that you are going to get a definitive answer? >> always. we're always gonna have that question that is never going away. >> that's all for this edition of dateline, i'm craig melvin. thank you for watching! >> ultimately what president trump said is let's go with option the, let's just halt, let's pause the voting and allow the state legislatures to take one last look and make a determination as to whether or not the elections were handled fairly. that's constitutional law. that is not an issue of criminal activity. >> that's an admission. >> you can say something is not criminal but that doesn't make it true. that is donald trump's attorney in the 2020 election case, seeming to admit that the former president did exactly what he is accused of doing. >> when all he wanted to do is

impede the counting of electoral votes. all he wanted to do is impede the process that is stated in the constitution, that's all he wanted. all i wanted to do was rob a bank. >> take all the money. >> i mean, this is exactly what he is charged for. and he admitted it. >> yeah, you know watching mr. laura and political defender like lindsey graham, attempt to defend donald trump over the last couple of days, it's clear they don't have a lot to work with. mr. lauro is a real attorney, not like the other attorneys that mr. trump had around him, he was a prosecutor, and if he can't seem to come up with a cogent theory of the case of why donald trump was acting legally around the 2020 election in the days leading up to january six, it's because the evidence in that indictment are so overwhelming, they are

hopscotching around hoping to find something, but nothing is hitting yet. >> well, of course they won't find anything illegal because they are boxed illegally, they will lose legally, what they're trying to do is trying to create something for chinese religious cult that run conspiracy websites that maybe will catch hold on fox news and other networks where they can create an alternative set of facts. so, of course, none of this, none of this has anything to do with defending donald trump legally. because, again, he started out talking about the first amendment, okay, that is fine, that is something you would do if you were in a political debate. but legally, he knows that holds no water because at the top of the indictment, what do we have? we have jack smith saying hey, anybody is free to say what they want to say about the election even if they want to lie that it was rigged.

that is his first amendment right, that is taken away in the first couple of paragraphs. so, they start by talking about the first amendment, that doesn't hold water. it's a stupid argument if you actually read this indictment which a lot of people on fox news don't. do you know why? they don't want to read it, they had a editorial page this morning, it was shameful. they went full, you never go for trump if you are on the editorial, they went full trump. you never go full trump. they blame it on the democrats, and -- you will not believe this. they said that joe biden's old. they say joe biden's old. so, you have all of this going on and then you have lindsey graham, who is a lawyer saying i don't trust juries now. so, here you have people who have said, we don't trust american democracy after donald trump loses, and now folks,

some of these people on fox news lindsey graham, some republicans are now saying we don't trust the jury system. we don't trust american democracy because trump lost, we don't trust the jury system because donald trump stole nuclear secrets and is being held accountable for it, and donald trump tried to steal an election, that we all know he tried to steal. lindsey graham said -- and three people chased him around washington, and he goes okay, i'm back on the train. and it is so bizarre, man. it's so bizarre, they are willing to trash every american institution for a guy that has never been loyal to them. >> lindsey graham said yesterday that donald trump can't get a fair trial in washington because of the jury pool in washington. remember, in the eugene carroll case a defamation case when

that was decided, marco rubio said the jury system is a joke. another lawyer saying the jury system in the united states is a joke. this is the way it works, you are tried in the place you are alleged have committed a crime. as e. jean carroll's lawyer pointed out on morning joe, those jurors were not from chelsea and tribeca, some of them were from manhattan, other places around new york. it's how the jury system works. what you're hearing is fear from those politicians that if they don't rally to donald trump's defense, even on this, even after reading this indictment, that they are going to lose. they will lose the voters and might lose their power. >> after reading this, after reading -- people who worked for donald trump page, after page, after page of testimony, people that donald trump brought in to his inner circle, people that donald trump's elected for cabinet members as his white

house counsel, all saying the same thing, that donald trump tried to steal the election. even after that? what is worth it for these people? what is it worth for the wall street journal editorial page? what is it worth for lindsey graham to try to excuse an attempted coup? >> what is that worth? i just must say, sometimes you get frustrated because politically i am too pragmatic -- >> right. >> i bend over backwards too hard to understand too many people's views and it frustrates you. i have to say, in this case, there is no getting this. i've been a member of congress, it's not worth this. it's not worth betraying your country. it's not worth turning a blind

eye to a coup. it's not worth going to the best schools in america, getting one of the best editorial jobs in america, reading this and knowing better. and trying to blame donald trump's attempted to coup -- his coup attempt on democrats, that would use this and election? on the biden family, on joe biden being old? come on man! you are better than that. i know because i know you, because i've been reading your work my entire life, because i served with some of you in congress to through difficult times. you are better than this don't

listen to. me don't listen to the washington post or new york times or msnbc or cnn. don't listen to -- just listen to the people who worked for donald trump. the people who donald trump selected himself. the defendants vice president who personally stood to remain in office and gain by the defendants ticket, who the defendant wanted to rig the election. mike pence refused, senior leaders of the justice department who stood to gain, they would have been acting attorney generals in the first term, or the second, they would've been the attorney general, they would have run

the justice department if only they had gone along with donald trump's lies. senior white house attorneys. the people who defended him when he used his office, when he used his office to ignore congresses authorization of weapons to ukraine. he said, no, no to zelenskyy, you need to give me dirt on my political opponent or won't send you weapons. they defended him through that, but here every senior white house attorney told him he was wrong. that he could not overturn the election, and he needed to leave. senior staffers, when the reelection came -- i mean, come on! this isn't a liberal conspiracy. you can read your religious

cult website all you want, but you know they're lying to you. you know kevin mccarthy is lying to you. you know they are running scared, scared from what? what are they running from? it is more frightening then an attempted coup against the united government. where cops were brutalized for eventually died. american democracy smeared globally. because of one former reality tv host. wanting to maintain power and become an authoritarian leader here in the united states. what is worth that? i would say nothing. absolutely nothing! and yet, they continue to march

america towards the clifton. >> yesterday in washington d.c., for the first time ever, a former president of the united states was arraigned for his alleged efforts to subvert an american democracy. just a few blocks away from where he took the oath of office and from where his supporters carried out an unprecedented act of violence just a few years later, donald trump pleaded not guilty, to four felony charges stemming from his actions after the 2020 election. the charges, conspiracy to defraud the united states, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction -- and of temp to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights. no cameras were allowed in the courtroom yesterday, there are only around 100 people present, trump in a blue suit and red tie was seated about ten feet away from the man leading the

prosecution against him, fresh sole counsel jack smith. when the former presidents lawyer introduce themselves to the magistrate judge, they referred to the client as president trump. the judge then referred back to him as mr. trump of reminder that everyone is equal in the court of law. >> the former president himself spoke only a few times, mostly to acknowledge he was aware of his rights, he was asked to state his name and age to which he responded donald j trump. and seven, seven, most of the arraignment typical ineligible before trump agreed to the conditions of his release, the judge gave him an unusual warning. she reminded trump that it is a crime to try to influence roger, to threaten or bribe a witness, or to retaliate against someone providing information to prosecutors. when asked if he understood that violating those terms could result in his bond being revoked, the former president

said simply yes. let's bring in the host of way too early, author of the big lie, jonathan lemire. former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst joyce vance, nbc news justice and intelligence correspondent can. and founder of the conservative website, charlie sykes. good morning to you all, can, i want to begin with you because you are at the courthouse in a room not inside the courtroom but a joined overflow room, tell us more about what took place inside the courtroom and relationship 20 feet or so apart between jack smith and donald trump in that room? >> good morning, that was my one advantage from watching on a video in the media overflow room, is that i could see jack smith's face the reporters in the courtroom are behind him, i watched jack smith who was sitting behind the prosecution team in the first row as donald trump entered the courtroom, where every other face turn to

point towards the former president. jack smith did not, he stared straight ahead, he made a point of not looking at donald trump, as he moved his way towards the defense table and sat down with his lawyers, i thought that was very interesting, because there were a lot of observations that smith seemed to stare down trump in his raymond in miami, he did look at trump at other times while he was talking. just in general, this i thought was a much more sober and serious and even tense atmosphere, at this arraignment than the one down in miami. in miami the magistrate judge there was pretty loose, was making jokes, and the other interesting thing is donald trump didn't say a word at the arraignment in miami, his lawyer answered on his behalf, and pled not guilty. yesterday, donald trump was essentially questioned, even grilled by magistrate -- asking him the standard questions that you would ask a defendant, your name, your date

of birth, and then you know sort of going through the list of charges and the potential penalties which in some cases or 20 years or more for each kouns. and then, giving him a series of instructions as conditions for release, and the most important when she said that he should not commit any crimes while free, and then willie, as you said, that unusual instruction that he should not bribery and timid ate a witness. i talk to lawyers afterwards who said that everything she said in terms of those instructions was standard for a defendant in washington d.c. except for that one, they hadn't heard that before. that was interesting. also interesting was that the magistrate kept folks waiting, including mr. trump for 20 minutes, there was a period of stone silence as the smith team sat at their table across from trump and his lawyers at their table. todd blanche one of trump's lawyers appeared to be conferring with trump reading

the indictment and possibly explained indictment to mr. trump, he seemed animated and inquisitive. people said that he was looser perhaps then last one and he was asked his name, donald j trump, and he added john, asked his age he said 77, 77, the upshot here was that this is washington d.c., this is different from florida. i've covered trials and criminal cases in that courtroom in other courtrooms i look exactly like it, and to me was bracing, drawing to see the former president sitting at the defense table of that courtroom. >> next hearing scheduled for august 28 just over three weeks from now when a trial date will be set, there will be a lot of haggling and negotiating back and forth about when that will be, that is critical to see what if it will be completed before the election. joyce vance, i want to ask you about the admonition from the judge, she told donald trump it

is a crime to try to influence a juror, threaten or bribe a witness or retaliate against someone providing information to prosecutors, did that strike you as unusual to? >> you know, it is very unusual, willie, the only time i can remember hearing a warning like that at an arraignment is when i prosecuted someone who had firebomb the house of a witness coming very close to injuring small children, as part of the activity in a very violent drug organization. in that instance, the judge did admonished the defendant at arraignment, not only that you can have your bond revoked and go back into custody if you commit new crimes, that part a standard. but talked with him specifically about taking any action against witnesses, against him. what comes to mind when you see a judge doing this with donald trump is she's a good judge, she's being very careful, if she gets to a point down the road where there is a hearing

about revoking trump's bond, she wants it on the record that she gave specific advice that there could be no efforts to influence jurors, anyone else involved in the case. she was dotting her eyes and crossed her t's. >> let me ask joys really quickly i'm curious -- i'm just curious, donald trump hears that from the judge, he then goes out and he says his process it's a scam, he has his usual witch hunt speech after that, i don't know how judges, federal judges and alabama would respond to that where you practice, but where i practiced in northwest florida, i suspect judge collier or judge vincent would throw my client in jail and call me out and dress me

down and say you have a client that i admonished in my courtroom, he walks outside and says on conducting a witch hunt here. i'm gonna let him sit in jail until you can go out and i can tell you at least in northwest florida, they would look at me and say if you can't control your client, you might get off the case because if he says it again i will put you in jail. i think for people and florida that is not that much of a stretch. so, i'm really surprised that any defendant is allowed to say that a judge is conducting a witch hunt and that the entire judicial system is a scam. >> so, joe, your court in what we call lower alabama and my course in alabama, i think look very, you know, they're not

pleased by this kind of behavior, i'll stop the benefits of having started my career as a lawyer in washington practiced in front of these courts. where they do offer a little bit more room to ramble for defendants, in these sorts of political cases. here is the reason, i don't think any of us will like the reason, but it is something that exists, donald trump who is not mr. trump in court is still a candidate to be president of the united states. and in the course of his campaign for that office, he has certain first amendment rights. what the judges will do here is stand well back from the line where there could be any sort of litigation over whether they violated his rights. i think that there's still align there that trump cannot cross, and this sort of rhetoric that we are used to him expressing about, witchhunts, that might cost him some jurors. if this case goes to trial

during the process, there may be witnesses who will be influenced by his comments, and who will not be able to set aside what they've heard come out of the former president's mouth. he may lose some witnesses he would've liked to have on the jury. >> so, some of the officers who helped defend the capitol during the january 6th insurrection were present for former president trump's arraignment yesterday. one of them, officer perry dunn who joins us now. he is the recipient of the presidential citizens medal for his exemplary contributions to our democracy surrounding january 6th. he is also the author of the forthcoming book entitled standing my ground. which will be released this october. officer dunn, your reflections after watching this unfold yesterday? >> good morning, thank you for having me on. yesterday i didn't expect much,

i didn't expect to find new evidence or revelations, but it was refreshing, if you will, so to speak to see the former president treated like any other criminal, who violates the law sitting in the courtroom going through the judicial process. >> this must have stirred real emotions in you watching this, this impacted you personally, tell us about how you felt, there is no closure here yet, this trial is gonna go on for months, if not longer, but in this particular moment, tell us what it meant to you? >> i did evoke a few motions, physical ones to. i notice that i had a lawyer on my smartwatch and my heart weight was up 100 beats over minute, that's after he walked in the courtroom it stirred up some feeling just seeing him.

but like you said in the closure i wish it would've happened, i said that he should've been arrested or charged or investigated on january 7th but, no it's not closure but it is a necessary step to get the closure. accountability, he's being held accountable for his actions, that is happening now, but justice looks to me -- justice looks like a guilty verdict. >> officer dunn, good morning, great to have you back with us, even some of your fellow officers, i know it's not easy, it's probably not something you chose to do but you have been coming up publicly and reminding the country about what happened on that day, because there have been so many efforts by trump and his followers to change the story and say no, actually what you saw isn't what happened. we know what happened, you know what happened from the inside, i would ask you apart from what you saw yesterday, how are you doing, how are your fellow officers doing two and a half years on since january 6th?

>> well, willie, good to talk to you, think about it though, one of the reasons for me speaking out is therapeutic helps me get my feelings, my emotions out but also people are trying to whitewash what happened and try to act like what we went through wasn't real, and as long as that happens we have to continue to speak back and push back against it, silence is complicit city. we have to have williams -- and not just by standards, democracy is in the spectator sport, we need to have people telling the truth about what happened especially while they're so many people who are saying that what happened on january six didn't really happen. but, as far as how i'm doing, i don't speak for all my coworkers, but, you know some individuals have shared with me that this is a triggering experience, and they wanted to be over with.

a lot of people do. a lot of people expressed similarly that it wanted to be over with. i do too, but here we are, removing slow, but we're moving, and it needs to be done. >> all right harry dunn, thank you so much, greatly appreciate it. >> thank you. thank you for your service. we appreciate it. his new book standing my ground will be released this october. i want to show you the reaction from republican senator lindsey graham to trump's latest and argument on wednesday ahead of the former presidents appearance in court. e former president appearance>> any conviction in . against donald trump is not legitimate. so they are charging him with a crime but taking bad legal advice, that's what this is about, they're trying to criminalize attorney-client relationships there. trying to criminalize exercising the first amendment the judge in this case hits trump, you can convict trump of

kidnapping lindberg's baby. you need to have a new judge -- >> he is slandering the judge. he is attacking the jury system, and it is interesting the judge, he will be overseeing the case was unanimously conferred by the senate in 2015 by a vote of 95 -- >> unanimous. >> 95 to 0. she was unanimously conferred by the senate, and then again just like the republicans used to defend the fbi, they were the ones defending the fbi against attacks from progressives, the second the fbi actually investigated donald trump, well, suddenly they hate the fbi, suddenly

they hate the military, they hate military leaders. they slander the chairman of the joint chiefs, we can go on and on, charlie sykes marco rubio slandered, attack the jury's is them. now lindsey graham is attacking the jury, we know and they know that the bedrock, the bedrock of our judicial system, we, the people, that is how madison had it set up, and applebaum wrote this yesterday, if the republican -- solely by attacking courts and judges and its leaders continue to work to delegitimized the legal systems, i'm not sure how we recover. let's make this very simple for people, charlie. our former party, from election day 2020 through january his

sixth trashed american democracy. told americans and the world you can't trust fair and free elections, our side doesn't win. fox news paid close to a billion dollars for the lies that they spread. about the election. they will have to pay close to a billion dollars. we turn the page, what lessons learned from that? absolutely nothing. because now they are trashing the judicial system, which i would say is, you know, it's madison's crown jewel. it's the great leveller of the democracy, but now they are trashing that, against for donald trump. do you agree. might be a little extreme but she says i'm not sure how we recover. >> go ahead, i could not agree more strongly.

what lindsey graham and marco rubio are saying is pathetic, and this is where we need to pause for a moment this is dangerous, what you are seeing is a full on attack on the legitimacy of the constitutional order, they are attacking the fbi they are attacking the justice department they are attacking the judges, they are attacking the juries, they are saying that the actions of the juries and the judges are illegitimate, what does that mean? where do you go with that, when you basically have knocked over all the props of the rule of law, they may not be saying okay we will be rejecting you know james madison's design here, this is where their hickory has led them, it is dangerous because if in fact some of this rhetoric that we are seeing the biden regime or the fbi or the gestapo, this goes beyond demonization.

because you don't argue with the gestapo, you don't litigate with the gestapo, you go to war against the gestapo. so, the question is if you doubt the legitimacy of the government, what do you think the people out in the country are going -- how do you think they will react all of this, this is dangerous. ll react all of this, this is dangerous. and charlie let me let me follow up on that to. yesterday we get the news out of new hampshire, i guess it was this weekend. you actually had that number two republican, saying that he was going to go after the bureaucracy, by quote, flooding their throats. flooding the throats of the aircrafts, this is what desantis said. you have the most recent member of the republican party in the united states senate, talking, hold on, talking about how irs

agents are going to go to his home state and with ar-15s and gunned down middle class business people. this has become such a violent party, with such violent rhetoric. let's listen to desantis really quickly and have you respond. >> all these deep state people, you know, we're gonna start slitting throats on day one. being ready to go. >> where? again. i was saying before. i do not understand what is worth trashing the rule of law. what is worth trashing american democracy. i just, i'm gonna say, i can't even imagine how important got to a point where a front runner, a guy in second place, would say i'm going after the deep state. and i'm going to start sledding throats on my first day in

office. this is fascism, is it not? >> it's not just a race to the bottom, i wrote a piece i think, for msnbc a few months ago, that said the brutality is the point. and there is this contest now. among the republicans, not just the cruelty that's the point. it's that the brutality is the point. you listen to them and there is a contest of who can be the toughest. who can be the most savage, are we going to put drug dealers against the wall, and shoot them the day that they're convicted. run -- hold my beer, i will actually slip throats on my first day in office. and it's not just the, i guess it's the crudity and it is the appeal to this visceral sense of we are not in a normal, democratic order.

we need to destroy our enemies throats because they are evil. and we are going to use the most violent means necessary. so there is, again, always the nature of being bombed by this. and this is dangerous when you have tens of millions of people who are listening to this and are trying to figure out how do you respond. how do you respond to the gustavo? how do you respond to the illegitimate regime. what do we think is going to happen next year if this continues? >> and really the consequences, i, mean we've talked about how public servants, are going to have their throat slit. you talk about how i are's agents are going to be coming in hometowns in iowa and shooting people, governing them down, and you have is people

saying that american military is going to take helicopters that were used in afghanistan, and bring them to the united states to gun down trump supporters, that the fbi is coming to kick down doors, to go after trump supporters. this is all a calculated campaign, and my guard it sounds like it's a campy headed campaign to whip up civil war. to create a silver war where no civil war exists? >> and that is some perception of toughness, i, guess or masculinity, or whatever rhonda scent is who in a recent poll trails donald trump by 43, points i think china made a mini version of donald trump that isn't quite working for him but in some way that is their vision of toughness, they see donald trump do it and they figure it's been working for them for a year so maybe i'll try this on as well, but jonathan, obviously that kind

of stuff and government organizations and unions came out and condemned that rhetoric from governor desantis, because he said it, before it's a line he used this out, there were going to flip the throats of members of the deep state, saying it figuratively we now but obviously that kind of stuff, that, culture that language of violence can lead to real violence which is what we are talking about, why donald trump was in a courtroom yesterday. we >> saw it happen, trump of course has used violent rhetoric since his 2016 campaign, talking about second amendment people, second amendment solutions when invoking hillary clinton at times he's endorsed acts of violence at his rallies, we know of course he has stirred up the crowd ungenerous except with that tweet about it being wild. we know the call out to the proud boys stand back and stand by. it has consequences. it wouldn't just be january six, but we know we have discussed on this show that there are

families across this country who have had a hard time following election volunteers, following poll workers because of threats that they received from trump and allies, rudy giuliani, in particular in years past. just last week i spoke to some white house officials before the indictment came down, but it was anticipated, and they talked about how they had to coordinate with federal and law enforcement, state law enforcement about the rise and political violence that could be coming before next year's election, and the sort of rhetoric just adds fuel to those fires that are already burning already simmering and there's a real fear of explosion again next year and joe and micah talked to senior law enforcement just last week. the number one threat in this country right now is domestic extremism and the idea of political violence could be on the horizon. >> absolutely, george vance given the guidance that the judge gave to donald trump, american citizen. in the courtroom.

equal under the law, what about his behavior might he need to curb if you were his attorney? what might you tell him to change in the days and weeks to come? >> if i was his attorney, i would be in the unfortunate position of telling him that he had to stop talking publicly about all of the cases against him. three, maybe four by the end of the next couple of weeks and i think something that we know at this point, it's baked in, is that trump will not stop his constitutionally incapable of keeping his mouth shut, even when it's his own best strategy, so look, his lawyers are going to be fighting a losing battle. on the one hand they are facing very serious charges, and they get worse every time trump opens his mouth, i promise you that when the prosecution closes, and the jury trial, they will play many of trump's own words, they will have posters that will depict his

social media expressions because he seems to be engaged, and we've talked about this for, this, before in this long, slow process of confessing, in public, and much of the case against them comes out of his own mouth. >> ken delaney, give us a timeframe what is your best guess from reporting and also people you talked to yesterday, the courthouse and throughout the day. about the timeframe for this trial. when do we expect this trial to begin? >> it was very clear from that arraignment, that this judge, wants to get this case to trial, as does prosecutor jack smith, and the trump side strategy is going to be delay, delay, delay. so the magistrate judge presented, for example, three dates for the next in the, case august 21st, august 22nd, and august 28th. jack smith teams said we want this sooner state available plays, your honor. of course donald trump's lawyer

said we want august 28. he won the day because the manager has to defer to the schedule of the defense attorney, who has other clients in other cases. but that was an example and then they immediately started arguing about, prosecutor said, look our attention here is to seek a speedy trial. and john morales stood up and said wait a second, we need to understand what the scope of the discovery, is that there's a lot of reason for a delay. you can already see, it that's gonna be the huge issue in this trial. it is trump trying to delay it. but a lot of legal experts i've talked to think this is a streamlined case with one defendant without the complexities of the castle fide documents that you have down four. so it's very feasible with the right judge who is interested in moving the case along to get this trial, get this case to trial before the november election and perhaps even before next summer. it takes an average of a year and a half in d.c. for the complex case to go to trial, but there is every interest at least on the prosecution side

and it appears by the judge to get this case moving. guys. >> nbc's kendall lanny, and former u.s. attorney, joyce vance, thank you very both much for coming in this morning. and charlie sykes, thank you as well. and still ahead on morning joe, house speaker, kevin mccarthy, falsely compares donald trump stolen election claims. to actions taken by ellery clinton, and al gore. after they lost their own presidential case. >> why do they lie through their teeth, when they know there is video to show their lying? >> because they have platforms that they can go on, where nobody holds them accountable. that's why. >> they let them lie? >> yes, they let them life. they don't have any questions. they can specialize as long as they want to millions of people. they have a platform to do it. >> and they'll play a video game that shows that they lived through their teeth? >> now, they're not held accountable. that's where we're at.

district attorney, funny, willis weighs in on the status of her years long investigation into election interference in georgia. what she is saying about any possible impact from the special counsel's probe. also ahead, as former president trump was in court, president biden was on vacation. we'll talk about that split screen between two men who could very well face-off next year. you're watching morning joe! we will be right back! l be right back! 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. somebody would ask her something and she would just walk right past them. she didn't know they were talking to her. i just could not hear. i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair. but nobody even sees them. our nearly invisible hearing aids are just one reason we've been the brand leader for over 75 years. when i finally could hear

for the first time, i started crying. i could hear everything. call 1-800-miracle and schedule your free hearing evaluation today. wayfair has nice prices, so you can have nice things. um kelly? we havee champagne taste... on a hard seltzer budget... wayfair's got just what you need! what... y'all this is nice. salad plates? kelly clarkson? i'm fancy now! i have always wanted statement lighting. get nice things at nice prices at wayfair! ♪ wayfair, you've got just what i need ♪ >> we are following a

development this morning, out of southern california, where two navy sailors are under arrest. accused of providing sensitive national security information

to china. nbc's chief foreign affairs correspondent, andrea mitchell has the details. >> the justice department says the two navy sailors had been arrested for selling military secrets to china. >> sensitive military information ended up in the hands of the people's republic of china. >> the first defendant, 22 year old jim chao way, faces espionage charges. >> he sent espionage information to china including documents, photos, videos, and technical manuals. in exchange, his intelligence officer paid millions of dollars. >> they said that the -- sent the chinese intelligence officer photos of military hardware and vehicles. and divulge information about warfare exercises. the second person charged in a separate case, 26-year-old petty officer thou from neighboring base in california. federal authorities alleged thou received $15,000 from a

chinese intelligence officer, for sharing radar plants, navy, and -- from a base in okinawa, japan. >> again, he chose the path of corruption. >> this comes amid heightened fears of china based cyber espionage. with microsoft reporting that chinese back hackers broke into the email accounts of state and commerce department employees. including the secretary of commerce. >> andrea mitchell reporting for us there. coming up on morning joe. we are now learning what was, and what was not discussed between hunter biden's business associate, devin archer, and then vice president biden. the transcript of our tours closed-door interview with the house oversight committee was released yesterday. we will go through, it and see and how it contributes what republicans, like committee chair james comer have been saying. we'll be right back! ht back!

ya know, if you were cashbacking you could earn on everything with just one card. chase freedom unlimited. so, if you're off the racking... ...or crab cracking, you're cashbacking. cashback on flapjacks, baby backs, or tacos at the taco shack. nah, i'm working on my six pack. switch to a king suite- or book a silent retreat. silent retreat? hold up - yeeerp? i can't talk right now, i'm at a silent retreat. cashback on everything you buy with chase freedom unlimited with no annual fee. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. >> do you believe that this is

now officially that joe biden bribery allegation, and do you believe that you will be able to prove that? jim comer? >> i sure hope so. and i do believe that there's a lot of smoke, and where there is smoke there is fire. and we just heard today that joe biden lied to the american people. >> i sure hope so. that was the chair of the house oversight committee, james comer on monday claiming there is a lot of smoke. >> they're blowing the smoke in. and then they're saying a lot of smoke. >> that hunter biden was involved. and whether joe biden was involved. they said just hours after the committee received closed-door testimony from hunter biden's former business partner, devin

archer. but as we learn from democratic committee member, dan goldman, archer may have actually contradicted commerce point. and yesterday, the transcript of that closed-door interview was released, confirming goldman's account. it turns out that archer told the house oversight committee that he has no knowledge of joe biden altering policy to benefit. hunter archer also said he was present for roughly 20 instances of hunter putting his father on speakerphone, in the presence of business associates. archer said none of the conversations focused on business. and that they talked about things like fishing, and the weather. >> with me right now. senior congressional reporter for nbc news, got while, covering the released transcript also with washington post opinion editor. alexei mccann in. congratulations on your new role. it's fantastic. so this is really something,

scott, we have the republicans going out, growing. we've got him, we've got him and it is sort of like what we were talking about earlier in the show. same saying things that the transcript prove to be wrong. go into the transcript and the so-called, smoke around all of this? >> good morning, as 141 pages of transcript where released by james comer, the gop chairman yesterday. it just so happens that it happened on just hours before donald trump was arraigned in federal court as we all witnessed, and so democrats believed that this was really rushed out. that this was an attempt to distract from trump being in court. here is what we know so far. that, upon reading through this transcript, devin archer

testified to lawmakers that he had no knowledge that joe biden had committing any wrongdoing. he was pressed several times on that point, that was a huge take away. furthermore, as you just mentioned, he, devin archer said that he had no knowledge or evidence that joe biden had changed policy. that he was impacted at all, or changed u.s. policy based on things that his son had done. and so, that really has undercut this argument from republicans like james comer, like jim jordan, that there was some impropriety, or wrongdoing, or a look at the on the part of then vice president, joe biden. hunter biden is an entirely different question. he of course, very clearly was, trying to trade on the biden name. archer said that multiple times. he was portraying this

appearance, or quote, an illusion of influence. and so, that was something that was very clearly stated by archer. that hunter biden was trying to impress his employer, worrisome of, the ukrainian energy company. but that no evidence of impropriety was committed by joe biden. impropriety >> scott, good morns interview was presented by devin archer by, some republicans and media outlets of some smoking gun. here he is, hunter biden on the phone with joe biden. we made the connection. as you read through the transcript, i've been reading along as well. it says just the opposite, which is that they ask him leading question, after leading question. so there were phone calls to joe biden, and again and again, devin archer answers yes there where. because joe biden calls hunter biden every day.

they talked, sometimes that would be a dinner, he puts them on speakerphone. and he says it was about geography, weather, wherever the vice president happened to be at that moment. traveling anyway. and says explicitly it was never about business. so was there anything, just to be fair here, was there anything as you read through the transcript that looked like it did in fact connect joe biden to hunter biden and his business dealings? >> now, larger was pressed several times by both republicans and democrats about those roughly 20 instances over the course of the tenure relationship between arthur and hunter biden. where hunter biden would be hanging out at dinner's, or, hotel rooms with business associates around the globe. and, because he spoke to his father on a daily basis. what oftentimes put his father on speakerphone. he was asked specifically was

business ever discussed? was official business ever discuss? anything related to paris summer, and the answer always came back from archer, absolutely not, they were, as we have discussed, talking about the weather. how is the weather in paris? how is the weather wherever hunter biden happened to be. they talked about things like fishing. and so, that was very clearly established from devin archer, that there was no business ever discussed. however republicans continue to insist that this is somehow evidence that joe biden was deeply involved in the business dealings. but again, no business was discussed. according to devin archer. >> hey alexei, jonathan, congrats again on that new gag. so as scott just mentioned, there was a sense of the republicans maybe had rushed out this transcript. to deflect from the attention of what is happened to donald trump. another example of them doing

trump's bidding. i'm curious of what you're hearing there. because about a week ago, speaker mccarthy started talking about an impeachment inquiry into president biden. and then tap the brakes on it. but trump at the last rally suggested full steam ahead. walk us through that balancing, act mccarthy is reluctant to defy trump. but him himself has acknowledged there's no evidence there. and some moderate republicans are saying you're going to put us in a really bad situation. >> and to your point, it's not just the moderate republicans anymore. it's a far-right folks like marjorie taylor greene, who is now conceding that it would be difficult to get many of her colleagues on board to actually move forward with an impeachment proceeding against president biden. and you know, you're exactly right jonathan. kevin mccarthy, i often am wondering whether he cares about republicans keeping the house in 2024. because so far, he seems singularly focused on helping donald trump win the primary and get reelected. and as you just alluded to,

there is something like 18 republicans who hold seats in districts that joe biden won by healthy margins across the country. these extreme, really baseless claims that joe biden is corrupt is not going to work in districts like that. impeachment proceedings are a drag on the american people. we've seen that in poll, after poll. and republicans, as we see time and again, they're having a really hard time running against themselves. they can't run against their own record because they're not doing much for the american people. they don't want to run against donald trump, because of all the problems that he has. and so they're trying to create this bogeyman out of joe biden, by the way of hunter biden, and what is remarkable is that with control of the house, they have created this committee to explore the weaponization of government. and yet, there are zero facts that they should otherwise be so willing to share every single day. but they can present the fact because they can't find them. they can't find them on hunter

biden. and they, if they could, they would tell us. >> the washington post, alexei mccann, and nbc scott wong thank you very much for being on this morning. morning. all learning to save and spend their money with chase. the chef's cooking up firsts with her new debit card. hungry? -uhuh. the designer's eyeing sequins. uh no plaid. while mom is eyeing his spending. nice. and the engineer? she's taking control with her own account for college. three futures, all with chase. freedom for kids. control for parents. one bank for both. chase. make more of what's yours. >> and it is the top of the

hour. go ahead. >> top of the hour on the fourth. and i just wanted to follow up with what they were saying there. you go through it with comer. there's one example after another where he just makes a fool of himself. he comes out, says something, the opposite ends up being true. you look at what happened with durham. and he knows that's true. you look at what happened with durham, and how humiliated he was by one screwed up indictment after another screw it up indictment. one acquittal, after another acquittal. he has to end up re-arguing his

cases and his father report. and, again they keep trying to find something, and anything to describe it from the fact that donald trump has been charged with stealing nuclear secrets. charged with stealing military plans. charged with trying to overthrow an american, presidential election. and they keep, sort of, rummaging around for hunter biden and biden crime family conspiracy theories. and again, let me say it again, this is our daily reminder. to anybody watching. if hunter biden is guilty of anything, arresting, charging, letting a jury convict. and k sarah sarov, whatever will be, as we say here. but the republicans, they have nothing. they keep making fools of themselves. and they did it again.

we get this transcript and again, they are crowing a couple of days ago, about how this proves that joe biden is guilty. and then there's the informant who of course was a fugitive. and an arms dealer, was smuggling oil illegally to the chinese. it goes on, and, on and on. >> we don't hear much about that star witness anymore. we have congressman gold on a couple of days ago, and they asked them if they track them down. and he said, no he still enough fugitives. still an alleged fugitive to the chinese government, still an alleged arms trafficker. but he's been pushed to the side. we also, joe, had jim hines, that democratic congressman from connecticut, who said exactly what you have just said. exactly what we have been saying for, months, and, months and months. if hunter biden committed a crime, can, and send him to jail. that's all fair, that's how the

system works. but if you're wasting time, and tying up the united states congress trying to find a connection you haven't been able to find for five years. is how long this investigation is going on. you think by this point, there would be some fire to go along with the alleged smoke that chairman comer is talking about. >> to have an ominous conversation will be hard to say there is a definite scenario where we would be talking about hunter. inappropriate behavior to say the least, going on there. but cover it full throw deadly yesterday, where we saw happening. when a former president is indicted for the third time, by the way, this time, for trying to overthrow an election. is just dishonest. it's simply dishonest, it's veiled disinformation that is being packaged as what about-ism. >> they are just trying to distract from the proof. which is their only game right

now. >> it's their only game. >> they have to distract from the truth. the ugliness and trumpism that has led to a man beat stealing nuclear secrets, stealing military war plan, stealing so many other things. >> if i may, jared and ivanka working for president trump. jared walking away with periods of dollars from somebody. i'm, sorry do we want to talk about family members. do we have the time to talk about family members? right now we're talking about a former president who was indicted for trying to steal our democracy. trying to deny voters their rights to elect the presidents. but if we want to talk about family members, and other stories related. there are many. there are many. at this point, the hunter story is being abused away republicans, and used by fox news and other right-wing networks to try to try to bring that effect. that the big story of the moment. probably of our lifetimes is

donald trump and what he tried to do to this country. >> how many times can they lie? how many times can they lie? how many times can these republicans lie? and just move on. >> read the transcript. >> they lied about their star witness and we find out he is an international fugitive. we find that he is illegally smuggling oil, iranian oil, to the communist chinese. we find out that he is an agent of the communist, chinese government. we find out that this testimony that was supposed to be devastating for joe biden and the hunter biden smoking gun, we find out that it was just the opposite so they're lying on fox news, fox news host, they're lying to people that are watching this and yeah after getting socked for close to a billion dollars for lying about stolen elections. >> it's always about something. this time is trying to get them to show up for the debate that they have. >> all of these distractions.

and again. a week ago on and on and on. they had a different lie every day. comer comes up with a different lie every day. remember the informant they had to take? they were going to hold the fbi director in attempt of congress. and then when they found out that there was nothing on there. what do you have? you have a grassley going we do not care that he did nothing wrong. we do not care. and they don't care. all they want to do is keep aligned going and spread more smoke. there's always smoke and never fire because they are the ones that are spewing this smoke. usually on fox news and it all ends up being nothing. >> let's remember that comer about a month or so back gave an interview to fox in which he acknowledged that he was seeing president biden's poll numbers take a hit. as a direct result of his investigations. that's why they were doing

this. on the devon archer testimony we were talking about. not only did not provide a smoking gun, it backed up the biden part of the story. but the republicans had alleged that the biden department of justice was trying to prevent him from testifying. because archer had been sentenced to a year in prison on an unrelated matter, and archer's own lawyer was actually the six have nothing to do with it. he's going to serve his time. this is nothing to do with his testimony, whatsoever. it's just trying to, it's a fire hose of falsehoods as we say on this show a lot. it's a smoke machine, and effort to distract. and it's a whataboutism. it's trying to bring the bidens down to the level where trump is. hey, everyone's corrupt. so you can cast the ballot for our guy. and look, it's not simply true. it's simply not. and we know that hunter biden's plea deal collapsed last month. that judge raise some concerns. some legal experts we talked to said hey, maybe legitimate concerns about the breadth of

the hunter biden deal as we say. willingly we will follow that, in the weeks of head, see if there are any legal medals that hunter biden has to contend with. but this is all about politics for the republican party, and be honest, it's been propped up by the conservative media. one cable network in particular who is treating it as an equal matter as what we are seeing with donald trump. >> and equally matter, they want you to do this. yesterday and watching, ten donald trump was arraigned for the third time in four months. this time for the alleged efforts to subvert american democracy. he pleaded not guilty to four felony charges yesterday, stemming from his actions after the 2020 election. the charges were conspiracy to destroyed the united states. conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. obstruction of, an attempt to obstruct, a official proceeding. and conspiracy against rights. no cameras were allowed in the courtroom yesterday, when a about 100 people were president. the president himself spoke

only a few times. mostly to acknowledge he was aware of his rights. most of the arraignment was typical, but before trump agreed to the conditions of his release. the judge did give him an unusual morning. she reminded trump it's a crime to try to influence a, juror bribe a witness, or retaliate against someone providing information to prosecutors. when he was asked if he understood that violating those terms, resulted in his bond being revoked. the former president said simply, yeah. let's bring in legal reporter for the hill, zak, who is in the courtroom from yesterday's arraignment. zak, tell us what you saw yesterday. >> in many respects, yesterday's proceeding was very ordinary. and was the same steps that any other defendant, that comes to the federal court system here in the nation's capital would go through. the former president was read his rights and asked to respond to a series of yes that no questions from the judge. he entered the plea himself of not guilty. but of course everything except

for the script was anything except for normal. whether it be the security agents, more than a dozen in the room standing vote behind him as well as all over the courtroom. as well as a few protesters, not too many, but a few protesters outside of the courthouse and a swarm of media of course both inside and outside so the atmosphere was anything but normal but the basic steps that trump had to fall yesterday coming into the courthouse, and going through that abatement. really was the end of the day. the same steps that any other defendant would go through in front of a magistrate judge. >> and zach, the one thing that some court watchers observed a slightly different is the directions that the judge gave to donald trump. especially about influencing potential witnesses, and jurors. and then he went outside and talked. so it's curious to see if the former president will be able to stick to that. and perhaps why that judge decided to say that?

>> as we now, many of the potential witnesses, and not only this january 6th case. but also the two other criminal indictments that the former president is already facing, many of the potential witnesses and these matters are people who are still in his orbit. and he still speaks to. so the judge did give him a very stern warning yesterday. telling him that he could not speak with witnesses in the case, except if he is in the presence of his attorneys. so something that the judge really did give a serious warning, and had the former president respond to in court saying a firm yes, he would comply with those conditions. so with that, the judge did release him, he was not held, the government did not request that. his next court appearance is now set for august 28th, the judge did say that the former president would not necessarily have to attend, so it doesn't look like necessarily he will be back in d.c. at the end of

the month. but his lawyer certainly will be. and also at that august 28 court hearing we are expecting to see potentially a trial date be set. >> wow, courts legal reporter for the hill. zach schonfeld, then you very much for being on. we let's bring in msnbc political contributor, amy fang, and maybe rocha, and author and msnbc political analyst, and that. his book, the purse waiters, at the front lines of the fight for our hearts, minds, and democracy. >> maybe, center on the front lines. obviously, an active prosecutor in new york state. i'm curious what was your take away from yesterday? >> just like everyone has been saying, in some ways very routine. and arraignments, this is what every defendant who is charged with a crime it goes there. with that in and of itself is remarkable, considering who the

charge defender is here. that we are having a court process that happens with thousands of people across our country, and state and federal courts. come in here with the former president. that is remarkable, as not many people have done it. but worth pointing out that our justice system, the wheels are turning. and that is so important. i do think that it is remarkable that the judge decided to give mr. trump this morning, at this stage, i have heard that warning from judges many times and i was prosecuted for many years. and that is where i heard that the most. not only in those cases, also in those cases where there has been some indication of attempts at witness tampering. there have never heard a warning about not tempering with the jury. this early in the process. we don't have a jury yet. so i do think that also is

quite remarkable. but again, the place i have heard this kind of warning the most is in the mob cases that are prosecuted for eight and a half years. ha >> and this morning, nealand a katyal, wrote a very persuasive arguments in the new york times about the need for cameras in the courtroom. and he quoted justice louis brandeis who had said, sunlight is set to be the best of disinfectant, so i'm curious do you agree that there should be cameras in the courtroom but also i just love to get your view from 30,000 feet on what you saw yesterday? >> yeah, so, 247,000 meters ago this country started with manner created equal. we've done better and where's jobs of living up to that in history, and different issues. but i've yet to see a former president of the united states, arraigned, like anyone else as others were pointing out.

it's a good moment. one of those moments when we are living up to that notion that people are equal, at birth and equal even if they have reached a lot of money and power. i think when it comes to cameras, it's incredibly important for the public to see as much of this is possible. unfiltered, because we had this problem of lies and disinformation that you are talking about at the bottom of the last hour and the more things that are mediated, the more they're coming from not the direct thing, and you and i talking about the thing and people who are even our super fans or think we are diamonds. which is basically the countries entirely sorted into, do you fully trust certain people or do you think that they are diamonds? the more things are mediated, the less trust there is. so people are gonna trust the real thing. it's not gonna erode his support among the hardest of the hard-core. but we have seen in between 2016 and 2020. there are sensible people who

are susceptible to reality. and i think showing what he did and showing as we did in the documents case with all those gruesome photos of documents in the toilet. it's very, very powerful. can be powerful. katie, donald trump supporters, in congress and in the media, have been trying out different events as here over the past couple of days since its indictment dropped. his attorney appears to have confirmed one of the allegations in the special counsel's indictment. trump and accused of asking his vice president, mike pence, to stop the election certification process. even, allegedly, telling pence that he is, quote, too honest, when pence reject the idea. john laurel, the attorney for donald trump, provided more insight on those conversations, trying, attempting, to get into some kind of defense just hours after the former president pleaded not guilty. >> president trump was getting advice from a esteemed constitutional scholar asked to

an array of options that he could take in light of the discrepancies and what was going on in 2020. those discrepancies were well-known. and they were being litigated. professor eastman laid out a series of options that were discussed with vice president pence. vice president pence disagreed on certain issues. ultimately, what president trump said is, let's go with option the. halt, just pause the voting, allow the state legislature to take one last look and make a determination as to whether or not the elections were handled fairly. that is constitutional law. that is not an issue of criminal activity. >> katie, help us out here. is that not john laurel confessing to a part of the crime that is alleged in the indictment? >> it certainly is a concession that john laurel is making on behalf of his clients, donald trump. i am looking for that esteemed constitutional scholar. i don't see one. i haven't heard one. if you look at this indictment,

there is an allegation within this indictment, keep in mind, allegations are just what they are. i suspect special counsel jack smith has the goods here. eastman admits that his legal theories are not legal. that is clearly the problem for donald trump. john laura what he's doing is this. he is having test balloons go up, so he can taint the jury pool. put out ideas like, i was relying on the advice of my lawyers. these constitutional scholars who are telling me it was okay to finally establish federal law in order to advance my scheme to defraud. there is another theory that has been advance, as well. you can't attack the first amendment right of the former president of the united states. well, the first amendment is an under attack here. it is really critical that as members of the media, when we are talking about this case -- especially as analysts, that we clarify for the american public that these are not viable legal defenses. in addition, this case is not about those legal defenses. this case is, clearly, about

somebody who knew -- even though that is not a requirement, guys, to be able to say or prove if you are the prosecution, that he knew that he lost. but, let's be clear. the evidence is legion here. he, donald trump, knew he lost. he knew that he lost and he wanted to advance a scheme to defraud so he could steal valid votes in the american people. that is exactly what the cases about. >> those are such great points. all of them, such great points. it is like robbing a bank and then trying to bring the first amendment into it. as jack smith says up top, the first amendment has nothing to do with this. you had trump's lawyer, again, doing his best to defend his client. he wanted to halt -- >> pause. >> let's just send it back to the states and have them check one more time. they had already checked. time and time and time again. how many times in very comey

county? four or five times? >> i don't think a riot is a pause. >> giving biden more votes in the end. michigan, one recount after another. recount after another recount. the speaker of the house in the republican singer wanted trump to win. i thought it was a great president. the votes weren't there. georgia, how many recounts where they're in georgia? that holds no water. we are probably not gonna hear that over the next week or two. he tried the first amendment on day one. that doesn't work. intimate work because jack smith puncture that balloon before he even went out and said they're. then we had the, oh, he just wants to pause -- he's figuring out this morning, that was an admission against interest for his client. he probably won't trot that will now. the esteemed john eastman? as katie pointed out, as you know very well, you wrote the book on this. you know very well that donald

trump is saying, hey, let's go with what he, eastman, is saying. mike pence turns to him and says, has anyone ever agreed with this before? this theory? has anybody in 240 years ever said that this was the law? eastman said no, never before. pence turns to trump, see, your own attorney is saying this is bowl. that is all they got. jonathan not at all they have. they have nothing except stirring up you know what. so, right wing pro trump outlets can try to twist the minds of viewers away from the truth. >> there are two options here, stirring up the, you know what. or number two, delay, delay, delay. that is where i want to go with

you. it's all about timeline right now. it seems a special counsel smith is trying to keep this as narrow and is tight as he can. we just mentioned john eastman. we talked about rudy giuliani earlier. these are coconspirators but they are not involved in this they have not been charged. there isn't anything about the actual insurrection on january 6th. the violence of that day it is just about this. a pretty lean case clearly designed for speed. using your experience there as a prosecutor, talk to us about what you see as this timeline. we know the prosecution is supposed to come back next week with some proposals about timing. the two sides are going to meet at the end of the months to set a try schedule. what do you think is going to happen? >> i am not going to give a predicted trial day that would be foolish on my part. in any case, and any federal indictment, there are so many unknowns.

i think that it is absolutely correct that the 70 days speed trial clock is not a realistic clock. it isn't in any federal case. i think that people understand that. i just wanted to say that out loud. while the statute in the rules talks about 70 days, cases never go to trial and 70 days. as you pointed out, jack smith built this indictment for speed. they will do everything that they can, and clearly, to have the scope work expeditiously. not for an unfair reason but for a very good reason. the whole speedy trial statute is built on the right to the public and a speedy trial. the public has that interest, perhaps, more than any single case. we want to see how this plays out. we want to see how these defenses in fact play out before the election, for good

reason. i think jack smith has that top of mind. i think the judge will, obviously, have to be and should be fair to a charge defendant here, to mr. trump. you don't want, as a judge, to rush things along and away that if there is a conviction, if there is some argument on appeal about how the process was unfair. he didn't have perfect and council. we are not anywhere close that. . that is a very high standard. a judge needs to keep that in mind. i think they will move things along. i think there is a way to do that. defendants make motions all the time, frankly, to try to stall. that is not unusual. juries are used to that. they know how to see, okay, this is a real reason for some postponement. this is a real motion that we need to litigate, or this isn't. i think that this judge will be very good at seeing through

that. to celebrate the week from the chief. >> katie, thank you. what will you be watching moving forward especially leading up to the 28? i'm curious because trump, i'm not being facetious or silly here. he can't keep his mouth shut. he will be posting, there isn't even a jury yet. in a way any comments he make is potentially speaking to potential jurors out there. what are some of the stumbling blocks that he might confront with a judge that doesn't want him running his mouth? >> so, there are a couple of thoughts. this particular federal district court judge, who has the existing federal indictment, the fact we actually have to clarify what we are talking about is absurd in and of itself. but this indictment that we are talking about, she is on record previously stating that when she had to sign a executive

privilege issue with the january six committee, she said that presidents are not kings. the plaintiff, which is donald trump, he is not the president. she has made it very clear that she wants to make sure that there is nothing that goes awry in this case. nothing that the judge, as we d repeatedly, admonished and warned donald trump that he cannot have improper contact with witnesses mirrors a similar bomb condition that was proposed in trump's mar-a-lago case. in that case, trump and the other codefendants are not allowed to have contact with any witnesses or talk about communications about the facts of the case, unless it is through council. they are trying to make sure that each of these defendants stays in a particular lane. in regards to timing, once you give enough rope to donald trump, he will hang himself in his regard in an attempt to incriminate himself. it's tough thing for people to understand is i wrote a piece that wasn't really popular really received but the

judicial process takes time. a criminal defendant like donald trump has to play out the litigation clock to the best of his ability. he has a trial coming up. the letitia james 250 million dollar civil lawsuit in just a few months. he has two civil trials in january. a pyramid scheme lawsuit trial at the end of january. and carols regional defamation lawsuit in the beginning of january. he has the manhattan d.a.'s criminal trial with alvin bragg in march. then he has the mar-a-lago trial in may. there is a tight window between now and november of next year to get this particular case to trial. i agree with me that special counsel jack smith built this indictment for speed. speak can be derailed by multiple witnesses like mike pence, mark meadows, and all these other possible coconspirators. there could be a very real challenge for the prosecution to get donald trump to travel quickly. >> and on that crowded docket that katie just laid out so

well, of course, all taking place during a presidential election. in an attempt donald trump to return to the white house. you have written, thought about, and talk to us so much about authoritarianism over the last several years. there is the theory out there that they want to push this along as far as he can. all of these trials, especially this one, get it after the election. hope he wins and make it all go away. thinking about all of this legal trouble in that context for this man. what is your view of that? >> i think hot vax summer of 2021 have given way to hot indictments summer of 2023. i think that if you have been clamoring for the rule of law and accountability in this country, it feels like a great moment. i would say that a note of caution thinking about why katie was just saying, and others. i think that we are at risk of confusing prosecutors doing their job properly with us doing our job as citizens.

this movement, frankly, this leader called around donald trump -- this cult of our fellow citizens enable his lawbreaking by wanting him to continue in power is something that cannot be defeated in the courtroom. it is something that has to be out organized and defeated at the ballot box. if all of our energy goes into passively watching for cases to advance, cases will be postponed and postponed as katie was saying. i think we are missing something. i have a terrific interview with ruth ben-ghiat an incredible scholar of authoritarianism. that will be our coverage of 2024 through the lens of authoritarianism. waiting for prosecutors and waiting for trial dates is not something you can actually do. out this movement, running for local boards. running for these local education boards. the way that folks on the

far-right are doing is something that you can do. i think it is going to be really, really, important to remain focused on and how organizing donald trump's incredibly organized, incredibly loyal, incredibly energetic movement. eye movement of deception and illusion. but there is a reason why no one else in his primaries coming close here. they have social media accounts. those of us who do not believe in authoritarianism in america are going to need to build a better, bigger. movement that should be the focus. >> fair enough. thank you very much. westchester county, d.a., mimi roca. thank you. katie phang, thank you, as well. we will be watching the katie phang show saturday and sunday around 8 am eastern right here on msnbc. still ahead on morning joe, how speaker kevin mccarthy gets asked about donald trump's arraignment. instead, turns the conversation to hillary clinton.

we will show you his new false comparison between the 2020 and 2016 elections and speak with doris currents good win for some much needed, historical, pepective. you're watching morning joe. we'll be right back.

the chase ink business premier card is made for people like sam, who make- everyday products, designed smarter. like a smart coffee grinder, that orders fresh beans for you. oh, genius! for more breakthroughs like that- i need a breakthrough card. like ours! with 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more. plus unlimited 2% cash back on all other purchases. and with greater spending potential, sam can keep making smart ideas- a brilliant reality! the ink business premier card from chase for business. make more of what's yours. we moved out of the city so our little sophie the ink business premier card from chase for business. 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. sleepovers just aren't what they used to be. a house full of screens?ton. 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. 36 past the hour.

a live look at the white house. constantly defending donald trump might be getting to kevin mccarthy. >> really? >> the house speaker, yesterday, had an angry response to a question about trump's continued claims -- >> is kevin angry? >> kyiv is angry. >> what is he angry about? >> but the 2020 election was stolen. >> yeah, i could say the same thing that hillary clinton says about her election that she lost. i can say the same thing about the dnc who said it about the 2016 race. i can say the same thing about those in the democratic party, from the leadership on down, about george bush not winning, but our gordon. or any of them prosecuted? or any of them put in jail? or any of them held with no response to be able to get out? the answer is no. so yeah, you can raise that. did someone raised the question? in america you are entitled to raise a question. you are entitled to question whether it was honest or not. that is the uniqueness of the

first amendment. that is the uniqueness of america. you know what? he shouldn't be prosecuted for your thoughts? but difference here is what hillary clinton said, nothing happened to her. when they said in georgia elections, nothing happen to them either. you know what? when the dnc said, nothing happened to them either. stop using government to go after people who politically disagree with you. that is wrong and that should stop now. >> clearly, the bad acting, first of all. it is shocking that there are people who are really stupid enough to believe any of that. here's the thing, hillary clinton never, never, never, challenge the results of the 2016 election. in fact, she gave a concession speech the next morning. saying that she hoped, the next morning, the next morning, she hoped that trump would be a successful president for all americans. in fact, to secure a peaceful

transition of power has happened twice in american history. the first, in 1860 with the election of abraham lincoln freaking out southern states. they succeeded and form the confederacy. the second and 2020 with donald trump. it's only two times, kevin! it happened. take a look! >> one of the great features of america is that we have political contests, they are very hard-fought as this one was hard-fought. once the decision is made, we unite behind the man who was elected. >> this is a fraud on the american public. this is an embarrassment to our country. >> i have no bitterness, no rancor at all. i say to the president, as a fellow politician, but he did a wonderful job. >> we were getting ready to win this election.

frankly, we did win this election. >> i have lost, mr. nixon has won. the democratic process has worked its will. so, now let's get on with the urgent task of uniting our country. >> this is a very big moment. this is a major fraud in our nation. we want the law to be used in a proper manner. >> congratulations on your victory. i hope that in the next four years he will lead us to a time of peace abroad and justice at home. you have my full support on such efforts. >> we will be going to the u.s. supreme court. and we want all voting to stop. we don't want them to find any ballots for o'clock in the morning and hand them to the list. >> the president asked me to tell you that he telephoned

president elect carter a short time ago and congratulated him on his victory. >> it is a very sad moment, to me, this is a very sad moment. we will win this. as far as i'm concerned, we already have won it. >> the people of the united states have made a choice and of course i accept that decision. >> if you count the legal votes, i easily win. >> he has won. we are all americans. he is our president and we honor him tonight. >> if you count the illegal votes, they can try to steal the election from us. >> he will be our president. we will work with him as the nation faces major challenges ahead. we must work together. >> as everyone saw, we won by historic numbers. >> there is important work to be done, america must always comes first. we will get behind this new can

president and wish him well. >> democratic officials never believe they could win this election honestly. that is why they did the mail-in ballots where there is tremendous corruption and fraud. >> i've said repeatedly in this campaign that the president's my opponent, not my enemy. i wish him well. i pledge to hit my support. >> i've had two elections. i won both of them, it's amazing. >> i actually did much better on the second one. >> this is america. just as we fight hard when the stakes are high, we close ranks and come together when the contest is done. >> that was a rigged election. we are still fighting, you'll see what's going to happen. >> in the american election, there are no losers. whether or not our candidates are successful, the next morning we all wake up as americans. >> we will never give up, we will never concede.

it doesn't happen. you don't concede when they're staffed and volleyed. >> whatever our differences, we are fellow americans. please believe me when i say that no association has ever meant more to me than that. >> to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with we will, stop the steal. i so wish that i have been able to fulfill your hopes to lead the country in a different direction. the nation shows another leader. and and i join with you to honestly pray for him and for this great nation. >> when you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules. so i hope that mike has the courage to do what he has to do. >> donald trump is going to be our president. we owe him an open mind and a chance to lead. our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power.

we did not just respect that, we cherish it. >> we fly, we fight like hell. if you don't fight like how, you are not gonna have a country anymore. >> you know, we were reminded of what a dark chapter of american history's donald trump is taking us through, still. we are reminded of that because we see such extraordinary grace -- >> goodness. >> decency, patriotism, love of country from all of those other candidates. let's bring in right now pulitzer prize-winning author and presidential historian, doris goodwin. >> oh that was free speech on donald trump. >> earlier it was. not as he was whipping people into a frenzy on the sixth. >> doris, you and i have had the honor of knowing a lot of people that we saw there. i want to underline one point

before, you know, for people who might say, that was then. they were on the good old boiled club. no, no. i look at goldwater, who couldn't have disagreed more with lbj than he did, being graceful. and mcgovern, could not have been more horrified at the prospects of four more years of vietnam and nixon. hubert humphrey, could not have been more horrified that richard nixon was winning in 68. gerald ford, broken hearted, voice stripped, ron. all of these races, most of these races, so close. bob dole, i was flying with him during the campaign. he just kept whispering what he said through the entire campaign, i can't believe this guy is beating me. this world war ii veteran against somebody that he thought with the under, though he never said it. he couldn't believe it.

george h. w. bush thinking the same thing. wait? they are rejecting me? i can't believe it. but to most extreme examples, richard nixon. who conceded a race when a lot of people around him in 1960 were saying, they stole illinois from you. he said that it didn't matter. i'll gore, one of the few good moments of his 2000 campaign where we saw into the heart of our core. was, for him, tragically his concessions speech. any concessions speech, one of the most patriotic concession speeches. when al gore knew that five republican appointees to the, nominees to the supreme court voted against him and for democratic appointees voted for him, he still went now gave and

extraordinarily gracious concession speech that helped bring the country together. my god, my god! the contrast with this man. this farai's indicted man. it could not be greater, could it doors? >> you know, joe, i think everybody should show again what you just showed. that conjunction of what has happened every other time in the history, except 1860 and what is happening now. it just shows you the grace of the people that you could imagine how hard it would be for them? losing this election i look to the concession speech or the other day, maybe an early thing to do but it made me so emotional to realize exactly what you're realizing. emotionathey know they disappoid their followers, they feel really sad, and gets, they know that the peaceful transition of power is a bedrock for our country. and the reason why i think

showing those two things together, as you did this morning, people may just think this is just words, the peaceful transition of power. but it ain't democracy, the simplest terms of a democracy is you can vote your leaders in or you can throw them out. if they are thrown out, they have to have the grace and humility to accept that. and every other time, only in 1860, one of the things lincoln said, if our democracy will not exist, that is why the civil war partly had to be fought. if you can decide you are the minority in the south, the democratic party, you lost the election, you decide okay, i'm not going to accept the loss. i'm going to secede from the union. he said, if we can't prove that can happen, democracy will be an absurdity. and i think we have to go over those consistent speeches again and again. i mean, look at albert speech. my husband, luckily, was partly able to help him on that speech. but it was the way he delivered it one, such a conversational style, such and emotion. he was able to say, i don't agree with that decision, but the supreme court has spoken. it's the law of the land.

then, he talked about what -- harvard law school, not undermanned, but under got and under the law. so, the rule of law is an issue right now. i think if we can just play those over and over again to show the american people, this has been our tradition. you know, it started the concession speeches started in 1896. the first one that was on the radio was al smith, conceding to herbert hoover. the next one was a newsreel, when will he conceded to fdr. that, adlai stevenson gave the first one on television. he went back to a lincoln thing. so, there was a sense of a family tree of all these people knowing how important it was. only donald trump, one man, has not done that. at the end of al gore's speed, she reprise something at the democratic convention for clinton and gore. they had this ramp at the end, a chance. it's time for them to go! it's time for them to go! so finally, at the end of al courts speak, she brought that back up in another way. he said, it's time for me to go. he said that peacefully and he wished that don stewardship pushes elections.

so, where are these people now? >> it is such -- >> the chant, it's time for him to go! >> boris, i couldn't agree more. i think that should be mandatory viewing, to just sit and watch that clip. i was thinking, joe manchin george h. w. bush, bush 41. how devastating that loss was for a man who was so proud that he was going to be a one term president, he couldn't believe he had lost to bill clinton. and yet, famously, but no t left in the oval office for bill counted on january 20th, 1993, on the day of president clinton's inauguration. he gets into the oval office and finds a note. incredibly gracious note. part of it is, you will be our president when you read the snow. i wish you. well i wish your family well. your success now is our countries success. i am rooting hard for you. good luck. thank, george. and that is a reminder of who we are and who we are supposed to be, and how this is supposed

to go. and donald trump does represent a deviation from history. but doris, it seems to me we have to confront the fact that still, all these years on that, there is a large segment of the population who is saying, we want to pat, and we wanted again. >> and that is the reason why the real battle to be fought here, and this is what you are talking about a little bit earlier, it's the battle of public sentiment. i mean, but law cases are going to be absolutely critical, but beyond those law cases, the country has to be persuaded that's what has been done by president trump, former president trump, is wrong. one of the things that lincoln said is that even more important than loss of congress, even more important than judicial decisions, is public sentiment. and as long as public sentiment is educated, as it was in the 1850s and the 1860s, finally, with organizing, with movements, the anti slavery movement was able to make a sort of majority view in the north it was wrong.

it was that against the ideals of the country, and that let the whole thing is to happen. so, that's what has to happen now. it's very important that i think this is why it's so important that the trial be publicized, that it be essentially on television. it's the most important thing that's going to happen to. us how are we going to feel about somebody who has violated the ideals of the country, who was wrong? one of the things to go back to, george bush senior, there is a great story he tells that he came home one day after having scored three goals in soccer. he was so happy. he said to his mother, i scored three goals! and his mother, who loved competitiveness and wondered ambition said, yes, but how did the team do? how did the team do? that's the important thing. you need people in that office. run for office or feel something is more important than their victory. it's the country, it's the team, and if you can't accept that, that the democracy doesn't work. that's what has to be returned home to the american people. if they could see that clip over and over again, they could see how far this goes, from the grace and the dignity of all the other people who have run for our office, lost, and took

it. then the, country moved all. >> the, respects the grace of the individual to accept that defeat, to put the country first. but also, their parties are with them. other leaders, whether it's democrat or republican alike, say look, it's time. the elections over. it's time to move on. we all have come through the example of nixon and watergate. but sometimes, it's presidential elections. these bitterly contested fights, still, even the party said okay, it's time to turn the page. even in 2016, by that next morning. the democrats are doing. so what are you seeing anything here that would suggest that there are other republicans, real ones that matter, not just the occasional lonely voice, that are going to push the party and donald trump to move past this in the next election? >> yeah, it's also hard to accept that. i thought after january six, when you saw mcconnell speak, when you saw mccarthy speak, that was going to be the beginning of the leadership turning against him. and then somehow, somehow, it's not happened. it can't just be a few of them. we've got to figure out, what

is that going to happen? when is it going to break? and maybe the more this thing becomes clear, what was done, you've got to believe that rational thought will come back in the minds of some of these people. but if not, it's going to take the overwhelming organization, just as you were talking about earlier, organizing the country at all the levels so -- win that election. if the party will not depart from him, he has to be defeated, and the party has to be defeated. >> but one concession speech we haven't looked at doris, it's hillary clinton's. i'm just curious if you could talk about that, especially given what we heard kevin mccarthy say in the setup. basically lying about her behavior, about the peaceful transition of power. versus what she said that they. >> on the contrary, she comes out that next day. she talks about the disappointment. she knows people have felt. she feels it, too. she talks about what it was meant to be, a woman running for the election. and then she talks about the peaceful transition of power

and she says, as was said in that clip, with real emotion in her voice, it's not just that it's part of our system, not just it's a rule of law. we are not just respecting it. we cherish it. we cherish it, and thereby, i wish him well. i hope that he can have an open mind for him. that was a hard thing to do. and she knew what she had to do. she did it, just the opposite of what he's saying. so, two with all gore. the opposite of what he was saying there, too. he comes out and he talks about the fact that how hard this is, to, he doesn't like the supreme court decision, but it's the rule of the land. and they both deserve, i think, pantheon's. those are great acceptance speeches. one concession speeches. oren of my favorites, actually, was mccain. what an extraordinary when he gave, because he not only said that he accepted what had happened, but he said that i, obama had inspired the nation and he felt it was a wonderful moment in their history, that the first black american had been elected. wow. that's what you want. that's character. in fact, you learn about the

character of the person who loses more either losing them by their wedding. and those people you saw this morning on that cliff, they showed character. they were americans. >> i'm so glad you brought up john mccain. because for those of you who knew senator mccain, honored enough to have senator mccain, for anybody who thinks that's its week to concede an election, a democratic election that you lost, what's showed that clip. while we show doris, let's show john mccain. john mccain, one of the toughest guys i ever met in congress. when he came at you, he came at you hard. knock your head off. and then, he'd sit down with you later and say okay, let's figure this out. he was a stand up man, a tough man, and the man we're looking at right there, all these phony, all these phony shows of

masculinity and macho-ism, all these phony trump snowflakes who claimed to be real men, we are looking at a real man here, who was in prisons, who was beaten, beaten so badly he could never raise his arms over his head again, and doris, you know the story. like so many of us know the story about john mccain, they offered the vietcong offered to let him out of his living hell. and he refused. he wasn't going to get special treatment. he would continue to be beaten two inches of death and stay in vietnam, in the hanoi hilton, being tortured because he wasn't going to get special treatment over his band of brothers who were there with him.

and he came back. he got into politics. he served this country so proudly. and when he lost, i'll say it. he did what real men do when they lose. he tipped his hat, acknowledged reality, and moved on. >> so well said, joe. just think about it. we should've learned about the character of the candidate trump when he said that john mccain was not a hero. right at that moment, presidents said examples for our people. that's one of the things that is so concerning to me about what's happening right now with president trump, unwilling to accept a lot of that election. teddy roosevelt said the most important thing a president does is to set an example for children. what are we setting an example for? we want our children to our coaches, through our teachers, through our parents, to teach a kid how to lose gracefully. how to win with humility and loose with grace. this is just the opposite,

example bigs. at mccain sets this extraordinary example. and when i looked at that acceptance speech the other night, i could feel tears almost coming to my ice. what a great thing he did that night. >> and you talk about what we teach our children this morning in the washington post. -- wrote this. that donald trump with a reverse image of the boy scout law. you know, the scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, et cetera, et cetera. trump's mendacious, selfish, egoist, grandiose, and all the rest. he always has been. he always will be, for almost half a century, american culture has been attacked. or maybe is infected by donald trump. a famed sucking parasites with fangs sunk deep into our national artery of sensationalism. harsh, harsh words. >> and true. >> but given the reality, true. we compare donald trump with his bone spurs, with john mccain. with his heroism.

and -- >> leave it right there. presidential historian, doris kearns. good one. thank you for this conversation. thank you for coming on. >> thank you so much, doris. hi, i'm todd. i'm a veteran of 23 years. i served three overseas tours. i love to give back to the community. i offer what i can when i can. i started noticing my memory was slipping. i saw a prevagen commercial and i did some research on it. i started taking prevagen about three years ago. i feel clearer in my thoughts, my memory has improved and generally just more on point. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. (man) what if my type 2 diabetes takes over? (woman)nd generally just what if all i do isn't enough? or what if i can do diabetes differently? (avo) now you can with once-weekly mounjaro.

mounjaro helps your body regulate blood sugar, and mounjaro can help decrease how much food you eat. 3 out of 4 people reached an a1c of less than 7%. plus people taking mounjaro lost up to 25 pounds. mounjaro is not for people with type 1 diabetes or children. don't take mounjaro, if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop mounjaro, and call your doctor right away, if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, vision changes, or diabetic retinopathy. serious side effects may include pancreatitis and gallbladder problems. taking mounjaro with sulfonylurea or insulin raises low blood sugar risk. tell your doctor if you're nursing, pregnant, or plan to be. side effects include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea which can cause dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. (woman) i can do diabetes differently with mounjaro. (avo) ask your doctor about once-weekly mounjaro. >> this is the katie phang show,

live from miami, florida. we've got lots of news to cover and lots of questions to answer, so let's get started. protective order. the department of justice estafette earl judged to step in after an inflammatory social media post from the twice impeached mouth race indicted one term ex president appears to threaten revenge. my brilliant sisters in law, barbara mcquade and joyce vance, are standing by to tell us what happens next in this historic case against defendant trump. plus, damaging discovery. trump's legal team reportedly