netanyahu's current stance? >> the fundamental reality is that in the west bank you have jews and palestinians live leaving side by side but until -- the jews are citizens of the state around, they can vote for its government, they have free movement, due process, the palestinians have none of those rights. they live under military law. they need military permission to travel, for instance, from the west bank into jerusalem. what itamar ben-gvir believes is that that is not harsh enough. this is already what has been characterized by israel's own human rights organization as a part. but itamar ben-gvir wants to go further. if you look carefully at what he has written and what other far-right leaders in this israeli government have written, and their long term goal is the expulsion of palestinians from

the west bank. >> i want to put up a couple of maps. the occupation is in and of itself illegal. the u.n. has been very clear there is supposed to be an israel and a palestine. but let me just show you the west bank. the west bank is supposed to be this little, this whole strip that you see here. all those red dots and parts of it are these settlements. you could actually make that bigger because there's also a whole line, a big area that comprises about 60% of the west bank also used for security zones and nature preserve tours and all ways of saying palestinians have almost nothing left. if you look at the map of gaza, it is basically an open air prison. palestinians who typically would be fishermen, would fish in the water that you see there, they can't because if they go a certain amount they would get shot. it's impossible for people to survive this way. how has the international

community and done nothing about this? it's been decades and decades of this. >> it's worse than the. the united states funds this. the united states gives israel 3.8 billion dollars of essentially unconditional military aid a year. the united states ensures that the u.n. and the international criminal court that there is total impunity. there can never be investigations by the international bodies of what israel is doing. look, there are a lot of americans who have a very, very deep connection to israel and see, because of the suffering of jews throughout history, a sense of solidarity and concern for those people. you don't need to tell me. i was raised my entire life with those feelings. i cared desperately about the welfare of my own people. but it is not in the long term interest. it will not keep jews safe in the long term to brutalize and subjugate palestinians. just like it didn't in the long

term safety and self interest of white people to brutalized black people in the united states, ultimately, when you oppress people and inflict terrible violence on them, it comes back to you. the answer, i think democrats are rapidly realizing that partition is no longer possible. the core principle in israel palestine has to be the same one we are fighting for here, which is that people deserve equality under the law, the respect of whatever religion or ethnicity they are. >> it also didn't work in south africa, you said apartheid. this is what the far-right in israel, this conestee movement really wants. a foundational desire to have as few non jews in the country as possible, greater powers to crack down on the judiciary, greater segregation between jewish and non jewish populations, greater crackdowns on freedom freedom of the press, freedom assembly, freedom of the press. also religious rule, which sounds like what we are dealing with in this country as well. you also mentioned jim crow.

it sounds like it has shades of that. i wonder, people got very upset with congresswoman camilla jayapal when she called israeli racist state, she did take it back. but is apartheid -- it doesn't feel defensible. i wonder if you are starting to see a change in the way that americans think about if this is, as you call, it apartheid, what we think about it and what the media is trying to speak about in a different way. >> yes. and there is a shift going on. part of it is palestinians, who were long absent from this conversation, are now having the ability to speak their own truth and people are hearing them talk. more people are going. i can tell you from personal experience, almost anybody who goes and sees what life is like for palestinians without basic rights, no matter how much they sympathize with israel, they are horrified by that. people in america are realizing the struggle we are fighting here for equality and against

ethnonationalism is the same struggle we need to support in israel palestine. >> absolutely. people are throwing rocks and fighting back because they don't know what else to do. i don't know how you can't empathize with people who have no rights and no freedom and are quickly losing their homes and their land. it is so tragic. peter beinart, thank you. i really appreciate. always good to talk with you. that is tonight's reidout. all in with chris hayes starts right now. >> good evening from new york. -- in for chris hayes. the greatest crime donald trump ever committed was to undermine democracy. the will of the people by trying to overthrow a free and fair election. today, we saw the first signs that justice may be coming for him. today, we learned that the ex president received a letter from the special counsel jack smith, indicating that he is the target of a criminal investigation into efforts to interfere with the presidential election of 2020 leading to the insurrection on january 6th 2021.