maple high-end voters would say i wish we had a third party option, but when it's time for them will ever begin to pick a major party candidate. >> molly murphy and cornell belcher, thank you. that's it for all in on this thursday night. you want velshi weekends at 10 am eastern right here on msnbc. velshi weekends at 10:00 a.m. eastern. by some magic alex and i were in the same city a couple hours ago. >> they let us be in the same room at the same time, though. >> it was a nice afternoon. i'll see you back in new york in the afternoon tomorrow. former president trump had today to appear before special counsel jack smith's grand jury to tell his side of the story. as far as we know that has not happened. mr. trump did not take jack smith up on that offer. but someone else did speak with the special counsel's grand jury today. he is not a household name. the house january 6th committee

never even interviewed him. but clearly this individual was in a position to know some things. his name is william russell. the only photos we have of mr. william russell are ones where he's in the background of trump events, and that makes sense because mr. russell is what is known as the political world as an advance man. his job was to coordinate president trump's movements, his literal muflts from one location to another and to go ahead of the president to make sure everything was setup. he went in advance of trump, thus an advance man. and that makes william russell a potentially huge witness when it comes to january 6th. here was russell with president trump and trump's chief of staff mark meadows on january 6th in the tent at the ellipse before trump's big speech that day. you might remember from the house january 6th investigation that there was drama in that tent before trump went on stage.

trump was angry that the crowd was too small. he was mad that security was turning people away if they had weapons. he wanted people inside the ellipse so that they could cheer him on. but trump's anger wasn't directed at his supporters for showing up armed. his anger was focussed on the presence of magnetometers, the meter detecters. and the group he was directing this anger at included his advance team. >> the advance team had relayed to him that the mags were flee flowing. everyone who wanted to come in had come in, but he was still angry about the extra space and wanted more people come in. >> i was in the vicinity of the conversation where i heard the president say something to effect of i don't care they have weapons, they're not here to hurt me. let the people in. take the f-ing mags away. >> so that incident could

certainly be something special counsel smith wants to learn from william russell, trump's knowledge of how armed the crowd was on january 6th and trump's desire to let in that armed crowd. but then there's what happened after trump's speech at the ellipse on january 6th. trump wanted to make what is known as an off-the-record movement or otr to the capitol itself. a president has on the record movements meaning travel from one destination to another put on the president's official schedule for the press each day. but a president can make off-the-record movements without alerting the press. both those type of movements on the record and off-the-record are something that an advance man might be a part of. and this particular off-the-record movement, trump physically going to the capitol after his speech, this movement had been debated at the white house for days. white house lawyer pat cipollone warned cassidy hutchinson repeatedly not just that he

thought it was a bad idea, but it can get everyone involved in it in deep legal trouble. >> mr. cipollone said something to the effect of, please, make sure we don't go up to the capitol, cassidy, keep in touch with me. we're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen. >> and do you remember which crimes mr. cipollone was concerned with? >> in the days leading up to the 6th we had conversations about potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. >> obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count. well, yesterday nbc news confirmed the three statutes mr. trump has been warned about in the target letter he received from jack smith, and one of them is conspiracy to defraud the united states, which certainly sounds like it's in the ballpark of defrauding the electoral count. and it is important to remember

even though trump ultimately did not get to the capitol that day, he tried to aggressively and repeatedly do just that. you might remember cassidy hutchinson's testimony to that end. ms. hutchinson was told when trump's presidential limo refused to take him to the capitol, trump was so furious that he tried to grab the steering wheel and then physically fought with his lead secret service agent who tried to restrain him. once he was forced back to the white house, trump kept his overcoat on still arguing to be taken to the capitol. his motorcade waited outside for more than 45 minutes just in case trump won that argument. if i were jack smith -- i'm certainly not, but if i were, i would definitely want to hear from trump's advance man about how everything went down on january 6th itself. but we also know the special counsel has previously been interested in william russell for other reasons. russell has already testified twice before special counsel grand juries.

once reportedly for smith's investigation into trump's use of elebz fraud claims to fund raise after the 2020 election and then another time as part of the mar-a-lago documents investigation. william russell really seems to know a lot about almost everything, so what was he doing with the grand jury today, and what can that tell us about where this whole investigation stands? joining us now are danya perry, and andrew wiseman, co-host of the must listen to msnbc podcast "prosecuting trump." great to see you both in the flesh as this, well, i guess the prognostication continues about what's happening here. andrew, let me start with you. in terms of the presence of will russell testifying to, what does this tell you about where we are in the january 6th investigation? >> well, first of all, there's

nothing unusual for someone being called back into the grand jury. it could happen for a variety of reasons. it could happen because jack smith wants to see how he testifies to get a sense of his credibility, and also learn something new they want to ask him about. it also could be they have some questions about things he might have said earlier and they're concerned whether it's totally accurate and might be a euphemism and now has his memory refreshed. it does suggest now at a later stage if you get a target letter that's the key thing that tells you at this point we're very much at the end stage. but to your point, he is the sort of natural person to make sure you've sort of gone through everything he knows. because he's there with former president day in and day out. so in some ways he's better than mark meadows. plus he's a junior person so you might get a more candid version

of what happened. >> it's like prosecuting a mob case. you start with the lower level people that don't have much skin invested in the game that might know what happened. this is someone apparently not on the radar of the january 9th committee but then you see him in the photos and he's in a place you need to be in a critical moment of history. >> as andrew says, it often is the best fly on the wall, they know so much, hear everything but sometimes the higher-ups don't notice their presence and very candid while they're there, and also don't have the same kind of culpability or exposure. so they don't have to make deals so they're not a complicated witness in that sense. so just like cassidy hutchinson in some way was a wonderful witness for the january 6th committee and she put so much into the record we http://known,

this is kind of the analog in some way. and so it's not surprising he'd be called time and time again. perhaps we don't know -- i'm kind of answering a little bit or adding onto the question you put to andrew, but it doesn't necessarily mean that much. it can be many reasons as you said. it can be tricks of the calender. it doesn't mean that they are or not indicting next week. it can continue to put people on the grand jury as we've seen with the mar-a-lago investigation. >> also to everybody's point this is someone who's been testifying about multiple investigations here, andrew. there's a story about what happened in court today. a judge in an unrelated case effectively forced william russell's lawyer to give up a little bit of information about why william russell was meeting with the grand jury today. can you offer a little insight into that? >> sure. so so essentially turner

mcfadden was the judge and the defense counsel for mr. russell was supposed to be present before trevor mcfadden before sentencing for a different defendant who he represented. and by the way the same defense lawyer also reps mr. nauta, so that's three. >> yes. >> so he was late and that apparently displeased the judge. you shouldn't be late for a court appearance, and in the course of that the defense counsel said i had to go back and it took longer because there was a claim of executive privilege. >> so william russell was testifying to this grand jury and somehow it involves executive privilege. >> exactly. and then it all sort of got worked out behind the scenes because the prosecutors came and spoke with the judge and we don't know that part because appropriately that was behind the scenes. i sort of took two things away from that. one, is that sort of happened later in the day and that meant mr. russell was there for quite some time, and i think that's a good sign for the government

they were really pressing on a whole variety of issues. again, tea leaf reading, but it's not someone who wept in for an hour to clean something up. that suggests to me there were a variety of topics. the other issue is as i mentioned his counsel who represents two other people, i'm not saying it's with this particular lawyer but there is a problem in cases involving multiple people in a conspiracy when you have something called house counsel, where the lawyer is making sure they're doing the bidding for the ultimate client and you have two things going on. and that would be something if i were the prosecutor i would be concerned about. just to be clear, it is legal to represent multiple people, each person waives the potential conflict, but it is perilous

because you as a lawyer have an ethical obligation to zealously represent each of your clients and sometimes those conflict and you have an obligation to say i can't do this. does it always happen? no, unfortunately that doesn't happen. so that's the concern you have somebody not there representing that person's best interest. >> just an onlooker to this when you see the name stanley woodward, which is the name of mr. russell's lawyer, to me it signals the person he's representing ain't cooperating with the federal government. listen to this walt nauta, the coconspirator named in the case, tyler budwhich. dan scavino, close trump aide, cash patel, and peter navarro. all those people are being

related by stanley woodward. does this foreclose the possibility any of these people are going to cooperate with the federal government? >> it can be consistent with ethical obligations. there's also no inherent problem with someone else paying legal bills. that happens all the time. oftentimes if a prosecutor raises this potential conflict, a judge will hold a hearing and determine for itself whether or not there is actually a conflict, and sometimes they will actually kick a lawyer off. so i haven't seen that happen in this case, but that's -- you know, there's some potential for that. but certainly that is how people at the top keep the people at the bottom a little more in check. >> aligned. well, yeah, they're all paid by the trump save america super pack. i've got to ask you in terms of what william russell might be brought in for in specific,

andrew, we talked about defrauding the electoral account. that was something pat cipollone was worried about if trump had gone to the capitol on january 6th. that dove tails one of the charges outlined in the target letter. do you think that's where we're going with this? i know i'm asking you to predict the unpredictable, but is it off base to say maybe they're really zeroing in on that moment on january 6th where trump is trying to physically go to the capitol. >> there's no question that's at least one of the topics. there's a photograph as you showed of his being there. so if you are the prosecutors, you want to know everything from everybody as to what was going on with donald trump on that day. and so this is a logical person. and so i think that's included. but if it were me i would also want to know what do you know about pressuring mike pence, pressuring doj, pressuring the states. in other words, you may have information about all those

things. and even if it's just small pieces, you want to make sure you plug that. he also could be a witness as cassidy hutchinson as to knowledge before january 6th of potential violence. and that seems -- it seems unusual if he did not know that given just how much information we have about people being concerned about that. we have hope hicks who told the january 6th committee and now told jack smith about her conversations with the president on january 4th and 5th where she pleaded with him to say something to the crowd that's coming on january 6th that you have to stay peaceful and according to her the president rejected that. >> danya, i do want to raise something barb mcquade and i were talking about yesterday which is the special counsel is very much interviewing witnesses both in this investigation and in mar-a-lago, and is there any risk ipcontinuing to bring in witnesses and sort of stretching -- stretching on the

timetable in which, you know, indictments and superseding indictments could come given the whole cold, hard reality of a presidential campaign that is very much under way and the sort of complications in and around that? >> yes, i mind agree there's some risk to that, and i think the special counsel's office is keenly aware of that, and they are going to hold themselves i think to a very tight timetable here. so the grand jury doesn't have to be impanelled in order to supercede. they could still be gathering information. they could also be looking at other targets that maybe are on a longer time frame than mr. trump. so there are plenty for them to do. so it doesn't necessarily put in jeopardy the time frame, you know, of indicting this particular defendant before we really get into election season.

>> so bernie carrick, and rudy giuliani don't breathe a sigh of relief just yet. their work is not over. andrew wiseman, danya perry, so great to have both of you. the latest effort of ron desantis in florida to whitewash the teaching of slavery, plus maga republicans let wild conspiracy theories take center stage on capitol hill today with some help from a democrat. that is next. >> the republican hearings that have unfolded over the last few days and throughout this entire congress are a malignant clown show. malignant clown show to help prevent bleeding gums. try saying 'hello gumwash' with parodontax active gum health. it kills 99% plaque bacteria. and forms an antibacterial shield. try parodontax active gum health mouthwash.

is that a good thing for the republican party if donald trump is -- >> the question is he the strongest in an election? i don't know that answer. >> that was speaker kevin mccarthy in an interview with cnbc last month questioning in the gentlest possible terms whether or not donald trump is the strongest possible candidate for the republican party in 2024. today politico reports that that comment so enraged the former president that trump demanded mccarthy endorse him immediately. as speaker of the house mccarthy has gone out of the way to stay neutral in the republican presidential primary, so instead kevin mccarthy made a deal. as penance for his hearsay, he made a deal he would expunge trump impeachments and get it

done slated before july 28th. today reporters asked mccarthy about that reported deal. here's what he said. >> there's no deal. i've been very clear long before during impeachments they're doing for purely political purposes. >> joining me now is congressman joe nagoose, democrat of colorado, former impeachment chair. i have a lot to ask you, congressman. but the first is what exactly the point of expunging an impeachment? >> i'm not quite sure, alex. i think that's a great question for the extreme members of the house republican caucus. from my understanding every constitutional scholar that has looked at this has said there's no constitutional basis for the type of action they're going to apparently pursue in the house.

the trial that followed in the senate. the american public watched it, the senate rendered a verdict, and as i said nonsensical for republicans to try to pursue this. but to the extent it's true, it's consistent with the way speaker mccarthy has conducted himself for the last several months constantly capitulating to this extreme right wing of his caucus taken hold of the entire republican caucus. >> placating the guy at the top of that extreme wing it's donald trump. this is placating an irascible sort of individual who doesn't like the fact he was impeached. i've got to ask there's this

sort of reason mccarthy is doing this, which is for trump, but there's the reality of what this does to his caucus. resurfacing impeachment does not seem like good politics, and to ask members to take this vote seems equally perilous. there are only two republicans left in the house republican conference who voted for impeachment the first time. they had a very tightrope to walk, and to do this to them again and other moderate members seems almost suicidal for a man who holds the gavel by five votes. >> it is as i said nonsensical and clearly the speaker is focused on his own survival atop his caucus. and we have seen time and time again over the last eight months a variety of different demands in cohort and conference with

former president trump. legal consequences for american families and we now see that with the supposed expungement as they're gnaw calling it of the two impeachments they're proceeding with. >> when we talk about impeachment, january 6th, we're on the precipice of trump potentially being federally charged for his role in the events that day, and the house republican leadership has been so cavalier about holding him accountable, has gone so far to suggest all the efforts of the department of justice are a political stunt. i wonder what it is like for you as someone who was an investigator, someone who worked on the impeachment in congress but also a victim that day what it is like to watch the speaker of the house of representatives diminish what you did from a constitutional standpoint and diminish your experience as an individual who was part of an insurrection on the capitol.

>> it's disheartening, frustrating, but at the same time it's par for the course for the republican leadership in the house that clearly chose long ago to choose party before country. not all republicans, as you said ten republicans in the house, seven republican senators who ultimately voted to convict in the united states senate, not that we didn't meet the standard for conviction or rather the constitutional vote requirements were two thirds. at the end of the day it was the most bipartisan vote for conviction in the history of presidential impeachments. and i'm remind of what mitch mcconnell said on the senate floor minutes after that trial conclude. as you recall he ultimately voted to acquit but made clear he believed former president trump was morally and practically responsible for provoking the events of that day, and he would not be, no former presidents ultimately are immune to the criminal liability and actions they have taken and the course of conduct during their presidency. i'm not going to opine on the

investigation, obviously it's being done by the special counsel, premature for me to speculate, but i trust that the department of justice will do their work in an impartial and independent and objective way. i think it is deeply dangerous for republicans to be attacking the fbi, the department of justice, the office of special counsel. it undermines the rule of law which is sac rusanct in the united states. >> in the meantime they're hauling robert f. kennedy jr. to the hill to spot anti-conspiracy theories about the covid-19 vaccine. we're talking about a cast of characters the republicans have brought to their hill as their weaponization of federal investigations that is laughable. leader jeffreys called them a malignant clown show. this is more than just ridiculous. it seems from the outside to be

dangerous, and yet it doesn't seem like they're showing any signs of slowing down. >> i think it's right. i think these hearings are going nowhere fast. some republicans know why they're doing and it's a strufeejic reason and judgment they have made it is better to distract or try to distract and obfuscate from the american public and policy agenda they're pursuing which is deeply unpopular with voters. you think about the work they're doing to try to unwind economic progress they made to go to the middle class to lower cost. they don't want to talk about their plan to defund social security or cut medicare, so instead, you know, they fill the air waves with incoherent hearings and outlandish conspiracy theories and clown shows, political sideshows. i think the american public can tell the difference between congressional oversight and sideshows, and i suspect they're going to come to the conclusion this is the latter. >> you're generous enough not to mention the craven behavior for

taking credit for infrastructure projects they voted against voted largely by democrats. >> i'll talk about that next time. >> yes. please do. i didn't mean to sound sarcastic. coming up after a quick break, florida public schools may soon teach children slavery brought a, quote, personal benefit to slaves. that is next. , personal benefit slaves that is next life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications.

what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information.

sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. a house full of screens? basically no hiccups?

you guys have no idea how good you've got it. how old are you? like, 80? back in my day, it was scary stories and flashlights. we don't get scared. oh, really? mom can see your search history. that's what i thought. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity.

his name may not be familiar to you, but this is john brown. john brown was enslaved in the mid-1800s and subjected to excruciating experiments by a georgia doctor named thomas hamilton. hamilton believed there were fizz logical differences between black and white people and used brown's buddy to prove it. after he escaped slavery brown described what happened to him in an auto biography. dr. brown set to work to ascertain how deep my black skin went, this he did by applying blisters to my hands, arms, and

feet. that thinking was so pervasive at the time it spawned propaganda like this print from slavery apologists who pushed a narrative that enslaved blacks in the u.s. were better off than right factory workers, and it provided material for slave holders like south carolina senator john calhoun who in an 1837 speech argued slavery was a boom to black people. never before has a black race of central africa from the dawn of history to present day attained a condition so civilized and so improved not only physically but morally and intellectually. this kind of thinking gave rise to drunk science like drape dumania which translates to run away madness. there was a clinical term in the 1850s based on the idea slavery so vastly improved the lives of slaves they would be to be mentally ill to run away. the term was not removed from

medical textbooks until after 1814. human experiments and racist propaganda were used to prove something we all know was patently false. black people did not benefit from slavery, quite obviously. but this year in florida the echoes of those falsehoods can be heard once again. yesterday the florida board of education approved new standards for black history instruction that require lessons for middle schoolers to include, quote, how slaves developed skills, which in some instances could be applied for their personal benefit. the old racist trope from the 1850s that slavery benefitted the enslaved seems to have been resurrected in florida, and middle schoolers in that state may be required to learn it. more on that unlearning of american history is coming up next with my guest journalist and dean jeloni cobb. jeloni cob

your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today.

as part of florida governor ron desantis' efforts to whitewash black history high schoolers in the state's public school system will now be taught that race mankers like the racial terror in 1920, the largest incidence of voting day violence in american history, that those massacres included acts of violence perpetrated against and by african americans. in reality it was a white mob that killed 60 people after a

black man tried to vote. but those guide lines are part of a new set of standards that florida's board of education approved yesterday down-playing america's history of anti-black violence. and as part of their campaign to make america florida, state officials want to export those standards nationally. joining me now is dean of the journalism school at columbia university and of course a staff writer for "the new yorker." dean, i feel like i'm always bring you around the news for education gets and more and depressing especially in the state of florida. this for a long time the effort has been minimize white aggression, minimize white crime, minimize white murder and targeting of people of color throughout american history. now sort of the other side of that coin is an upsell the notion either black people enjoyed slavery or that they were somehow complicit in this racially motivated violence. >> sure, and so this is outrageous but it's not shocking.

you know, when you know the history of this, this is just a repetition. so even as these events were being perpetrated, they were attempts to, one, eliminate the record. when you go to tulsa and also go to ocoy many of the official documents you would use to record that history has been destroyed. and there's the attempt to whitewash it in the immediate aftermath and then the reversal of the narrative to make it seem the people who were victimizers were actually victims and the people who were victims were actually victimizers. the most pernicious part of this, however, is not the dishonesty, not the outright lying on people and who lost their lives, but it's the purpose of it who do this in order to uphold an unjust and unfair state of affairs in the nation and in the state. so they're telling the story, the question is they're telling the story for what ultimate

purpose, and i think that's where it gets to be really pernicious. >> it's pernicious but at least from my vantage point trance apparently pernicious. it is so egregious the vice president of the united states is going to florida tomorrow to talk about what's happening in the florida public school system. i wonder if inkhey get away with this. >> i mean they potentially can. given what we've seen, you know, the anti-woke act and the don't say gay act and the kind of rear guard march that happened in education in florida, the way they antagonize people at the university level, the way they are creating a chilling effect, you know, across education on all these tiers, i'm not sure they won't be able to get away with this. i will say one thing i think is particularly disturbing is the fact ron desantis was a history major, that he graduated from yale with a degree in history. now, i know the faculty of yale. i know that department. i've lectured at yale.

nobody -- i can guarantee you nobody taught ron desantis the foolishness we're seen being passed off as history in florida right now. >> i think -- i believe you when you say that. i think what's equally disturbing about all this is that other states are looking to florida as a guiding light in terms of how to revise american history, how to shift the country into reverse as to say, and what could emerge is literally just the fragmentation of american education, right? where you have plustates that are not under the same sort of duress as red states where history is taught in a fulsome way and red states where we have revised our history, where there's a different understanding children are brought up when it comes to america's bloody history on race. what are the implications of a country already so fractured to poison the well in the education system, we're talking about

children in elementary and middle and high school to be brought up with this. >> the issue is the protection of hard won rights. the fact people were excluded from the social compact, excluded from the civic compact, the fact people had to lose their lives in order to attain rights granted to other communities at birth. and so that is the fundamental narrative and a crucial narrative in terms of understanding how this nation came to be what it is. now, if you eliminate that narrative, what you do is make it possible to marginalize those people again, strip away their rights again and not only be able to do that, but for the public to understand the travesty as it has happened. >> when you say basically they've tried to sensor the phrase structuring racism and now they're trying to teardown the structures itself. it's actually the history itself, trying to revise it in a way where structural racism

where not only you cannot say it, it never existed. i think the fundamental issue, we understand that to be cancerous for the united states of america. other states so enamored of this idea crt has poisoned the well -- i mean do you think it's a forgone conclusion it gets replicated in red states where governors have looked kindly on what governor desantis -- >> people will try. the same thing we saw with crt. what you do is strip away the utility of history in the first place. and as i say time and time again teams watch their tape, their game tape to see what they got wrong and not what they right. >> you devastate the world of politics and policymaking, i'll say that because so much of what we're trying to do is correct the wrongs of the past. we see why it all dove tails into a political agenda.

it is always so enlight pg and such a pleasure even when it's about distressing topics to see you and speak with you. thanks for your time and wisdom tonight. we have one more story this evening. while facing potential criminal indictment for sending a mob to the u.s. capitol, donald trump today appeared to issue a new threat. that's coming up. stay with us. then i went to experian. now i can see them in one place. and the ones i forgot about? experian can cancel them for me. see all you can do at experian.com/save now. i need it cool at night. you trying to ice me out of the bed? experian can cancel them for me. baby, only on game nights. you know you are retired right? am i? ya! the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is now only $899. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. shop now only at sleep number.

what i'm about to see you is from 2020, but this week it reemerged without context.

>> if you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before. >> if you "f" with us, we're going to do things to you that have never been done before. now, the audio is from an interview donald trump did with the late conservative radio host rush limbaugh. today it was reposted on truth social by donald trump. joining us now the senior advisor to bernie sanders as well as the founder of a more perfect union. so you ran a presidential campaign before bernie sanders. i -- i was really taken aback by the just very specific intent of this most, the most from trump which is to strike fear in the hearts of people who could potentially be detractors, investigators, or opponents, right? if you're a 2024 presidential

candidate in this race, what do you do with an ad like that? like it's incumbent upon you to respond to it. >> i don't know that it is. i would argue trump has largely buried himself with a lot of independent and moderate and progressive people all across america. and he continues to dig holes. he is rallying and of course in this primary a bunch of intense people who like his alphaness. he swings at everybody, hipisses people off, and they get excited about that. if you're biden you're letting him mark his territory. go for it. if that's your 30, 40%, great. it ain't a majority in this country. and so you say i have a different ethical code. i don't get dragged down into nonsense and garbage like this. with that, what trump knows is there's a lot of people angry and upset in america and he's trying to capitalize on that. if you're angry and upset know i'm angry and upset. and i do think there's a message for biden to make sure while

he's governing appropriately there are moments of anger and upset, too. can't forget that part as well. >> i think the fighter has always been bandied about. we were talking to transportation secretary pete buttigieg how republicans were taking credit for projects they themselves voted against. it is one of the arenas you sort of wish the white house would be more aggressive and mark its territory like this is the what we're doing for america and this is the way we're going to own it. can you talk to me a little bit about your strategy for highlighting in the fight what democrats are doing? >> joe biden he's a peacemaker. you put him in any room he dials the temperature down, and i think it works in many ways for

him. there are ways in which the working class audience they're going to be swing voters in this cycle. they're not going to be gravitating until it's a nice rational plan to improve america. they want to know what are your value limitations? do you give a damn about me? do i see that in the way in which you articulate? and and i think when you get into these implementation fights, there are going to be moments whether it's on prescription drugs, whether there's a company resisting child care or a company resisting paying workers its fair share. you go after them. you say, hey, i don't just dole out federal money so people can take it and run away with it. i think there needs to be some animation. you've seen ups workers across the country, the screen actors guild, the writers guild. they're all telling you workers are upset, and many of them feel like this might be their last contract because automation, the

consolidation in corporate america you say who the hell has power to stand up to these guys? you know who does? a government. and you have to say i am the bulwark against large corporations who have incredible power over you, and they say go on strike for two months. where else are you going to work? that's their message to a lot of people. where else are you going to go? and so if you're the president of the united states, you say i've got your back. >> then you bring up the fact this is shaping up to be the summer of strikes. i think by the peak of the summer, 650,000 american workers may be on strike, whether that's writers guild, sag-aftra, hollywood, potential ups strike which could cost the u.s. economy 7.1 fast. that is the reality he's trying to balance the economy and the very real need of american workers and the reality of, you know, the future in terms of american labor. >> with my power as administration, as a government

i'm standing up for middle class working people with everything i can do. now, i have some opponents out there they happen to be in corporate america. they want to screw you. they don't care about our agenda. then i've got a ups over here, big auto makers, big studios and disneys of the world. they say the profit should only accrue at the top and you can be a part timeworker with no benefits and $16 an hour, and that's good enough for you. and if that's their attitude, we should be looking for a government that says that's b.s., we don't tolerate that. and i am willing to allow people to go on strike to say you deserve your fair share, and i think there's going to be these moments, these are existential moments. what direction of this country do you want? and i do think you take a.i., and you say, like, you come in every day and you talk to producers, right? is there a world in which you imagine there's robots that come in and decide what the topics and segments are for you?

not profit accrual. you're optimizing for people pull filament, happiness, to have a good life. that is our vision. >> we're at an existential moment. always great to see you. campaign manager and senior advisor to bernie sanders. that is our show for this evening. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. will russell is one of the president's body men. he's the guy that carried tic tacs and a cone and was around the president to make sure administrative tasks like that were fulfilled. he was depicted in photographs and apparently with the president back and forth to the ellipse and the oval office on january 6th. >> that was the lead investigator for the january 6th committee describing the latest witness to give testimony to special counsel jack smith's grand jury. we'll get to tt