we always appreciate your time. david miller and -- that's it for all in on this wednesday night. you can watch until 10 am eastern right here on msnbc. alex wagner tonight stretch right now. good evening, my friend. right >> i, ali. i'm down in washington, d.c., the scene of the action as it were. we have a lot to report on tonight. >> i'll be following you there. we'll see you tomorrow. >> thank you to you at home for joining us this hour. do you remember jacob chansley? you probably remember him better is the qanon shaman. he was the gentleman that ran around the capitol on january 6th with the third in the hornets in the face paint. when he eventually struck a deal with the government, he pleaded guilty to just one count. it's account from a statute that's titled tampering with the witness, victim, or informant. then there's this guy, remember him? he's stewart rhodes. the founder of the far-right group the oath keepers.

the government tried nine oath keepers with seditious conspiracies. six of them were found guilty of it. all nine of them were found guilty of at least one other charge. the same charge brought against the qanon shaman. and by the, way hundreds of other jerry sixth defendants. it's actually one of the most common charges that the department of justice brought against january 6th insurrectionists overall. again, statute is technically titled tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant. the qanon shaman, and all of those hundreds of other january 6th defendants, they weren't actually being accused of witness tampering. we're charged with a particular section of the statute, corruptly obstructing an official proceeding. basically getting into the way of congress as it set out the 24 -- by staging an insurrection. okay. all of this is relevant because

today, the three federal statutes listed in the target letter that special counsel jack smith sent to former president trump, those statutes were described to nbc news by two attorneys with direct knowledge of the document. the wall street journal, rolling stone, bunch of places essentially had the same reporting. that is, one of the statutes he's informed donald trump that he might be indicted on has to do with tampering with a witness. just like the qanon shaman, just like stewart rhodes of the oath keepers. we have all of the descriptions -- we all have descriptions of the federal statutes in play, but we don't know with particular sections of each statute the doj is looking at. it means that this tampering with a witness charge, this could be exactly what it sounds like, witness tampering, it could be a charge would have trump's legal team allegedly tried to influence the testimony of witnesses like former white house aide cassidy

hutchinson. it could also be the same obstruction of an official proceeding section that the doj has used over and over again to prosecute january 6th defendants, the qanon guy and stewart rhodes the head of the oath keepers. it could also be both, we don't know. we don't know a lot, but what we do know is this. the other two statutes in projects mid target letter were described to nbc news as conspiracy to defraud the united states and the deprivation of rights. the conspiracy to defraud -- could seriously referred to trump's fake elector plot, but again, we are a little bit short on specifics here. for the deprivation of rights charge, whose rights would apply and how serious is a charge like that? for both of our six, we're about to get some expert legal help unpacking all of this in just a second. unlike the general public,

president trump's legal team knows the specifics here as far as the exact statues that jack smith might charge mr. trump with. that has reportedly led to him believing that the special counsel will prosecute a bigger case against trump than they were previously expecting. again, all eyes on special counsel jack smith today his motorcade was spotted leaving the office at 11:35 a.m.. it is then spotted again leaving the federal courthouse where smith d.c. grand juries meet at 1:10 pm. and between that coming and going, a grand jury was meeting. terry broke for the day at half past noon. here's the thing. we have no idea what that grand jury is working on. the grand jury for special counsel smith's 2020 investigation has a meeting on tuesdays and thursdays. it's the kind of stuff you know when you watch this so carefully. what was special counsel doing at the courthouse on wednesday?

it could be a different grandeur. it could be a different case. if the past is prologue here, jack smith enjoys multitasking. more than one month after he indicted trump and the cost of the documents case, we learned the grand jury in florida is still working. it is still investigating. it is still potentially mulling over whatever indictments in that mar-a-lago documents case. we know the trump codefendant in that case is walt nauta. we know that he did not get a target letter until five days after trump got his. nbc news has reached out to a number of trump allies that were involved in the attempt to overthrow the 2020 election. so far, we have confirmation that rudy giuliani and lin wood, bernie kerik, scott perry, kenneth chesbrough and john eastman, so far we have confirmation that all of those people have not received target letters. again, so far. other individuals like jeffrey

clark, who trump tried to appoint as the acting attorney general and the january of 2021, helping trump to overturn the results of the election. mr. clark's spokesman declined to comment. tonight, there's a particular focus on people like jeffrey clark and john eastman, and rudy giuliani. the lawyers in the trump bunch. part of a rant on his social media platform, truth social, he claimed tonight that lawyers and the legal system itself are under siege. he called that siege a gift from crooked joe biden, merrick garland, and deranged prosecutor jack smith. who knows what trump meant by that. if i were a lawyer, if i were a lawyer that would help trump to try and overturn the 2020 election, i might be keeping an eye on my mailbox. joining us now is barbara mcquade, the former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. barb, we are waiting for your shot also with us is the great

lisa rubin. hi, lisa for -- thanks for saving my height. lisa, let me start with the notion that jack smith, his very busy and can apparently juggle a lot, was at the courthouse today on a wednesday, which is not traditionally when his grand jury's, meet. what's the signal to you? are you making a mole -- do you think there's something significant be inferred here? >> alex, it's hard to say, and i know that's an answer is deeply unsatisfying, both to you and our viewers. . it's one of two things. number one, jack smith went to hear from a witness in a grand jury that we did not understand to be meeting today it's unclear whether that ranged jury would have been for the election interference side of the investigation or the records investigation. the other possibility is the jack smith could've attended a sealed hearing having to do with some issues in one of those two investigations. he felt it was important to be

there in person. obviously, time will tell why check smith is there, i think it is significant that he was at the courthouse. he can obviously do the bulk of his work from the special counsel's office where he can interface with various lawyers on his team. no need for him to come to the courthouse unless there is a particular proceeding for him to observe. >> we now have barr mcquade, the former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. and of course. our hometown hero, let me just ask in terms of the jacks mitt, ongoing work of the special counsel. just talking to them about how he's back in the courthouse doing what exactly, we're not sure. doing something else. the work continues. the witnesses continue to get to testify before these grand juries. there is some suggestion that there might be superseding indictments. my question to you is, is there any risk of prolonging the timeline here if these investigations continue and in

presidential election is very much on the horizon, -- >> one of the things that prosecutors have to be mindful of it is not to boil the ocean. even in a case without an election at stake, there's a risk as prosecutors supersede the indictment. they push off, they're moving the goalposts and are pushing off the inevitable date for the trial. there's also the concern that if the case is too complicated, it becomes too massive for a jury to understand or to try and a reason period of time. sometimes prosecutors will forgo certain charges that focus on the ones that really matter. i've experienced that in public corruption cases where you could've charged dozens of teams. at some point, you have to say what the best and strongest evidence is, and go with that to make this case simple unfocused, something a jury can grasp. and that we can resolve in a reasonable period of time. there are three charges that

have been floated in a broad sense in this target letter from jack smith to donald trump. i'd love to get your thoughts on the one it seems the most mysterious to me, that's desperation of rights charge. what do you think that could be, barr, and what does that signal in terms of trump's potential wrongdoing and liability? >> that's the one surprising all of us. the other two have been kicking around for a long time. this is a charge that he's used historically when people have been deprived of the right to vote. statute was one post civil war, and targeted ku klux klan members who are depriving people have the right to vote. it could be a theory that by trying to subvert the election, donald trump and others were severed-ing the rights of voters to have their votes counted. there are some other theories that it might be like pence is the victim, or members of congress as the victim. by sinking the crowd on, it was an effort to work their rights

to exercise the thing that they have. a better thing is that it's bringing the voters as the victims, lisa that seems old-timey and novel at the same time. the deprivation of the rights not just being a specific person, but the american public at large. is that risky territory for the special counsel in terms of the novelty? >> alex, it might be somewhere in between. earlier tonight, we took a look at whether others that like barbed and may have been focused on this investigation for sometime, we have looked into the deprivation of rights as a theory that could be advanced in the january 6th investigation. and indeed, a number of folks including danya perry who's been on this show and others. reporting for the brookings institution, where they said that section 18 usc to 41, which is the conspiracy to deprive people of the rights could be used where the theory is not -- every american voter was the --

but that voters in battleground states, where the fake electors were advanced, their rights would've been interfered with by convincing mike pence to disregard the legitimate votes of folks in those 5 to 7 states. maybe somewhere in between, every voter in the country, and something much more microscopic. >> interesting. the conspiracy to defraud the u.s. seems fairly straightforward in terms of what that portends and actually means, barb, but what about tampering with the witness? we spend some time talking at the top of the show about how tampering with the witness might not actually mean tampering with a witness, similar, but that it could actually be that umbrella for a potential obstruction of an official proceeding charge. what do you think this might mean, barb? >> my guess is that the target letter identifies the statutes of investigation without describing a lot of detail. the statute is the united states code section 15 12. as you mentioned, there's an awful lot of stuff packed into

that statute. it could be that, maybe donald trump or others suggesting to a witness that they not tell the truth or something like that. it strikes me as far more likely that it's 16 12 see. the construction of an official proceeding. it could be a conspiracy to obstruct official proceeding. an agreement to something to disrupt that joint session of congress on january 6th, which has been used again and again against or any of the jarry six defendants. it seems to me that that's a much more likely strategy here. of course, we'll have to see the indictment. i guess is that there will be things in that indictment that are not yet public now, which makes you very eager to read it. >> and every house in the america. and incited in the january six final report, talking about that in the model prosecution memo, where we talked a lot about that on the show, and earlier this week. or last, week who can nowadays. that's not in there. i think a lot of americas

incensed about what they saw unfold on january 6th, they are hoping to see a strong charge like that. like the word insurrection in this charging document. what's your assessment of the fact that that is not apparently in the target letter that jack smith sent to donald trump. >> earlier, you are talking about novel charges. insurrection would probably qualify as a novel charge, not one that's used all that often. to bob's point earlier about not boiling the ocean, i'm sorry, the special counsel's office, aided by the department of justice, is really trying here to come up with a streamlined theory of the case based on statutes that they have used again and again, where there is a history, not some novelty, so they can say with a straight face that this isn't that complicated of a case. we have a small group of defendants, i would guess, and a fairly small number of charges ones that they've used before again and again with success, it can eliminate as

many unknowns as possible as they're going forward with this case. knowing that this defendant is going to be hell-bent on delaying and obfuscating as much as you can for as long as he can until the november 2024 election, and perhaps beyond. >> to talk about this sort of judiciousness with which the special counsel's office has approached this, barb, it is noted that in the three charges we heard about in this target letter, none of them seem to suggest that the feds would have to prove that trump knew he was lying when he claimed the election was stolen. at this hour, it seems to be his entire defense. i didn't know that the election was stolen. therefore i wasn't lying. therefore it was not criminal. do you see a workaround here for the charges that mr. smith's office has chosen, barb? >> when it comes to conspiracy to defraud the united states, i think you're going to have to show that he knew the fraud was the false claim that the election was stolen.

i don't know they're going to be able to work around that. with the obstruction of an official proceeding i don't think you have to know that you actually lost the election there, it's just everything you do with the proceeding. and maybe in the civil rights claim, the deprivation of rights, it's enough that you try to subvert the process. maybe that is the work around if they failed to prove the donald trump actually knew that he had lost the election. there might have been a way to have a jury reach a verdict of guilty on those other two counts without even finding that that is the case. it happens all the time in obstruction of justice charges. a person might say that i am innocent, so i told the person the life for me. the fact that you're innocent is great but the part where you told them to live for you is still a crime. it might be this is a strategic call by jack smith to avoid having to prove the trump. actually knew that he had lost the election. >> lisa, i know that i'm going to ask you the impossible. i'm going to do it anyway.

we know there were three weeks between when trump received his target letter for the mar-a-lago documents case, and when the doj actually charged him and indicted him, one wonders whether you think recent looking at a similar timeframe here, given the fact that fani willis seems to be waiting in the wings, and fewer than three weeks to announce her own potential indictments of the former president. >> alex, it's impossible to say as you acknowledge. we're probably working on a little bit shorter of a timeframe here. ironically, the person that brought in the wrap up witness last time, lawyer stanley woodward who was in miami, is also the lawyer for the person we understand to be testifying tomorrow to the grandeur, a former white house aide will russell. does that suggest that we are at the end? not necessarily. we are certainly getting close to it,. i'll be looking for signals that trump's lawyers are sitting down with the special counsel's office in their last-ditch effort to persuade them not to bring charges.

that might be when we know that the end is actually near. >> the end is near. and yet it keeps going, on doesn't it? barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan, and our great msnbc legal analyst, lisa rubin, ladies, thank you for your time and thoughts this evening. >> alex thank, you. >> when we come back, the news of a looming federal indictment for a leader of their party has landed among republicans down here in washington. that news has landed with a thud. we're going to get reaction from senator elizabeth warren and my msnbc colleague jen psaki. stick around. stick around if you're looking for a medicare supplement insurance plan that's smart now... i'm 65. and really smart later i'm 70-ish.

consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare. with this type of plan, you'll know upfront about how much your care costs. which makes planning your financial future easier. so call unitedhealthcare today to learn more about the only plans of their kind with the aarp name. and set yourself and your future self up with an aarp medicare supplement plan from unitedhealthcare. - i got the cabin for three days. it's gonna be sweet! with an aarp medicare supplement plan what? i'm 12 hours short. - have a fun weekend. - ♪ unnecessary action hero! unnecessary. ♪ - was that necessary? - no. neither is a blown weekend. with paycom, employees do their own payroll so you can fix problems before they become problems. - hmm! get paycom and make the unnecessary, unnecessary. - see you down the line.

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. we moved out of the city so our little sophie i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. could appreciate nature. but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like? well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity...

and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? what, we have a ton of mulch. 3... 2...a literal ton. 1... >> news of a possible third

criminal indictment for donald trump has not exactly prompted a lot of soul searching among republicans in washington. instead, it's been more like wagon circling. and speaker kevin mccarthy said yesterday, the government is targeting champs to take him out of the 2024 presidential race. georgia congresswoman marjorie taylor greene had some choice words, kind of news absolute bowl. the euphemism. saying the charges were ridiculous. trump's not been charged diversionary six, but in the senate, that vest headed-ness and deliberation, the reaction to a possible indictment has

been either met with silence or criticism of the potential indicators rather than the indicted. >> every week i've said it here, i'm not going to comment on the various candidates. >> another indictment, even more devices for the country. >> he said repeatedly to protest peacefully. idiot they would indict him for contributing to divide centenary six. i think it's ridiculous. >> joining us now is senator elizabeth warren for the state of net massachusetts. thanks so much for joining us here in person. i want to hear with the scuttle in the senate now that we have news of a potential third indictment. the public posture of the republicans is to criticize the department of justice. do you get the sense in the hallways that this is affecting the? that there might be some sense

of shogren or remorse? >> nothing to say. it didn't happen. >> wow. >> i guess the playbook has been that whenever there are explosive allegations, republicans, it's not about the substance of the allegation, but talking about the leakers or government body, or the institution. not really to address the substance. do you think it's a good strategy that they could pursue for the entirety of the election season? >> do you think it's a strategy that they can pursue. they've got so much practice at it. they're so good at it. they've just constructed and left alternative reality where it's not about what really happened on january 6th. what they experienced, what we experienced, it's really about reading the same story, we are going to stick. we're just consistent with this story. >> at the risk of standing

naive about this, i'm old enough to remember the 2020 race, previous races in american history where members of the same party could disagree with each other. where they could level criticisms at one another. do we have the? michael bloomberg entered the race. this is an example of what can happen. >> i'm proud of the fact it about two weeks, ago we were awarded voted the best place to work, second best place in america. if that doesn't say something about our employees and how happy they are, i don't know what does. >> senator, you've been critical on this issue. >> yes i have. i hope you've heard what his defense was. i've been nice to see some women. that just doesn't cut it. he has to stand on his record. but we need to know is exactly

with working out there. he's got some men number of women, dozens, who knows. to sign nondisclosure agreements for sexual harassment and gender discrimination in the workplace. mister mayor, are you willing to release all of those women from those nondisclosure agreements so that we can hear their side of the story? >> i remember being in the press room for that, like always on the ground. it was a substantive, super substantive, really important exchange. would you brought up is something that the democratic elector really was interested in and wanted to hear. how is it that can only happen, it seems, like on the democratic side of the aisle? there is no internal questioning on the republican party at this point. >> actually do think there's a difference here. that is on the democratic side, i'm not going to say where. the really is a disciplining effect, not just from the

leaders but for people. we get things wrong, we statements steaks, say things that -- the answer immediately becomes for the people who follow us, from the people -- saying you got that wrong. things that are true to not get the same kind of long, long lifespan. we don't go out and say that somehow by repeating it enough we will make it true. we will bend -- remember the old spoon benders? we'll bend reality to our will. for some of our faults, i do believe that when democrats are trying to do is deal with a real world trying to help people, and trying to hold themselves to a standard of at least keep trying to get it right, and talk about the things that will affect that reality, and what we can do. >> it increasingly feels like on a host of issues, that holds

true. the democrats are intent on solving actual, relevant world problems, republicans are intent and stating an ideology in creating litmus tests. an example i pointed to is senator tommy tuberville. here he is effectively blocking the nominations in the military out of an ideological fight about abortion provisions that privilege for abortions in the u.s. military. the idea is that the u.s. military must -- in order for the military to staff. >> whatever it is, the department of defense has said the the number of active duty military that has been stationed in a place where it can't get access, the immediate family can't get access to reproductive rights, reproductive surfaces that they need. the military will say that they

take time and go to another place, and we will help play for travel. that's it, that's all what we'll do. when you get there, you have to pay for yourself. we are the least make this possible. we are today in the senate armed services committee, testimony that about 40% of the women serving in the military right now live in -- excuse me, not live, but have been stationed in states that have very limited access to abortion services, into certain other services that they may need. for example, in the aftermath of a miscarriage. . this is the policy of the department of defense putting in, an inclusive and important policy. senator tuberville doesn't like it. i understand. there are lots of policies that i don't like, but his response has been now four months.

stopping promotion and assignment of the top officers in the military. they have to be improved by the senate in order to take their post. the consequence is that we have now more than 250 people who are blocked. if this keeps, that we will soon have no head of the joint chiefs of staff. we did not have the commander of the seventh fleet, of the fifth fleet. cyber command. and the u.s. marines, for the first time in its history have no permanent person in charge. , you can go all the way through. these are people in a served their country honorably and what former defense secretaries, as well as our current defense secretaries on the former, both republicans and democrats have said this is undermining national security. this is undercutting military readiness and what the officers

themselves say is not just about us. it's all of those mid-level ranks, partly because they like at this and say political football, i don't want to stay around this. >> and it's the u.s. using a republican holding up the u.s. military, affecting's readiness on an issue that, by the, way is absolutely terrible politics for republicans in terms of there extreme stance in reproductive freedoms. >> and who is speaking out and saying he has to put a stop to this? tied back to democracy now. we've -- putting together the military budget. i sat on this committee as the head of the personnel subcommittee. the republicans introduced him an amendment to change that

particular policy on that access to reproductive health care. it lost. we had a vote in the committee and it lost. in a democracy, when we have about, and the majority says no, we ratify the policy. the policy as it is is what we hear in the senate want to see. not good enough for senator tuberville, backing off and say i might not like it, but this is how it works in the democracy. >> and you can play that lesson to a number of issues that republicans have had to deal with, including the 2020 election. it's fundamentally anti democratic, the position being put down here. >> senator warren, i live in new york city but i like coming to washington d.c.. it means a chance to sit down and talk chat with you about many things. unfortunately, we're out of time for this segment.

thank you so much for your time and your patience over on capitol hill. we are deeply appreciative. >> it's so great to see you, alex, let's do it again. >> still to come this evening, what happens after he spent the better part of three years telling your party not to trust the american voting system? it turns out it is not the best outcome for a party that is using the american voting system. we will explain. plus, congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez weighs in on the house defense. that's next. that's next. book a work trip. earn onekeycash. shake some hands. do not forget to laugh. [laughing] book a get-away-from-work trip. use onekeycash. order some sides. do not disturb. join one key to earn and use rewards across expedia, hotels.com, and vrbo.

when it comes to your hair, ingredients matter. that's why herbal essences is packed with naturally derived plant ingredients you love, and none of the stuff you don't. our sulfate-free collections smell incredible... ♪ and leave your hair touchably soft and smooth. ♪ herbal essences

i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

we're at war. -detonators charged. only pay for what you need. there's a chance that when we push that button, we destroy the world. we're in a race against the nazis. i have no choice. is it big enough to end the war? to end all war? 7... 6... 5... 4... 3... -it's happening, isn't it? 2... 1... we always had questions. who do we belong to? who are our ancestors? i know we have them. when i found that immigration record on ancestry®, it just changed everything. i feel like a time traveler. ♪ >> we are here today,

unfortunately, because the facts have brought us year. we are here today because donald trump is exerting an influence campaign. in congress, where he's no longer president of the united states. >> that was congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez today blasting republicans for weaponizing congress to go after the biden family while working overtime to shield from president trump from both actual and potential federal criminal charges. in fact, after trump announced yesterday that he received a target letter from the special counsel regarding the 2020 election interference, trump called speaker kevin mccarthy and republican conference chair at least a phonic to rally support for him among ranking file republicans. today, speaker mccarthy said that the call was not a strategy session, but simply a

call because he speaks to jump on a regular basis. he also told reporters that he doesn't think that prosecutors can criminally charge trump because the former president didn't do anything wrong. it's unclear speaker mccarthy remembers ever saying the trump bears responsibility for what happened on january 6th. joining us now is jim psaki, former white house press secretary and host of course of inside with jen psaki and msnbc. it's such a delay to see you. >> welcome to washington, alex. >> thank you, my friend. i have to ask, so many reasons to be alarmed at what is happening in the republican party. on a scale of 1 to 10, how much does it concern you the trump literally seems to be calling in favors to republicans in congress, and seem thus far to be doing his bidding? >> and they want to please him. they want him to call them. they want to be on his good side. it is deeply concerning, alex, to state the obvious. i think that if you look at the hearing today as evidence of

this, they're so wrapped on the axle about how they're talking about the potential indictment of donald trump, which is worth repeating, not just an insurrection, and the day all work in every day. and also the effort to overturn the will of the american people that they all represent. that is what is happening right now, or potentially happening, or could happen soon. at the same time, they are bending themselves over backwards to try and come up with a whistleblower who is a viable, to try and go after joe biden, to kind of minced things together and make it all confusing. that's concerning, in part, because it's a very political and they are in charge of the house of representatives. and they should be doing the work of the american people. >> and also, it also does not pose a possibility, depending on what happens in any of these federal criminal indictments, there is going to become a fence, if you will, on the part of house republicans, who are going to, effectively, truly weaponize the federal government to go after what

they see as their perceived group of enemies, which is merrick garland, joe biden, and jack smith. do you think it's a foregone conclusion that all of those folks are going to see impeachment proceedings, or some other extreme alarmist reaction to whatever happens in the criminal trials? >> and let's not forget that this is -- it's been a long. week but a lot has happened. >> -- >> earlier this week, there was an eye-popping story in the new york times about what trump intends to do as president, right? which is to take control of all independent agencies of government, essentially, coalesce control under his own power. that means self pardoning himself if needed. it also means being able to bend the will of agencies that have a huge impact on the economy, go after political enemies. he is basically announcing, this is what i want to do as president. and people in the party are saying, we are with you. and we want to do that. now >> a plus, let's go. not to be alarmist in my own --

but people wonder how democracy ends? when people who are potentially guilty of multiple federal crimes, observe hurting democracy, have a party that is complicit in their future plans to further erode democracy and our american democratic institutions, that is how american democracy ends. it is, like, literally being foretold in public, and no one in the republican party seems willing to stop it. >> that is exactly right. and they are fearful of their own political future. that's what this is about. if you were sitting here with kevin mccarthy -- i don't know him well, i will admit -- i don't think he would say if, we were not on camera that donald trump had nothing to do with january 6th, or with overturning the will of the american people. he would not say that. because that is not what he has said previously. many of them would not say that and that's not what they say privately. that tells you a lot about why they are doing this. >> yeah. well, that's maybe even the worst part of it. jen -- here with me in washington

d.c.. >> i'm here. i live here. >> because up next, the republican party push to get voters back to the polls early gets a great big shove from donald trump. it's just one of many challenges of having a twice indicted front-runner who can't help himself or, apparently, his own party. stay with us. ay with us type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® 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 ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. you may pay as little as $25.

- i got the cabin for three days. it's gonna be sweet! what? i'm 12 hours short. - have a fun weekend. - ♪ unnecessary action hero! unnecessary. ♪ - was that necessary? - no. neither is a blown weekend. with paycom, employees do their own payroll so you can fix problems before they become problems. - hmm! get paycom and make the unnecessary, unnecessary.

- see you down the line. 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. >> you might think that if you are the target of the special

counsel's investigation into your efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, you might think that you would be careful about what you said in public on the subject. i say, i don't know, election fraud. but if you did that, then, you would not be donald trump. last night, donald trump appeared on fox news, at the town hall with sean hannity. mr. hannity was trying to get the former president's signal to his supporters that, in spite of everything trump has done since 20 tundermine public faith in american elections, that voting early, or voting by mail, is actually okay. >> do you now encourage and embrace early and voting -- voting by mail and legal ballot harvesting? >> i do, but i also have to say something else. because the one thing -- >> but this is important -- >> -- that we don't talk about. -- also create phony ballots. and that's a real problem. that's my opinion. but they create a lot of phony ballots. >> has your mind shifted?

>> has your mind shifted? please, one more time, has your mind shifted? hannity they're just trying to get trump back on track and off the third rail. it did not go well. >> -- encourage your voters, based on this is dumb we have, to go along with the system of early voting in voting by mail? >> i will -- >> -- dig mistake -- >> i will. but those ballots get lost also, sean hannity. -- those ballots get lost also. the answer is, i will, because you would like it. but, you know what? can i be honest? >> -- i've got to take a -- break >> but sean, a lot of bad things happen to those ballots also. >> i've got to take a break. this guy is not helping out. trump can help himself. and while that exchange seems bad for trump, considering he was doubling and tripling down on election fraud conspiracy theories on public, on television -- officially target of another jack smith investigation, as bad as it was for trump, it is also a republican party

nightmare. this, after all, is the hangover from the 2020 election, the one where republicans lost faith in voting in general, and absentee and early voting in particular. and that reality is clashing with this other reality. the republican party needs people to vote, a lot, by many means, in order to win in 2024. so, at the national level, the rnc recently, and ironically, unveiled a new campaign to encourage republicans to bake your vote, which encourages voting by absentee and mail-in ballots. at the state level, republican virginia governor glenn youngkin has unveiled a secure of your vote initiative. and the republican party of ohio is launching a campaign to say, it's okay to vote that way. again, both of these initiatives are meant to convince republicans that mail-in and absentee ballots are okay. so, the republican party has begun to realize that the whole ballot fraud idea's electoral

suicide. but apparently, its head, donald trump, has not. we will have much more on that when my friend and colleague jen psaki returns to join me right here at this table, coming up next. coming up next hey bud. wow. what's all this? hawaii was too expensive so i brought it here. you know with priceline you could actually take that trip for less than all this. i made a horrible mistake. ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ 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. >> if, as expected, special

counsel jack smith and idaho trump in the next few days, it will be his third indictment so far this year. and we are only halfway through 2023. and thus far, trump strategy here appears to be blame the other party. on truth social, trump

announced today that democratic prosecutors waited years -- years -- to bring charges, so they could interfere with the 2024 presidential election. for the record, special counsel jack smith has been working on this case for a little over eight months. back with us to decipher what this all means is my friend and colleague, jen psaki. jen, i mean, what is the appropriate democratic response to this line of attack? >> can i just say first, when you were reading, that what it reminded me of is what vladimir putin did at the beginning, before the war in ukraine started -- >> yes -- >> -- which was to protect and say, the ukrainians are attacking us, as if, you say, it it's true -- i think, the democrats, it's a little bit of a split view of this, which is apparent in public. you look at the party committees, the dnc is not talking about the specific -- the dccc is. the white house is not. i do think that -- >> does that reflect a different political reality at

the congressional level was the national level, do you think? >> at the congressional level, you are just much more into what is in your district, and fighting hand to hand combat in some ways. verbal combat, of course, i mean. i think this will change once the election gets closer. now, and just remember, how joe biden ran for president in 2020. the heart of the nation, the soul of the nation. there is a way too harden the contrast with trump without talking about the specifics of the investigations. and he is going to have to do that and i am certain he will do that, which is there, is one presidential candidate, one president, who is going to stand up for democracy, who is going to stand up and protect the classified secrets of our country. there is one president who is going to stand up for the values and the rule of law. that's me. that's a contrast right there. and you can harden into it more. but i expect they will do it. they are just not going to and -- he's not going to talk about the specifics of the case because he is an institutionalist. >> yeah. >> and that is what tradition has been for a long time for a reason.

>> i guess i just wonder, is that more of a complicated needle to thread? to say that i am the person that sense for institutional integrity and yet these institutions are operating completely independent of me? right? like is that the complicating factor here? because you can't look like he is involved in this. he isn't involved in it. but he also wants to say this sort of responsive, protection of democracy is the work of my administration. >> that is true. but remember, a lot of what trump has done was in the light of day. a lot of what he is still saying is acknowledging things he did in the light of day. >> yeah. >> and president biden can draw the contrast by cole i want the values and -- versus what trump stands for. and remember, that's how democrats did better than expected, in part, in the midterm elections, he standing up for democracy against the ones who deny it. >> okay! well, nobody is going to confuse the two candidates, we know that for sure. >> that's fair. >> jen psaki, it's such a delight seeing you anywhere. >> -- >> i will come visit you in new

york. >> we will do that. -- host of "inside with jen psaki", which of course airs sunday's at noon, an msnbc. it is appointment television. thank you, my friend, for joining me tonight. that is our show for this evening. now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening alex. if you wanted to do a few more minutes with jen, that would be fined, because i'm in the middle -- i've got this speed reading assignment here in the middle, with a transcript that just came up from judge cannon's courtroom yesterday -- over 60 pages -- >> oh, that is good! >> -- yeah what was said. and we have our team of lawyers who are studying it. we are going to give them a full segment, where we will cover other materials, so that they can be reading this. but there is a couple of things that jump out here that we are going to get into. one is, it's the first time a trump criminal defense lawyer has tried to say in court