know that the elephant -- the orange elephant in the room is going to be some place else. that's what's going to be interesting. he's not going to be there, so how do they handle that. how does chris christie handle going after donald trump when he's not there on the stage? >> we will find out in a couple weeks' time. important moment to be sure. founder of the conservative website the bulwark, charlie sykes. stick around for "morning joe." we'd love to talk to you a little more. thanks to all of you for joining us today for "way too early." "morning joe" starts right now. i tell ya, remarkable achievements led by -- and this is not hyperbole -- the legendary dusty baker. i remember rooting for him as a kid, and i was older than he was. [ laughter ] dusty, wasn't easy. people counted you out, saying

you were past your prime. hell, i know something about that. >> president biden was cracking jokes with defending world series champions at the white house yesterday. that looked fun. we do have a lot to get to this morning. >> a very confused judge in fort pierce. >> oh, my gosh. >> she was shocked, shocked that you could have two grand juries going on at the same time. >> it's not a good sign, actually. >> where'd she go to law school? >> oh, boy, a lot of questions. >> not a good sign. we'll go through the flurry of legal filings last yesterday in the 2020 election case that has the judge summoning both sides to a washington, d.c., courtroom. >> different judge. >> this is a different judge, a different case. plus, action around the fulton county courthouse in atlanta. >> different case. >> sparking speculation that another indictment, another one, could be coming very soon for the former president. also ahead, we'll explain how the fight for abortion rights in ohio could hang on what happens in today's special

election there. later this hour, presidential candidate and former new jersey governor, chris christie, will be our guest. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it is tuesday, august 8th. what's important about this day? hmm. >> i think it might be somebody's birthday. >> it might be. somebody might be 20 today. we have the host of "way too early," white house bureau chief at "politico," jonathan lemire. host of "politics nation," reverend al sharpton. president emeritus of the council of foreign relations, richard haass. alexi mccammond joins us, and chuck rosenberg is back. justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian. we also pulled over founder of the conservative website, the

bulwark, charlie psyc sykes froy too early". >> i want to talk to charlie, but, ken, we have a confused judge this morning. confused two grand juries could be going at the same time. baffling decisions coming out of a judge who has already been excoriated by the 11th circuit in previous cases for being out of her depth. can you explain what happened with those fort pierce filings? >> well, in her latest order, judge cannon is essentially -- first of all, she granted the government's request to have a hearing on whether walt nauta's lawyer, stanley woodoodward, ha conflict of interest that needs to be explored, because he is representing walt nauta and other witnesses in the case that he may have to cross-examine. she denied the special counsel's effort to file part of something under seal, saying he didn't

justify that. then she questioned why he was using two grand juries to continue to investigate whether there had been obstruction of justice in this case. now, you know, there are some rules about continuing to investigate a case with a grand jury effort has been indicted. you have to be investigating pursuant to a separate indictment. chuck rosenberg to speak more into that. it's not a nutty notion that she would question that, but it did seem like she was a little bit surprised that there were two grand juries in the case when the prosecution had already laid that out in previous filings, joe. >> yeah, it seemed to be bad faith. speaking of bad faith, the judge in the e. jean carroll case, where the judge said mr. trump raped e. jean carroll not pleased. the countersuit against writer e. jean carroll.

carroll said he defamed him, when he was only found liable for sexual abuse. yesterday, a judge ruled against trump's argument, explaining why the jury did not find that trump raped carroll according to new york penal law's narrow definition, her allegation of rape is not defamation. because the words common and more widely understood definition is broader. the judge also denied trump's claim of presidential immunity, saying he waited too long to raise that defense. the countersuit is in response to a separate defamation lawsuit filed over comments trump made about carroll, both while he was in office and the day after a jury found him liable for sexual abuse. that civil trial is set to begin in january. trump's lawyers say they plan to appeal the judge's ruling.

what are the chances, though, he says something again and again and again? >> chance is good. >> defaming her. >> chances are good he'll keep getting sued. charlie sykes, this morning, gerard baker in the "wall street journal" wrote a column you were referencing earlier. he said, you know, republicans have to make a choice here. they can continue their year of magical thinking, or they can keep defending donald trump. in so doing, forever alter the rule of law in america. very true about that. let's say the same thing about my brothers and sisters that i grew up with in the evangelical church. they are now fiercely fighting for and backing a rapist according to a judge, who said by the common definition of the term, donald trump raped e. jean carroll. that's in the court of law. that's not in, again, the pages of some left-wing journal. these are the same people who

all collapse on their fainting couch because bill clinton had a relationship with an intern back when he was in the white house. said he was unfit to be president of the united states. a judge has said donald trump is a rapist, and, yet, they line up right behind him, just like these republicans who are all law and order and rule of law, continue to line up against the guy. they're doing it in a way that's eviscerating -- or they're attempting to eviscerate the rule of law, the justice department, and fbi in the process. >> yeah. i think where we've come since 2015, think what's happened to the american conservative movement. think of what's happened to our political culture. it's easy to dismiss donald trump as this narcissistic clown, but it is hard to understate the impact that he's had on our political standards. to your point, look, you are seeing a full out attack, not

just on the culture of facts, which we had back in 2016, but now on all of the institutions of our constitutional republic. there's a great piece in "the washington post" that talks about how all the other republican candidates are going after the courts, the system of law, the deep state, sowing distrust in any institution that might challenge or hold someone like donald trump accountable. and the willingness to accept lies, i think, has been established over the last few years, but think about the moment we're in right now. donald trump is -- you mentioned, you know, what's going to happen in the future. it is a -- it is rock solid certain that donald trump will continue to make the threats, will continue to make the insults. everything that's happening now will get worse, and the republican party and the evangelical church will go along with it. to your larger point, this has long-term importance.

things like this, when they were broken, they are hard to put back together. >> what biker sa baker says in street journal" piece, reverend al, is if republicans keep this line of thinking, continue their support for donald trump, they need not fool themselves. a second trump administration would destroy department of justice, would destroy the fbi, would destroy the federal government's rule of law, would destroy judicial independence. it would destroy the third branch of america's government. it would rip to shreds madisonian democracy. they need to understand what they're doing, and perhaps they do. i'm just trying to figure out what is so important about this former reality tv host, that they're willing to literally throw away madisonian democracy to defend him. >> that is what really has

troubled me. it's clear that you can have political debate. those of us considered on the left, those on the right. but when you see what is going on now, i think "the new york times" has a story about it this morning, where you have the actual institutions of government that would be totally altered by the politics of today, particularly if trump were to win. i mean, are these people really saying that's what they want to advocate, the absolute destruction of the justice department as we know it and all of the institutional law pillars as we know it? because that's where they're going. they are undermining the very principles that the country was founded on. that is democracy as opposed to autocracy. i think that is one thing to be caught up in the heat of a campaign. it's another thing to say that i want to completely alter how we govern and what we stand for as

a nation. that is the line they have began to cross in the politics of some of those that are running in the republican primaries. >> for what? and for what, mika? to lose again. >> i know. >> to lose again. i know they're looking at polls. no, he loses. he loses every single year. and he has since 2017. so they're willing to throw out the rule of law. they're willing to just ignore all of this, to nominate a guy who is going to lose again. >> they're willing to throw out common decency. if you look at what trump has completely admitted to doing and what he considers normal, and the way he has behaved toward people, especially women, hush money payments to a porn star for an affair, telling the attorney of e. jean carroll, who a judge says he raped -- >> and mocking her in the next debate. >> -- and found liable of sexual

abuse, mocks her in the debate, defames her again -- he is being sued again -- tells her attorney, "you're not my type," and can't even identify her and one of his wives. common decency. is this who you want? forget all this criminal stuff going on if you can't get your head around it. if you really think it's a witch hunt, you have to work through that and look in the mirror, that's your choice, but do you want this person running our country, representing us? >> that is the deeply disturbing thing, they have convinced themselves it is a witch hunt. >> okay. >> they have a guy who stole nuclear secrets, all these things. why wasn't hillary clinton ever arrested? it was donald trump's justice department. i know facts don't matter to so many, but it was donald trump's justice department in 2017 that told donald trump there's nothing there, there's no crime.

2018, the same thing, there is nothing there. there's no crime. trump kept going back to them. donald trump's justice department, the people he appointed, jeff sessions, the people he appointed, "there's no crime there." so when donald trump steals nuclear secrets, you can't go, "yeah, but hillary clinton." you can't. when donald trump steals secret war plans to invade iran, you can't go, "oh, but hunter biden." you can't do that. but that's what they're doing. they know it's a lie. they really do. they know it's a lie. they know the game they're playing, right? yet, they always -- >> defacing themselves in the party. >> even in these op-eds and editorials when they actually take on trump, they go, oh, yeah, but the democrats. oh, yeah, but hillary clinton.

oh, yeah, but hunter biden. they can never just say, "it's wrong he stole nuclear secrets, and no president or former president has ever done that in american history. it is wrong he tried to overthrow a presidential election." no, you can't, "yeah but hunter biden" when we're talking about stealing a presidential election, yet you do that. you do nothing but degrade yourself daily. see, those things you write, those things that you say, they're with you forever on this. you're choosing a failed reality tv host and a failed politician over america's rule of law, over the judiciary, over madisonian democracy. it's just -- the further we get away from this moment, the more horrific it is going to look. a second ruling from that federal judge, chuck, allows testimony from that civil case,

including donald trump's deposition, to be given to manhattan district attorney alvin bragg for potential use in the stormy daniels case. trump is facing 34 felony counts related to a hush money payment he allegedly made to the film actress to cover up an affair. how does this change things, chuck? >> it is an interesting ruling, mika, but not terribly surprising. i mean, what a department says can be deduced against him in trial. it's an admission. now, people may wonder why something he said in one trial can be used in another trial, but it really doesn't matter where you say it or how you say it, just that you've said it. because it was done in a deposition in a civil case, prosecutors in manhattan had to ask for it. they applied for it. they said, "judge, since mr. trump said these things in your case, can we use them in our case?"

simply, he said, "yes." this is routine, by the way. this is not hearsay. it is an exception to that rule. if the defendant says something, it can be adduced against him in trial. that's all this is. by the way, does it strengthen the hand of alvin bragg and his prosecutors in their hush money case? it does. it's more evidence. they can use it if they want. they can choose to ignore it if they want, but it is there for them if they believe they need it. my sense is that it will be helpful to them in proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury in manhattan. >> so let's talk about the hearing -- or the proceedings last night in d.c., chuck. i'll start with you. trump's lawyers once again talking about the first amendment. it's such a bad -- forgive me for my editorial here, but it's such a bad faith argument. everybody in the republican establishment now that is

saying, "well, yes, they don't like trump, but they're attacking him for first amendment," he set up false electors. in setting up false electors, his goal was -- and we have all the testimony from people who work for donald trump -- to take away the votes of people who voted in seven american states for president. wanted to take away their votes and replace electors that represented them with fake electors. it was a conspiracy. it was a lie. that's what he's being charged for. but talk about the protective order and the back and forth that last night showed. what's it mean? >>tective order? let's start with that for context. it's used to protect information. at the heart of it, we're protecting two other things, people is be -- people and process. these are routine in cases. i don't think i ever prosecuted

a case where i didn't have a discovery order and protective order. by the way, i never had an issue with it. the folks on the other side abided by it, and it streamlined the process. that's the key, mr. trump's attorneys don't want to help streamline the process. they want to argue against everything and anything. why not start with the protective order? all the government is seeking here is the knowledge that if they turn other stuff, which they must, to the defense as part of discovery, that that information, right, the processes and people that underlie that information will be protected as the case builds to trial. why do you want to protect that stuff? well, some of it is sensitive. some witnesses told the truth, some didn't. there is personally identifiable information in the discovery provided to the defense. you want to protect that, too. this is not a hard call. if you look at it through the prism of what the defense attorneys are trying to do, all

they are trying to do, joe, is disrupt. by the way, it seems to be working. normally, protective orders and discovery orders are signed by both parties and submitted to the judge, perhaps on the day of arraignment, if not soon thereafter. what is actually going on here is the defense attorneys have bought themselves a few days and another hearing to contest something that is normally never contested. because, typically, both sides, both parties have an interest in protecting information and protecting the process and protecting the people. that's only true on one side in this case. >> ken, i spoke to some folks in trump camp yesterday, and they pretty clearly admit they're trying to delay things. they see the south florida matter, the classified documents case is moving along slowly. they seemingly got an assist from that judge yesterday. in washington, that judge wants to seemingly move things along and move things along quickly. they're trying to slow things down. they also, of course, argue donald trump is not just a

defendant, he's running for president and needs to be able to make political arguments, the first amendment stuff we've covered extensively on this show, bad faith or no. give us your analysis on what happened yesterday. more than that, what should we expect between now and that deadline at the end of the week on this matter? >> jonathan, i agree with chuck, and i'll add to what he said. in terms of the delay, it looks like they bought themselves a week delay here. it was really interesting because what the special counsel last night asked the judge to do was simply to rule, just to impose the protective order that they believe should have been imposed. as chuck said, it is generally non-controversial. but the judge scheduled a hearing for friday, more time, more lawyer time over something that shouldn't be controversial. it was interesting to read the special counsel's rebuttal last night of trump's lawyers' attempt to craft a narrow

protective order. what they basically said is, look, what donald trump wants to do is try this case in the media. he wants to take all this secret discovery we're handing over, including very sensitive information, subpoenaed phone records, witness interviews, transcripts, and he wants to be able to make some of that public. they even pointed to the full ginsberg appearance by john lauro, one of trump's lawyers on the sunday shows, and said, you know, they hinted -- and they're right about this -- technically, if you read the local criminal rules in washington, d.c., you're not supposed to go on television and talk about the evidence in a case, but that's exactly what he said. they were saying, "judge, this is only the beginning. this is exactly what these guys want to do, so don't let them do it. impose our order." she didn't do that. she may ultimately do that, but she scheduled a hearing so they can argue about it. that's exactly what the trump lawyers want. they want to delay this. they're making the arguments that donald trump has a first a

amendment right to make public the evidence that the special counsel gathered. the special counsel is saying that's ridiculous, this is not to be aired out in the media. there is going to be a battle down the line, as to whether all these attacks donald trump is making against the prosecutor, against the judge, against witnesses, whether ultimately those can be tolerated or whether the judge, at some point, will have to try to regulate them, even though donald trump is running for president and that's really difficult. the way another judge in washington dealt with roger stone, remember, there was a gag order against roger stone after he put a target on a photo of a judge. we're going to come to that point, i predict, at some moment in this case but, again, it is a devilish problem for a federal judge dealing with a defendant who is running for president. >> right. or deal winning a defendant where the common understanding of the system and of fairness is that no man is above the law.

at some point, that's going to have to come to bear. nbc's ken dilanian and former u.s. attorney chuck rosenberg, thank you, both, very much for being on this morning. we are now in the second week of fulton county, georgia, district attorney fani willis' indictment decision window. she said around the first two weeks of august. security around the courthouse has increased, and so has the number of people who have received subpoenas to testify before a grand jury as part of the d.a.'s presentation to seek indictments. nbc news can confirm at least four more people received subpoenas. among them, former lieutenant governor geoff duncan. as we await final decision, "the wall street journal" is reporting it is likely we'll see racketeering charges against the former president of the united states. alexi mccammond, as we cover all of this, what stands out to you, especially with the fourth

indictment looming? >> well, to your point, mika, i mean, i think it's really revealing about what voters, but especially republican primary voters want, in not just their nominee but the future president. it's someone who is facing this tangled web of legal threats and folks around him who are now being called as witnesses, who have served as his lawyers and aides and assistants. we're seeing the way that he is trying to claim that he just sexually abused someonerape som is somehow better. polls are showing that republican voters continue to want someone like trump. it doesn't mean it'll be easy for him to win a general. as much as his team wants to delay and gum up the process, it is not going to help him, necessarily, in the long run. the other thing that i think is really important for the republican party, there are folks running for office right now who have to answer for trump's legal situations. i'm thinking of someone like the attorney general in kentucky who

is running for governor. at the first debate, he was asked about whether he was still proud to have donald trump's endorsement after the situation with stormy daniels came out. that's just one example of the number of republicans who will have to keep answering, not just for trump's behavior, but for the legality or potential criminality involved in what he is doing as this campaign goes on in this year and through 2024. >> richard haass, let's go down the list of our former party, members who have to, when they're standing on stage, "are you proud, do you still support?" are you proud of donald trump's endorsement, and do you still support him, despite the fact he was found liable of sexual assault in new york, and the judge said what he actually did, in the commonly used term, was that he raped e. jean carroll. he was charged and has his own people testifying against him for stealing nuclear secrets, for stealing secrets about

invading iran, stealing secrets about america's weaknesses milita militarily, that he is accused of something a security scheme for setting up fake electors and defrauding the united states government, taking away the rights of millions of americans in seven states to vote and to rig the election. i mean, they're having to ask these questions, and i don't know about you, but one thing that is really -- i found really disturbing over the past week or so is establishment republicans that claim to be anti-trump say, "well, i'm anti-trump, but this latest indictment on stealing the election, they're just going after him for the first amendment. why aren't they going after hunter biden?" these people know better. they know better, richard. it really -- i will say, i have despaired over the fact that people that i've known my entire life, adult life, are now

playing stupid, pretending this is about the first amendment and not a conspiracy to set up fake electors to steal seven states away from the rightful winner of the 2020 presidential election. how does america move forward when you have 40%, maybe 45% of americans who support a guy that steals nuclear secrets and tries to rig elections? >> well, it's the reason none of us should be senguin about american democracy, three years off of the 250th anniversary of the declaration of independence. one of our two major parties essentially no longer believes in institutions. it's essentially put the emphasis on a person and on causes rather than on principles or institutions. that's something the founders never anticipated. and -- >> can i correct you, richard? you said on a person and on causes. there's no cause.

donald trump, there's no cause for donald trump. it's all about donald trump. >> it's his personal -- >> that's what i'm saying. >> that's what is so crazy about this, it's not even about causes. it's about this one person and this cult. >> don't disagree. it is an angry, populist movement. trump is quite clever, quite brilliant in some ways, at reading what everyone is feeling angry about. it's the politics of aggrievement. they're prepared to tear down the temple. you don't hear anyone talk about what they'd put in its place. they'd tear down justice, the rest, and the energy department. that's another battlefield, if you will. they'd strip away all the funding the united states does in renewable energy. again, there's a kind of, again, tear down the temple. we know what we're against. we're not going to do anything that the elitists, that the establishment wants. this has become a truly

destructive movement. if it ever were to succeed, you are confident that he would fail. i hope you're right. but if it were to be the opposite, if these people were to gain power again, i really do think, for only the second time in american history, we would put our collective fate at risk. >> well, you know -- >> absolutely. >> -- it is the risk that he might succeed, whether it's the 1% or 10% or 35% or 45% risk, the consequences of losing, any candidate losing to donald trump and him becoming the next president catastrophic for american democracy, if you believe what donald trump says. >> right. >> if you believe what donald trump says, not what others say, what donald trump says and what just about everybody that ever worked for him in the first term

says. because most of the people who worked for him in the first term that he selected, that he appointed, say he's not fit to be president of the united states. if you believe them, if you believe trumpers, if you believe the trumpers in the indictment, a second trump term would be devastating to american democracy. and here we are, charlie sykes, i will admit that even after donald trump got elected, i thought, i thought america would come to its senses. i thought republicans, my former party, would come to its senses. i remember steve bannon proudly bragging that he was a lennonist, and as a lennonist, he wanted to tear down government. tear down all the institutions that lifted us up. tear down all the institutions that created the american

century. tear down all the institutions that fed and freed more people than any other country in the history of mankind. that's what he wanted to do. i was like, oh, whatever. that's where we are right now. you have republican candidates saying they're going to abolish the fbi, defund it and abolish it, they're going to tear down the justice department, tear down institutions. they're going to tear down universities. they're going to do all the things that we conservatives supposedly feared during the 1960s from the radicals on the far left. they're actually closer to doing it than the hippies ever were. >> you know, this is not trump derangement syndrome. this is what they are saying that they want to do. >> this is what they say. >> they have made it very clear. this is steve bannon's agenda right now. i think that is an interesting point. he said, you know, "i want to burn it all down, tear it all

down." well, what did republicans all around the country run on? i don't think it is too alarmist to say that this would be the end of the department of justice's independence, and that would be just part of it. you know, it's always difficult and dangerous to believe anything that donald trump says, but i actually do think that i believe when donald trump says he intends to do this, when he says, "i am your retribution," he means it. doesn't mean he'll accomplish everything, but he will try. think about what that will be like. trump 2.0 will be exponentially worse than trump 1.0. you would not have many of the adults in the room that stopped the worst abuses. and i think this is one of those moments where we need to take him at his word and the rest of his party at his word. because we're at a point now where it's not just steve bannon who is ranting, you know, ranting at the moon. he has brought much of the

republican party itself along with it. the base wants this. there's no indication that the republican establishment would be a check against him if he tried to do this in a second term. >> zero. >> they're along for the ride, charlie. that's the thing. since the latest indictment -- >> they're so scared of him. >> -- the number of people that claimed to be anti-trump all along are saying, "well, i'm anti-trump, but this latest set of indictments, why, they're just indicting him for the first amendment." which, again, you can say what you want to say, charlie, but let's be clear to our friends in the republican establishment that keep trying to lie to the american people and anyone that they're communicating with, setting up a conspiracy to have fake electors steal the votes away from millions of millions of millions of americans in the seven key states, like

wisconsin, like -- >> right. >> charlie, that's not the first amendment. >> no. >> that's a conspiracy. >> no. and they're willing, you know, to put on the cloak, looking like it's about principle. it's not about principle. it was a conspiracy to overturn the election. i think we do need to go back to specifically what we're talking about. they wanted to, and member of congress went along with this. the texas attorney general went along with this. they would have taken all the votes of folks like me in wisconsin and fraudulently thrown them out, saying, "we're not going to count them." in pennsylvania, in other swing states, georgia. to say that, somehow, this is about the first amendment misses fundamentally. i think this is the dishonesty of the anti anti-trump wing of the party, which is, they will say that they recognize what a threat he poses to american

democracy. when the push comes to shove, they will defend him. they will come up with these disingenuous rationalizations. >> every time. >> every time. and you know what is going to happen. they will rail against him until it's obvious that he is the nominee, then they will do what they did back in 2016 and in 2020. they will rally around him, and this will be, not just donald trump's political party, it will be the steve bannon political party that aims to tear down, burn down all of these institutions, all of these bulwarks of our constitutional system. >> you know, i have a lot of people over the past week saying, "you know, once again, we need to understand him." >> huh-uh. >> we need to talk to him and understand about this first amendment. we need to understand why they think the doj is -- no, we don't. i'm the first to tell you that we need to understand what's driving trumpism, but i understand completely when they

start lying about the first amendment. i understand. you know, it's the first amendment now, which is a lie. before, it was hunter biden's laptop, which was a lie. you go down the list. they create false equivalencies. as we said, if hunter biden did something wrong with his laptop or a wiffle ball bat, he should go to jail. we're cool with that. to do a moral equivalency between hunter biden's laptop and stealing nuclear secrets, hunter biden's laptop and stealing all the votes from wisconsin, hunter biden's laptop and stealing all the votes from pennsylvania, michigan, arizona, georgia, from millions and millions and millions of americans, don't play that false equivalency game with me or with reverend al. reverend al, final word here. >> i think the final word is that we have got to be committed to the basic institutions that make this country what it is. we can debate it.

we can argue our various political views. but there are some things that should be improvable, and that is protecting the democratic process and the law. >> amen. >> and the law. let us not get away from that. >> amen. >> charlie sykes, thank you so much for being on this morning. and "the washington post"'s alexi mccann mccammond, what are you following today? >> the legal drama and news from ron desantis, thanks to the great dasha burns. >> we'll have that still ahead on "morning joe." more on the new polling that shows donald trump's latest indictment has had little impact on support from republican voters. chris matthews will join us with his take on the new numbers. plus, as alexi mentioned, after repeatedly dodging the question, 2024 white house hopeful ron desantis acknowledges trump's 2020 election loss.

but it came with a caveat. we'll play what he had to say in an nbc news exclusive interview. and someone who is working to see trump lose again, former new jersey governor and presidential candidate chris christie is our guest in a few minutes. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. >> i am concerned in a second term he will be off the hook. there will be no way of controlling him, and he will also surround himself with yes men. when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis takes you off course. put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when i wanted to see results fast, rinvoq delivered rapid symptom relief

and helped leave bathroom urgency behind. check. when uc tried to slow me down... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc caused damage rinvoq came through by visibly repairing my colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief... lasting steroid-free remission... ...and the chance to visibly repair the colon lining. check, check, and check. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal; cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least 1 heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. put uc in check and keep it there with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq and learn how abbvie can help you save.

the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. it's lying dormant, waiting... and could reactivate. shingles strikes as a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. and it could wake at any time. think you're not at risk for shingles? it's time to wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention.

you founded your kayak company because you love the ocean- not spreadsheets. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

the 1-0, swing and a drive.

socked down the line. and that ball is gone! and the red sox win the game! >> it's a walk-off grand slam by pablo reyes, lifted the red sox over the royals last night. two pitches before the big hit, the royals manager was ejected for arguing a check swing call on a 3-2 pitch with two outs in the bottom of the ninth inning. instead of an inning-ending strikeout, the walk-off home run gave the red sox a 6-2 win. jonathan lemire, yeah, whatever. i mean, i'm just -- hold on. oh, my goodness. yeah, he's got a reason to argue about that one. so i'm not talking about this team post trade deadline, you know. they had a shot last year. >> kind of stuck on the outfits. >> the team collapsed. it's happened again post trade

deadline. we do absolutely nothing. chaim bloom does nothing when we need so this things, pitching. same thing happened. i'll let you go ahead and make your perfunctory remarks about how great we are in the yellow uniforms and how bad the yankees are. go ahead. >> well, i'll start with also the negative. i mean, it is inexcusable. they came out of the trading deadline without any pitching help. right now, through the five-man rotation, twice, two out of five, we're using openers, relievers. they don't have a major league roster, major league caliber pitching staff, they don't. yes, there is good news. it was a fun walk-off win. they caught a break on the third strike, to be sure. 22-4 in recent years in the yellow jerseys. i have warmed to them. the red sox are going nowhere.

richard haass, not to rub it in, but neither are your yankees. the sox have passed you guys by a half game in the standings. we're both in trouble. we're both falling out of the wild card race. and yesterday, yankees manager aaron boone, well, he took issue, as well, with a call, ed strike call. it is a strike. but boone gives it to the umpire, diaz. in fact, as we'll see here, even acts out the strike call with a pretty good impression of the umpire. richard, take it away. have you thrown in the towel like you and i have on the red sox? pretty good. >> alas, i have, jonathan. this is too painful. aaron boone has basically lost control of the team. i think the yankees have essentially given up this year. so many dugout issues, people not running out hits, the alcoholism issue and so forth. this has become one of the worst teams that money can buy.

it's just painful to see. it's not even the process of rebuilding. that'd be one thing. i could take that. this is more just the process of collapsing. it's just very hard to watch. >> my. >> you know, it is. it is fascinating. i'm not rubbing it in, richard, at all. i'm really not. but the yankees have gone the opposite way of "money ball" in the 21st century, actually, the mid '70s. one world series to show for it this century, and it keeps getting worse and worse. i think we're all starting to understand that unless you're in a desperate position like the red sox, where every one of your pitchers it seems has gotten hurt, unless you have to fill those gaps for a run, you build a farm team from the ground up or you don't win world series. you can't go out and spend tens of millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars on players and expect to win world series, unless, of course, you're boston and we take

ohtani. richard, from the bottom up, right? >> the core has to be from the bottom up. you can add to complement that. that's how the best teams in really every sport do it. the best basketball teams, you build it up through the draft, the core, and add a few positions and so forth. the yankees, they don't seem to have the patience. they used to have the best farm system, and now they have one of the worst. what has gone wrong with this team? i think you need an overhaul, manager, front office. it's just not working. >> it is miserable, i have to admit. you look at the lineup, and three-quarters of the guy, you're like, come on, they're not yankees. i say that as a red sox fan looking. most of them just aren't up to the standard of wearing the pinstripes. by the way, while we stay in the a.l. least, because we know everyone across america wants to talk one division of baseball, there is controversial around the feel-good team of the year, the baltimore orioles, perennial

last-place finishers. the controversial is in the broadcast boost. play by play announcer kevin brown has reportedly been removed from broadcast after making reference to the o's losing record at tropicana bay in previous years. here are the comments in question from a pre-game broadcast last month that got him booted. >> this has been maybe the toughest ballpark to play in, but the orioles have a chance to do something special today. they already clinched at least a split in the series, winning two of the first three. they could pick up a win behind tyler wells today. it's been a minute. the orioles split a two-gamer with the rays in june. they had lost their last 15 series here at tropicana field. >> according to the website, awful announcing and "the athletic," ownership took issue with the analysis.

it's just the plain facts! the orioles sucked at the trop. everybody knows it. but they actually took issue with him telling the truth, and brown hasn't been on an orioles broadcast since then. the o's are disputing that brown was suspended at all. jonathan lemire, this is just absolutely ridiculous. >> no, and the reporting shows that that stat that he read, again, it's not analysis, it is simply a statistic, was, a, in the orioles media guide that every reporter at the grand was handed and, b, as we just showed, it was in a graphic. the broadcast on masn put it up. he was simply reading what was there. orioles, the orioles have been a great story this year. we should note, the fan base there has been pretty unhappy with ownership, the angelos family for quite some time, and this looks like a moment where they're being thin skinned. it is a distraction from what has been a wonderful story to this point. >> boy, you talk about a farm

system. jack tells me they have something like 8 of the top 100 prospects coming up. the o's, man, they're built for the long term. hopefully they'll put this behind them. up next, presidential candidate and former new jersey governor chris christie joins "morning joe." we'll discuss his surprise trip to ukraine last week and his meeting with ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy. as well as the latest on his campaign for the white house. "morning joe" will be right back.

what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ age is just a number, and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health versus 16 grams in ensure® high protein. boost® high protein. now available in cinnabon® bakery-inspired flavor. learn more at boost.com/tv ♪ (upbeat music) ♪

( ♪♪ ) constant contact's advanced automation lets you send the right message at the right time, every time. ( ♪♪ ) constant contact. helping the small stand tall. first, there's an idea and you do something about it for the first time with godaddy. then before you know it, (it is a life changer...) you make your first sale. small business first. never stopped coming. (we did it!) and you have a partner that always puts you first way. (no way!) start today at godaddy.com.

every business that's why comcast business de is launching theal. mobile made free event. with our business internet, new and existing customers can get one year of unlimited mobile for free. it's our best internet. powered by the next generation 10g network and with 99.9% reliability. plus one line of free mobile for an entire year. it's the mobile made free event-happening now. get started for just $49.99 a month. plus, ask how to get one free line of unlimited mobile. comcast business, powering possibilities.

what is the purpose of the u.s. military? i'll tell you what it is. it is to protect americans on american soil, first and foremost. not to aimlessly fight some random war that's, arguably, a repayment for a private bribe, that a family member of the united states was given. $5 million from burisma. >> come on! >> oh, my god. >> man, oh, my god. >> it's just --

>> and the ghosts of a thousand warriors and republican presidents and reagan and eisenhower and everybody who fought to keep europe free from russian aggression rise from their graves. >> yeah. that was candidate for presidency. >> come on, man. >> republican. >> he knows better. >> vivek ramaswamy baselessly suggesting over the weekend -- >> what is he doing? >> -- that the united states aid for ukraine is a repayment for an alleged bribe between members of the biden family and a ukraine energy company. >> yeah, that's why all the european countries suffered this past winter, because they wanted to help hunter biden. seriously? the fevered swamps are, like, wading into the next. let's bring in presidential candidate chris christie, just came back from ukraine where he

met with volodymyr zelenskyy. g i'm soupsupposed to call you. i spoke with vivek early on. seems like a smart guy. maybe i'll have him on the show, but his statements keep getting more bizarre by the day. he talks about defunding the fbi. he says stupid stuff like this. you know, it's more, i think, a reflection on him, of course, but it's also a reflection on just how crazy these republican candidates think they have to be to win the votes of the base. what is going on out there? he's having to say this. by the way, for the record, this is a guy that i don't think voted republican until 2020, and he wrote in his book that donald trump behaved abhorrently after january the 6th.

that's all changed in a couple of years. >> well, good morning, joe and mika. good to see ya. look, i don't take the stuff that he says seriously. you know, the fact is, this is a very, very ambitious guy who is basically playing the role, so far in this race, as donald trump's wingman. you know, that's his call. i don't think -- >> governor, isn't he hearing that from the audience? you and i both know, we've seen politicians. instead of telling people what they need to hear, they're a mirror of the audience. he's hearing it, right? >> certainly from some elements of the party, but i don't think it is a majority of the party. it has not been my experience. i'm heading to new hampshire later today. i could tell you the last time i was up there a couple weeks ago, we heard a lot of support, two-thirds of the audience that i had was very supportive of my position on ukraine, which is

that we haven't done enough. while, you know, i think president biden has certainly done better than president trump, and president trump did better than president obama on this, we still have more to go. having gone over there now, joe and mika, and watched for myself what the folks in ukraine are going through, what they've already gone through, the idea that this is something that america does not have a vital interest in, to me, is just absurd. not only because we should be standing up against a barbaric russian administration that is doing things like the gouging of eyes, the cutting off of ears of men in ukraine before they tie their hands behind their back and shoot them in the back of the head. then go into the homes where they've taken these men out of and rape the women. nearly 20,000 children have been

kidnapped from ukraine, brought to russia to be separated from their families, programmed to be anti-ukrainian, and it's a work for the russian federation. i met with some of those parents, guys, and i can tell you, as a dad, it's unimaginable to me that your child would be yanked away from you. you don't know whether they're dead or alive, whether they're being cared for or abused. these are the things that vladimir putin is imposing upon ukraine, and this is the guy that donald trump says is brilliant and a great leader. well, that's brilliant leadership? you can keep it. it is, in fact, barbarism. >> yeah, it's barbarism. he's also set back his country probably a generation, exposed his military as being extraordinarily weak. so make the argument, if you will, about why the united states needs to continue

supporting ukraine. and you talked about the human rights element of it. geopolitically, what does the world look like if the united states and europe, nato, let vladimir putin just take over a sovereign country that we actually had treaties with, saying we'd protect their territorial integrity, what happens? what happens next in taiwan? then what happens next in the middle east with iran? what happens if we send a message to the world, "hey, we're going to let the worst regimes on the planet invade countries next door to them"? >> well, you started to answer the question for me. i'll finish the answer. russia/ukraine is the undercard. it's the undercard. because the chinese who are funding the russian aggression against ukraine are watching. if we cut and run on ukraine, the next fight is going to be in taiwan. and there, it's not going to be us just supplying weapons.

it's going to be american men and women who are going to be sent three-quarters of the way around the world to fight there. they're going to have to fight there not only to protect the freedom of taiwan, but for those who don't care about that, be practical. two-thirds of the world's semiconductors are produced in taiwan. everything that runs our cell phones, our computers, our automobiles, and just about every other element of american life now will be controlled by the chinese communist party. i don't think that's a place that we want to be in for a practical economic or technological perspective. and when you look at what's happening here, then go to the middle east. the iranians are obviously coordinating with the russians and the chinese to provide more sophisticated weaponry to the russians, and the folks in the middle east, whether it's the saudis, the emiratis, the qatar

qataris are going to look and say, it's not worth it being friends with the united states. we might as well cut the best deal we can with the chinese. when things get tough, americans run the other way. one of the points of my campaign, guys, is that america has never been great by being small. right now, in elements of my party and in the elements -- some elements of the democratic party, we are arguing over what i consider to be small issues. they're not unimportant, but they're small. the big issues that we have to deal with, and one of them is american leadership around the world. those issues are whatbigger, st richer, freer. and every time, going back to 1776, the civil war, world war ii, and the cold war ending in reagan era, we had presidents who said, "we're going to make sacrifices, and we're going to go big." we always came out on top.

we had a country after the revolution. we had a united country free of slavery after the civil war. >> right. >> we protected a free europe and a free rest of the world that became the leader of the world after world war ii. and reagan in nine years took down the berlin wall, and in ten years, eliminated the soviet union from the face of the earth. >> right. >> that's the kind of thing we should be doing. the ukraine fight, joe, is the undercard. if we do it right, there won't be other fighting. >> i completely agree. >> if we do it wrong, not going to be good. >> i completely agree. and if biden had not worked with republican allies, strong republican allies in the senate especially, and with strong allies in nato to do this, then, of course, you would have some of the same people saying the reason taiwan was invaded by china is because the united states didn't defend ukraine.hy.

mika, it is like when you hear governor christie say we need to focus on big things instead of some of these small distractions, it is almost like he is saying america's standing in the world, america's role in the world is more important than budlight or mickey mouse. >> or woke whatever that means for republicans who just use the word randomly. >> yeah. >> up and down in elections. >> i think the yankees are woke. i said it. you throw it around whatever you'd like. >> chris, do you -- it's sort of leading, but i want to get to how we got here. in the three indictments against him, the ongoing legal suits, the potential fourth indictment coming his way, is it your belief that donald trump probably committed a crime or two? >> oh yeah, he certainly committed crimes in the classified documents case. >> okay. >> i believe the keeping of the documents was a crime, and the obstruction was clearly a crime. now, the superseding indictment

where he was ordering folks allegedly to delete the surveillance cameras. you know, it reminded me of what, like, maybe costello means the corleones looks like. >> it's a caper. >> walt nauta is frado, down there to eliminate the server. i mean, this is both criminal and completely stupid. which is the combination donald trump is bringing to the country. it's the combination of criminality and abject stupidity, both in terms of his comments and in terms of his actions. now, when you look at the january 6th stuff, look, you guys know, i did this work for seven years at the fifth largest office in the country, in new jersey. it's an aggressive indictment, the january 6th indictment. i think there are more legal issues raised in the january 6th

indictment than in the classified documents indictment, which i think is a pretty clean, clear and not really assailable from a legal perspective. there are going to be interesting legal judgments to make in the january 6th case. but my point to folks in our party is, yes, we should care about those things. the judges should make these decisions and decide what's legal and what isn't for the prosecutors to be doing. but the bigger question for us is the underlying conduct. whether you believe what donald trump did on january 6th was criminal or not, it was immoral. he invited these people to washington, d.c., telling them it was going to be wild. he then lied to them in front of them that day, saying the election had been stolen, when it hadn't, and lied to them, saying it was all up to mike pence and mike pence could reverse this if he wanted to, if he had the courage to. then he told them to march up to capitol hill, and that he'd march with them. now, you guys have known him for almost as long as i have.

you know that if there was a risk that donald trump was going to break a fingernail, he wasn't going up to capitol hill. so he went back into the safety of the white house, sent these people up there to try to intimidate mike pence and members of congress into not doing their job and certifying the election. to me, the capper was even worse. he sat in that dining room off the oval office eating his well done hamburger and watching on tv as people laid waste to the united states capitol. and he did nothing. despite even many members of his own family urging him to get out there on tv and put an end to it. i don't know, guys, if that makes you criminally responsible, but i know it makes you morally responsible. and is that the kind of person we want sitting behind the desk in the oval office? >> that's a great -- >> i'm running because the answer to that is no, absolutely not. >> that's a -- that's a great question, and i agree.

my follow-up question, and it is meant with a real curiosity. from having served in the white house, covering it, we're all sort of watching what has happened to our country, how do you think we got here? what was it about him and the way he worked it in the white house from your perspective that gets us to a point where, right now, it's almost standing out that we can have an honest conversation about january 6th and the fact that this man probably committed multiple crimes, and, yet, you talk to republican leaders, you talk to kevin mccarthy, and it's honestly like a jordan klepper clip. it is honestly like you're talking to someone who is like, "well, but yeah, but you know, hillary clinton did that." what has happened that, actually, there are so many republicans that you have to go talk to people in new hampshire and in other places that trump won, and you have to almost beg them to be reasonable and to

remember, like, what a moral compass looks like. what happened? >> by the way, governor, let me just add, mika, though she didn't say it in the question, mika believes this didn't start with donald trump. >> oh, right. >> this was a 25-year progression. >> but i want to know what made it fast forward in the white house. >> what accelerated this? >> i think it is important to note that a lot of folks have felt, over time, over the last number of administrations, that they've been ignored and left out and mistreated. so there was an anger in the country that donald trump tapped into in 2016. that was the creation of both parties. we need to acknowledge that and understand that, when things went sideways in iraq under george w. bush, there were people who were very angry, upset, and felt, you know, disenfranchised by that. when barack obama said, you know, if you can -- if you like

your doctor, keep them. if you like the health plan, keep them. that turned out to be untrue. that made people even more cynical toward their government. donald trump raised the cynicism to an entirely new level during his presidency. now, joe biden, by promising the country when he was running that he was going to be a moderate who was going to govern from the middle and bring people together, and a lot of people, a lot of republicans who were discontent with trump, and a lot of independents who had voted for trump in 2016 went ahead and took a chance on biden, and they're now disillusioned and the polls show that. they're disillusioned with president biden. first, it is important to know that there are a number of people who contributed mightily to this problem in addition to donald trump. the problem with donald trump is that he knows no sense of history, has no intellectual curiosity, and doesn't care whether he puts himself before

the country at every turn. so when he sits now, mika, and says, "well, i'm getting indicted for you," it is so pate absurd. not only because the things he's getting indicted for are things he chose to do, has nothing to do with protecting the american people. how are the people protected by him keeping documents at mar-a-lago? it was there just for him to continue to show off for people who were on the back patio at mar-a-lago, by showing them things he shouldn't have been showing them. so he's not putting america first. that's the great irony of this campaign. donald trump saying he is going to put america first. he has not put america first. he's put donald trump first. >> always. >> i do believe, you know, there was a poll that just came out this weekend in new hampshire which has donald trump now down to 34% in new hampshire. now, ron desantis is at 13%. i'm at 11%.

we're still behind him, but he is down 14 points from where he was. when you think about it, guys, that means that two-thirds of the republicans polled in new hampshire are against donald trump. the incumbent president who, you know, for practical purposes, he is the incumbent in the republican party, two-thirds are against him. so i do not share the skepticism and the fatalism that everybody else does. i believe his conduct can -- >> if i can interrupt here -- >> -- will make a difference. >> if i can interrupt here to say, and pass it to reverend al, i've seen quite a few polls, rev and al, that had governor christie in double digits in new hampshire. it is early, but there are a lot of people that have been running for president for quite some time that have been more high profile than governor christie before his launch that are still at 2% or 3%. so we still have a race in new hampshire. i think he's right, i think we still have a race -- and you

know this better than anybody -- presidential campaigns are very fluid. >> very fluid. let me ask you a two-part question, governor. you and i may disagree on many, if not most, issues, but we always respected the institutions of government and what the country said it stood for, even if we didn't believe it lived up to it. when you see a sitting president undermine an election, which is undermining american democracy, i mean, no president in the history of this country ever did that. i mean, the founding fathers fought a revolution against great britain, not against the united states. he's telling the vice president to undermine the very tenants of what the country was founded for, democracy. how do you reconcile that members of your party, and some of your opponents, refuse to attack a man who is trying to undermine what the country stands for? it is un-american, aside from

being criminal and immoral, it's un-american in terms of the concept. secondly, how do we deal with the question of race in your party, of reaching out to people in the black community and other communities that feel isolated, when you have a candidate trying to erase black history in florida. the people that are against affirmative action, less known reparation. you as governor, you and i debated, disagree, but you were never disagreeable. there was a firm democrat that got along with you. >> yeah. >> you came and sat in whitney houston's funeral, the great pop star, and people got concerned, he's sitting there with al sharpton and jesse jackson. you never were disagreeable, even though you and i would fight. both of us accused as being loud mouths on both sides. i don't know where they got that idea. >> me neither. >> how do you deal with race,

and how do you deal with the undermining of american institutions? >> let's start with your first part. that was the breaking point for me, al. election night 2020, when i was on abc doing commentary. when donald trump came out at 2:30 in the morning and said the election had been stolen, when i knew he had absolutely no factual basis to make that judgment and it was just all ego, the thing that affected me the most was, here's a man, president of the united states, standing behind the seal of the president in the east room of the white house, telling the american people the election had been stolen, when he knew that was -- could not be supported at that moment. people are watching that, as you know, and believing that the president must know something i don't know. that disease still exists today. so many people in my party believe the election was stolen. i cannot reconcile, nor am i trying to reconcile, either what he did or what others in my party are doing now by not speaking out against it. i don't think leaders interpret polls or follow them, al, i

think they change them. my campaign is going out there and telling the truth. saying to people, "look, it didn't happen. it didn't happen. his ego was damaged, and he couldn't deal with the exact he was the only person, outside of the state of delaware, to ever lose to joe biden." it must be a killing thing to you because joe biden ran for president three times and lost all three times. but the truth is the truth. when you put yourself out there as a candidate, you have to be willing to accept the results, whether you like it or not. he wouldn't. not only did he not accept it, but he damaged the country in the process of not accepting it. on the issue of race, as you know, new jersey is the mostett. as the governor, i was proud to be the governor of a state like that where i wanted to campaign and work in places where republicans normally didn't. you know, you mentioned cory booker, as well. booker and i worked incredibly

closely when he was mayor of newark to reform schools there, to reform the police department, which needed help. we did the same thing in camden. we fired the entire police department in the city, as you know, which was the most dangerous city in america. yet, 95% of color. we fired the entire police department because we said, you're incompetent. what's happened in the ten years since? murder rate in camden, the most dangerous city in america, is down 75%. when the george floyd incident occurred, there was no violence in the city of camden. in fact, the protest march was led by a pastor of the largest baptist church in camden and by the polish american white police chief, together marching against what happened to george floyd. what i did as governor was to say, i don't care what your color is. i care what your ideas are. as you mentioned, when you and i disagreed, i didn't disagree because you were an african-american. i thought you were wrong. you did the same with me. that's why -- >> and you put some of my

friends in jail, but we'll leave that alone. >> only because they deserved it, al. they earned it. you know, that's why when i ran for re-election, i got 29% of the african-american vote. for a republican, that's rarefied air. people would ask me why, and i said, because i listened to folks. even when i disagree with them, i respect them. what ron desantis and what's going on in florida, saying there's, you know, some benefit to slavery, look, if i have to choose between in my party on this issue siding with ron desantis and donald trump or with tim scott and byron donalds, i'll take timdonalds. i think they understand the history of slavery and what it was a hell of a lot better than those guys do and better than i do. i'd rather listen to tim. tim is not, as you know, an inflammatory guy. for tim to speak out as clearly as he did against this tells me how offensive it is for me

historically, but more importantly, to tim, byron and members of the african-american community, how offensive it is morally, to be saying these things. so i think you have to tell the truth. look, are there going to be people in my party who don't support me for that reason? absolutely. but i'm not looking to play to their weaknesses. i'm looking to play to america's strength. >> governor, when you were in ukraine, you were there at the 18 month point of the war. the counteroffensive, quite honestly, is a slog. there's no breakthroughs. it was a powerful piece in "the new york times" over the weekend by roger cohen about putin's forever war. he is essentially gearing russian society to fight this war, quote, unquote, for as long as it takes. even if the biden administration were a bit quicker with f-16s or whatever, i don't know any serious military observer who thinks it would lead to a breakthrough. you can have a situation where imagine you were to win. you're the next president of the united states. what would you do?

do you basically say three more years, five more years? do we continue to say it's up to ukraine to decide what's good enough? does the united states at some point work with ukraine and say, hey, we need to find some way of bringing this war to end? in part, we have to focus, among other things, on china and other issues with the world. what is your sense of what do we do if ukraine cannot win this war militarily? >> well, from what i heard and saw this past week, richard, i'm not nearly as skeptical as some of the experts are, for this reason. i don't think most people know that right now on the average day in ukraine, russia is shooting 56,000 rounds of artillery into ukraine, and ukraine is responding with about 6,500 rounds of artillery. there are no f-16s, and the de-mining effort, as they're trying to do a counteroffensive and the russians have mined all the land they've taken, is going to take time and needs more

american support and technology to do that. we haven't sent f-16s, which i think has been an enormous mistake. so i do think that what is in america's interest is to give ukraine not just enough not to lose but enough to try to win. now, if we give them everything and in the amountscompetitive, we're not going to match russian artillery, nor should we try to, but we have to do better than 11-1. if the ukrainians can't take back their disputed land if we do that, most if not all of it, you're right, we have tosit down with the allies. we say, it's not fair they have some of your land, but we have to put an end to this because it is not in anyone's interest to continue to have the slaughter of innocent civilians and soldiers in this war. we're not there yet.

i think zelenskyy made the argument to me, i think pretty effectively, that if you give me everything that i need, and i don't succeed, that's one thing. but if i'm getting outgunned 11-1 on artillery, and if i don't have f-16s to help even out the air warfare, then i got at least one hand tied behind my back. i think to make a judgment to stop them would be the wrong judgment to make. >> republican presidential candidate chris christie, thank you very much for coming back on "morning joe." always good to see you. >> great to be back, mika. thanks for having me. i know you were the one who suggested this spot, and i can't thank you enough for persuaing joe to bring me on the show. i cannot. it's fabulous. >> we'll get there. >> always you in my corner, i love it. >> it's us. >> you got it, baby, right here. >> say hi to mary pat.

still ahead on "morning joe," after years of ambiguous answers, ron desantis definitively says donald trump lost the 2020 election. we're going to play that new sound for you and his caveat to it all. plus, in a new piece for "the atlantic," former secretary of state hillary clinton takes a look at how american democracy became so susceptible to a would-be strongman. it is entitled, "the weaponization of loneliness." we'll read from that next. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back.

(pensive music) (footsteps crunching) (pensive music) (birds tweeting) (pensive music) (broom sweeping) - [narrator] one in five children worldwide are faced with the reality of living without food. no family dinners, no special treats, no full bellies.

all around the world, parents are struggling to feed their children. toddlers are suffering from acute malnutrition, which stunts their growth. kids are forced to drop out of school so they can help support their families. covid, conflict, inflation and climate have ignited the worst famine in our lifetime. and we're fed up. fed up with the fact that hunger robs children of their childhood. fed up with the lack of progress. fed up with the injustice. help us brighten the lives of children all over the world by visiting getfedupnow.org. for as little as $10 a month, you can join save the children as we support children and families in desperate need of our help. now is the time to get fed up and give back. when you join the cause, your $10 monthly donation can help communities in need of life-saving treatments and nutrients, prevent children from dropping out of school. support our work with communities and governments to help children go from short-term surviving

to long-term thriving. and now thanks to special government grants, every dollar you give before december 31st can multiply up to 10 times the impact. that means more food, water, medicine and help for kids around the world. you'll also receive a free tote bag to share your support for children in need. childhood without food is unimaginable. get fed up. call us now or visit getfedupnow.org today. i'm jayson. i'm living with hiv and i'm on cabenuva. it helps keep me undetectable. for adults who are undetectable, cabenuva is the only complete, long-acting hiv treatment you can get every other month. cabenuva is two injections,

given by my healthcare provider, every other month. it's really nice not to have to rush home and take a daily hiv pill. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or if you taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions post-injection reactions, liver problems, and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away. tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection-site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. ready to treat your hiv in a different way? ask your doctor about every-other-month cabenuva. every other month, and i'm good to go. so you recently said the election is what it is. the theories put out did not

prove to be true. can we put this to bed so you don't have to be asked about this a million more times? yes or no, did donald trump lose the 2020 election? >> whoever puts their hand on the bible on january 20th every four years is the winner. >> but, respectfully, you did not clearly answer that question. if you can't give a yes or no on whether or not trump lost, then how can -- >> of course he lost. >> trump lost the 2020 election? >> of course. joe biden is the president. but the issue is, i think what people in the media and elsewhere, they want to act like, somehow, this was just like the perfect election. so i don't think it was a good-run election, but i also think republicans didn't fight back. you've got to fight back when that is happening. >> thank you. >> again, i don't want to belabor the point, but it's not the people in the media, ronnie, who are saying that this was a perfectly run election.

it was a trumper. it was, again, just like all the indictments, just like the january 6th hearing, it was trumpers who actually were saying all of these things about donald trump. as it pertains to the 2020 election, donald trump's own hand-picked appointed cybersecurity chief, and the department of homeland security said it was the cleanest run election in american history. a trumper said it was the cleanest run election in american history. again, all of these, all of these statements, all of these pushbacks, "oh, you people in the media." no, it's not us people in the media. i know that makes you feel like somehow more adequate. >> gives you someone to blame.

>> less empty in your soul. but this all comes from inside the house, all donald trump supporters. let's bring in the editor in chief of "the atlantic," jeffrey goldberg. he is the moderator of "washington week" with "the atlantic." jeffrey, thank you for being with us. ron desantis admits that -- >> donald trump lost. >> -- donald trump lost the election. but i must say, over the past week or so, i'm finding more and more republican establishment types going, "oh, this is a free speech question," and how horrible the justice department is out of control. are we actually losing ground in this country, even more with people who used to stand up to donald trump, who are now sort of caving in to the worth instincts of their party on its face? >> i mean, i don't think i can

judge that across the country. i will say that every time we're surprised that people haven't abandoned the trump ship, you know, each time something -- what's the polite word we use -- unprecedented happens, we expect, this is going to be the thing that causes the breakdown, the mass, sudden abandonment of donald trump. then it just doesn't happen. so i don't know which way the trend is going, but it doesn't seem to be going in the direction of everybody going -- in the chris christie style, "enough already." >> yeah. >> the most amazing thing to me, the most amazing statement was not the ments of donald trump after the indictment, it was ron desantis talking about slitting the throats, slitting the throats of government employees. >> yeah. >> if he is elected. i mean, this means that the sort of virus, that language virus,

that extremist language virus has jumped from, okay, mar-a-lago, where we understand where it lives, it's moving through the party, moving through society in a very dangerous way. that was the most shocking thing this week. >> yeah. when asked what he was going to do with bureaucracy, for those who don't know what jeffrey is talking about. >> quote, unquote, he was going to slip the throat of the deep state. >> yeah. how was he going to control this deep state in new hampshire? he said from day one, he is going to start slitting throats. >> who talks this way? >> of bureaucrats. well, you know, fascists talk this way. i mean, you look at the language. at some point, you know, we have all of these polite debates over and over again about whether donald trump is fascist or leading a fascist movement. at some point, come on, when somebody tells you who they are, you have to believe them. the language, the violence around the language, of course it started in 2015 and 2016 with donald trump, but it has

continued with this party. you know, members of congress punting out a reporter for asking questions about health care, and donald trump saluting them. charlottesville. >> good people on both sides. >> you just keep going through it all. we've now gotten to a point where a challenger of donald trump is saying he is going to curb the size of bureaucracy by splitting throats on day one. this is a part of the interview where, usually, somebody will ask, jeffrey, "what's happened so the state of our politics has declined to such a" -- but, no, i'm not asking that. i'm asking, how the hell did this happen to the republican party? how did we get here? >> i'm supposed to answer that question? >> you followed politics for quite some time.

seems to be -- >> i don't know. >> how about this, it seems to be accelerating, doesn't it. >> it's the great mystery, right? actually, maybe it's not a mystery. what you're talking about is just a lack of character. and we've talked about this before. you've written about this before. the crucial role that rhetorical and emotional restraint plays in a collaborative, coherent, democratic society, right? that's what we're talking about. it's like, we have freedom to say whatever we want, thanks to the first amendment. doesn't mean you as a leader say whatever you want. i mean, the fact -- i'm sorry to keep coming back to this, but i couldn't believe it. slit the throat is terrible terminology. >> terrible. >> the fact that, like, you're in a political dispute with another party, or you are a critic of certain government bureaucracies. how does your mind go from, you know what, i'm going to curb the power of the nih to make plague

policy, to make disease policy, to we're going to slit the throats of the deep state? i don't know how that happens. but what happens is -- and the only thing that works against that are people like chris christie, mitt romney and so on, within the party who say, you know what? yeah, you can say that, but you shouldn't say that. sorry to be cliche about this, but you shouldn't say that because children are listening. children are going to model their behavior on this kind of behavior and this kind of rhetorical violence. rhetorical violence is always the prerequisite for actual violence. i don't want to get -- >> part of the reason we got here, and there are many, is that we have a president, a former president, who behaves in a way that we would never allow anyone in our family, any of our children to behave like him. not one. i mean, the way he treats women. >> embarrassed by it. >> we would be embarrassed.

>> yeah. >> we'd take them off the field. we'd ground them. we would discipline them. it would be reprehensible. it would be embarrassing. it would be something that we wouldn't accept in our own families. yet, this is revered in the presidency among a lot of his followers. hillary clinton has a new piece for "the atlantic." it's entitled, and it might describe a part, also, of here, loneliness." she writes, quote, i long thought something important was missing from our national conversation, an epidemic of loneliness may sound abstract at a time when our democracy faces con secret and imminent threats, but the surgeon general's report helps explain how we became vulnerable. in the past, surgeons general have sounded the alarm about

major cries and drawn our attention to threats such as smoking, hiv aids and obesity. this is one of those moments. a hallmark of american democracy is that elections have been largely run by local, usually non-partisan volunteers and officials, not anymore. as trust and social ties that used to bind communities together have frayed, apathy, isolation and polarization have undercut the old "we're all in this together" ethos. instead of non-partisan volunteers and civic organizations like the league of women voters, we have maga election deniers and qanon enthusiasts. there's now a widespread shortage of poll workers because so many have faced harassment and abuse just for doing their jobs and helping people vote. i mean, this is, i think, kind of where trump found a sweet spot in the american psyche.

people who are vulnerable. >> yeah. jeffrey, a lot of talk about this, especially with the young men. >> mm-hmm. >> donald trump, steve bannon, people on the maga, the far right specifically target lonely, young men for political indoctrination. >> right. you know, this piece which is on "the atlantic" website this morning is interesting because she names names. we were talking about caution and incaution a minute ago. she's moved to a position where she's speaking very plainly about what she sees in society, talking very bluntly about what happened in 2016 and beyond. yeah, she names steve bannon. she says, you know, he is a creator of this phenomenon. he realized that disaffected, alienated, frightened, very

often, young men who are spending their time alone gaming, a lot of it comes out of the gaming culture, and sort of the itemization of society that's brought about or accelerated by smartphones and social media and the like, that he understood they can be, to use that word, weaponized, that they can be turned into an army of trolls, an actual army of voters in some cases, and that is where the anger is coming from. the anger sometimes and the disaffection are real and created by larger forces in our society, in our economy, technology. but she's also saying, no, this is also manipulated. you can take young men and manipulate them to believe certain things about the world, and, eventually, you can detach them from observable reality. it is a very interesting argument she's making. she ties it back very smartly to the surgeon general's report, which says that this is a -- we

have a -- it's not a new challenge, but it is a deep challenge. people who don't know their neighbor, who report they don't have friends, who are having difficulty establishing long-term relationships, who obviously don't belong to clubs and churches and the sort of things that kept people tied, tethered to reality, tethered to physical reality, to people around them, and this is something that demagogues and populists historically have exploited. >> jeffrey, we've come a long way, and we are much more alone in america. what about pushing back? one would be public service. if not mandating it, incentivizing it on a larger scale, to get americans off their devices for some time, get them together. teaching civics in classrooms. getting people back into churches and synagogues. essentially, coming up again with civil society, in the hopes

we become more civil. >> right. i mean, the temptations to stay on your phone are great, but -- and you've written about this write a bit. there's the third space. there's the home, there's work, and then there is this, what happens after work and before you go to bed? the virtues of being with people who you may disagree with. i love the idea of public service. it doesn't have to be military, though military historically has been a great equalizer, where you take people from all different regions of a very, very diverse country, and put them together, and good things generally happen out of that. but there's a million ways to serve. we also don't have a ethos of service. i mean, not to belabor the point, but, you know, donald trump stood for many things, but he did not stand for selfless service. you know, the most dangerous and depressing moment, i think, one

of the most dangerous and depressing moments in the whole trump presidency was his speech to the boy scout jamboree. i don't know if you remember that, but, you know, it was a selfish speech. so the trends aren't good, and we need people to yank back society. again, you have a technological challenge, which is that instagram, tiktok, these are very, very attractive and even addictive phenomenon. >> pretty large to legislate character. >> yeah. >> yes, it is. >> well, it is. i will say, another depressing part of the trump presidency, which jeffrey knows a good bit about, is when donald trump was quoted by generals, saying that people that gave their lives for america were losers in a war i never understood. he could not, could not ever grasp, even when generals were trying to explain to him why people would actually be selfless and defend their country. rev, it's so interesting we're having this conversation this

morning. last night, mika and i were talking about the critical role that parents play. it's something that can't be legislated, but just the critical role of parents. we were thinking about our own parents. i was talking about my parents, the things, you know, that i always took for granted. they were there. we would have dinner. we would watch "happy days," "laverne and shirley," whatever, but it was a family unit. we'd go to church a couple times a week. that just, you know, for me, that made all the difference in the world. hopefully it'll make all the difference in the world for my kids and, of course, families aren't always perfect. there's divorce. there are other things. but it is staying in there, being there for your children. it's the same thing with churches. i hear all this talk about loneliness epidemics. everybody is saying, "well, let's try this, let's try that." it's kind of like, you know, as jeffrey said, if the churches are emptying out and the

synagogues are emptying out and the mosques are emptying out and the places of worship are emptying out, then what you have is a value system that, for most of americans, used to be a faith in something bigger than ourselves, being replaced by staring at a telephone and taking whatever comes from this as the reality. it's not really hard to figure out why, you know, with churches and synagogues and the pews emptying out, why we've become so lonely. why we've become so adrift in this country. talk about that, if you will. again, can't legislate this, but we certainly need to stop talking around it as a nation. >> no, i think, as i was listening to jeff talk, i think that is very important. because what the collective gathering in synagogues,

churches, and other places, also not only gave us things that were bigger than ours, it gave us where there was a collective reasoning, that maybe we didn't agree or disagree. with social media, you almost program yourself to what may not have anything to do with the values that you should have, and you respond to the hype rather than to something solid. you know, howard thurmond talked about this strange freedom, to be adrift among men that are anchored in nothing. that's where we are. >> yeah. >> there's no anchors in society. i think that's what hillary clinton is talking about. when you're adrift and there is no anchor, you just float into anything. >> yeah, no doubt about it. you know, jeffrey, it is so important for us to recognize, again, the dangers of, again, this sort of itemization of

american society and american culture. we do need to find these places where we come together. i'll just -- like, for instance, in church, i was raised in a baptist church. you know, we'd sit there and we'd be in sunday school. somebody would come in, and they would do whatever the equivalent of a qanon theory was in, like, 1987 or 1991 or '92. we'd be about to talk about the bible, and people would look at the bible and go, "bob, i don't think that's right. let's talk about that after," right? i joke about it a little bit, but there was this community. somebody would come in with a crazy theory, and people that they knew, trusted, respected, would say, "no, no, no, you're following a conspiracy theory here. let's talk about this later." it was a -- you know, borrow from george will, it was a leveling wind. it kept everybody sort of

balanced, centered, and moored to abeauty of it. >> now, you do it here, you dive into a hole where there are a thousand other people spreading this same lie. >> right. you know, one other point, i moan, this is sort of additive to that, is the way in which some candidates and some political leaders are talking about the functions of government. you know, trust in government institutions is lower than it has almost ever been, and that's because you have a set of national leaders who should be modeling behavior, are talking about these institutions in ways that don't respond to reality. this is not a defense of this organization or that government department. obviously, you know, we in journalism are here to hold them accountable, and they make a lot of mistakes.

but the idea that, you know, the military has a recruitment problem right now, the army in particular has a recruitment problem, maybe some of that has to do with the fact that you have a lot of politicians who are talking about the army in ways that don't correspond to reality. you talk about the fbi, various health organizations within the federal government, and it is rhetorical, flame thrower. you can be critical of this agency or that agency without suggesting that everything is entirely corrupt and everything is aligned against you. it's not going to help in the long run, especially for people who want to run the federaljeff so much. the new moderator of "washington week" with "the atlantic." good to have you on the show this morning. coming up, polls are officially open in ohio for a special election today that

could determine abortion rights in this state and possibly set the tone for the rest of the country. we'll get a live report from columbus. plus -- >> never been to jail. i've never owned a gun. i hate that anyone at all might possibly be afraid of me. i'd go around the world and back again if i knew that single act might make your day better. i'm a proud man. i'm a proud black man. does any of this really matter? no. i just wanted you to get to know me better before you call the cops. >> that viral video reignited conversations about being black

in america. particularly following the murder of george floyd. we'll talk to its creator, actor and activist tyler merritt, about his new mission. that's next on "morning joe." inp with your erc tax refund so you can improve your business however you see fit. rosie used part of her refund to build an outdoor patio. clink! dr. marshall used part of his refund to give his practice a facelift. emily used part of her refund to buy... i run a wax museum. let innovation refunds help you get started on your erc tax refund. stop waiting. go to innovationrefunds.com you really got the brows. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance

so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

no. i just wanted you to get to know me better. before you call the cops.

>> that was part of a video posted by nashville-based actor and activist tyler merritt in 2018, but it didn't become a viral sensation until two years later after the murder of george floyd. the video re-ignited conversations about being black in america. now merritt is on a mission to create an environment that helps people learn more about those who are different from them. tyler joins us now. he's the author of a new book, "i take my coffee black: reflections on tupac, faith, and being black in america." it encourages readers to reconsider stereotypes deeply ingrained in our society. >> tyler, thank you so much for being with us. one of the fascinating things not only about the video but also about the book is you're

not just coming at it from, hey, this is my perspective, this is where i am, understand me, or you're a bigot. what you do is say no, no, no, we've got to build communities. i've got to go into your community, you should come into my community. >> you should know me. >> we need to build a bigger community where you know me but i know you as well. talk about that. >> first of all,let me say, joe, mika, i'm so glad to be with you today. and roll, tide. >> roll, tide. >> i'll tell you, there are very few things in the world that i believe in more than proximity. i happen to be one of those individuals that was blessed enough to be able to share community growing up in las vegas around so many people that were different than i was. so it means something to me when i see somebody who doesn't look

like me to understand who they are. and typically, joe and mika, my default is love. if i can find a common ground, be it laughter, be it a television show we may share, be it a story about your background that goes in line with who i am, i really believe that i can begin to see you on a level that is so much deeper than what you look like on the outside, because that matters. >> well, in your book, tyler, you write about this story, and it's really powerful. it was a fall day in nashville. i put on my alabama sweatshirt, i put on my bandanna and my sunglasses and i put on my wireless blue tooth beats by dre' headphone. as i was walking down the street, on the other side was an older white woman. i knew in that instant. because when you live in the south, you're 6'2" and black

with dreadlocks you know how some people per soov you. i was keenly aware that my blackst was going to be a problem. i took off the hood to my sweat shirt to expose my face. i wanted to appear like a black mister rogers. i put on a smile. as i got within a few feet of her, she saw me. this woman practically jumped out of her seat, grabbed her purse from the passenger seat, and then frantically rolled up her window. i wanted to say, lady, if you only knew how much work i just put into trying to make sure what just happened didn't happen. i tell you all this because for me it's not just a story. for me, it could very well be a matter of life and death, even when i try my absolute hardest, there is still nothing i can do to make some people feel safe. i'm curious if you ever get incredibly discouraged.

>> first of all, thanks for that reading. it's been a while since i've read that chapter and i found myself moved by your reading. thank you, mika. i'll tell you this. i've learned respectfully that as a black man in america i don't have the privilege to lose hope, i don't have the privilege to get so discouraged that i don't wake up every morning wanting for something new, wanting for something better. i come from a history of too many beautiful and brilliant individuals like rev sharpton where i can look back over history and go, today may be hard, but tomorrow can be better. and hear me, as long as i have air many my lungs, i have the opportunity to make the world a better place, and i don't mean to be hyperbolic about it, but a

as long as i can wake up and do that, that's what i'm going to choose to do. >> as i hear the passage from your book mika read and look over your book, part of the quest is not only to say to others to understand me, don't prejudge me, don't put me in a stereotype, but it's also to validate ourselves, whether we are black, whether we are latino, whether we are hiv positive, whatever category you put us, i give validation by saying to you and others that i'm not what you think i am. talk about how you validate yourself by not being just boxed into what somebody may perceive you to be. >> sure. i feel like we need to go way beyond the idea of i just don't want you to be afraid of me. forget that part. that's just the ground level. it goes way beyond that. not only do i not want you to be afraid of me, but i want you to

look at my eyes, i want you to love me. i want to make you laugh. i want to become one of your favorite people. the idea that we're living in a world where it just -- if i could just get to where you don't fear me, no, no, no, i want to move beyond that. and in my book, listen, there are so many brilliant books out there that talk about being black, talk about brown skin, black skin. i wanted to write a book where, by the time you were in the middle of the book, you felt like you knew me deep, maybe even more than you know some of the people that are in your everyday personal life. and if i could bring that kind of proximity into the experience of you reading my words, then maybe, just maybe by the time that you close it, you will feel like we are way beyond fear and we have moved on to love. i cannot wait -- this is one of my favorite shows. and i can't wait for your readers, for your watchers to

read this book, because it's one of those things that might change your life a little bit. >> and also as you delve into that and you say what you want people to have in terms of their feeling, you can find some common ground. you know, joe and i always talk about how we started off politically opposed to each other and then became friends and have become genuine friends now. part of that bond was both of us grew up in the baptist church. it was different regions of the country, different races, but it was the same experience. and we would have never known that if we didn't get to know each other. there is a commonality that people will find if they just go over the fence and talk to the person on the other side and find out they may not be that different than you think they are. >> i heard you speaking in the segment before about people leaving our synagogues and leaving the churches and the pews being empty.

somewhere in the midst of this i think we have forgotten about the default of love. i think we have forgotten about what our churches that have become political places and nationalist representations, we forgot where the love started. and i think that's why it's so beautiful to be able to watch a show like this and see you, rev al, and to see you, joe, two individuals that some might say could never just sit down in front of each other and share a cup of coffee and really get to know each other, you all were rooted in the church, which starts on this level of love. and let me be really clear, i'm not saying that the church has to be in everybody's life, but i do feel that when we begin with love, we can then grow from a point to be able to sit in front

of each other and have our conversation mean so much more than just worlds. i don't just see your political affiliation, but i see you. and that matters. >> exactly. >> it does. the new book is "i take my coffee black." tyler merritt, it is such a pleasure to meet you. >> awesome to have you here. >> please come back. great to meet you. >> thank you. >> all right. we kick off the third hour of "morning joe" right now. remarkable achievements by the legendary dusty baker. i remember rooting for him as a kid. and i was older than he was. people counting two outs saying you're past your prime. hell i know something about that.

>> president biden was cracking jokes with defending world series champions at the white house yesterday. that looked fun. we do have a lot to get to this morning. we're going to -- >> a very confused judge in fort pierce. >> oh, my gosh. >> shocked, shocked that you could have two grand juries going on at the same time. >> not a good sign. >> where did they go to law school? >> there's a lot of questions. >> not a good sign. >> we'll go to the flurry of legal filings late yesterday in the 2020 election case that has the judge summoning both sides to a washington, d.c., courtroom. >> different judge. >> this is a different judge, a different case. plus, action around the fulton county courthouse in atlanta. >> different case. >> sparking speculation that another indictment, another one, could be coming very soon for the former president. also ahead, we'll explain how the fight for abortion rights in ohio could hang on what happens in today's special

election there. and later this hour, presidential candidate and former new jersey governor chris christie will be our guest this morning. good morning, and welcome to "morning joe." it is tuesday, august 8th. what's important about this day? >> it might be somebody's birthday. >> it might be. somebody might be 20 today. with us we have the host of "way too early," jonathan lemire, president of the national action network and host of msnbc's "politics nation," reverend al sharpton. president emeritus of the count similar on foreign relations, richard and write toer alexi mcammond joins us, and chuck rosenberg is back. and nbc news justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian. and we also pulled over founder of the conservative website the

bulwark charlie sykes from "way too early" this morning. >> we have a confused judge in south florida, which of course i find it hard to believe that a judge could be confused having two grand juries going at the same time. just some baffling decisions coming out of a judge who has already been excoriated by the 11th circuit in previous cases for being out of her depth. can you explain what happened with those fort pierce filings? >> reporter: well, in her latest order, judge cannon is essentially -- first of all, she granted the government's request to have a hearing on whether walt nauta's lawyer has a conflict of interest that needs to be explored because he's representing not only walt nauta but other witnesses in the case and he may have to cross-examine. he granted that. in the process of doing that, she denied the special counsel's effort to file part of something under seal, saying he didn't

justify that. and then she questioned why he was using two grand juries to continue to investigate whether there had been obstruction of justice in this case. now, you know, there are some rules about continuing to investigate a case with a grng after it's been indicted. you basically have to be investigating pursuant to a separate indictment. chuck rosenberg can speak more to that. so it's not a nutty notion that she would question that. but it did seem like she was a little surprised there were two grand juries in the case when the prosecution had already laid that out in previous filings, joe. >> yeah. it seemed to be in bad faith. speaking of bad faith, the judge in the e. jean carroll case where the judge said mr. trump raped e. jean carroll. >> a lot of updates here. so a federal judge has dismissed donald trump's countersuit against wripter e. jean carroll. trump sued carroll in june alleging she defamed him by

continuing to say the former president raped her even though in may a jury found trump only liable for sexual abuse. yesterday a judge ruled against trump's argument, explaining that while the jury did not find that trump raped carroll according to new york penal law's narrow definition, her allegation of rape is not defamation because the words common and more widely understood definition is broader. the judge also denied trump's claim of precedential immunity saying he waited too long to raise that defense. the countersuit is in response to a separate defamation lawsuit filed over comments trump made about carroll both while he was in office and the day after a jury found him liable for sexual abuse. that civil trial is set to begin in january. trump's lawyers say they plan to appeal the judge's ruling.

what are the chances, though, he says something again and again and again, defaming her? >> chances are good. keep getting sued. charlie sykes, this morning gerard baker in the "wall street journal" wrote a column that you were -- i think you were referencing earlier where he said, you know, republicans really have to make a choice here. they can continue their year of magical thinking or they can keep defending donald trump. and in so doing, forever alter the rule of law in america. very true about that. let's say the same thing about my brothers and sisters that i grew up with in the evangelical church. they are new fiercely fighting for and backing a rapist according to a judge who said by the common definition of the term, donald trump raped e. jean carroll. that's in the court of law. that's not in -- again, the pages of some left-wing journal. and these are the same people

who all collapse on their fainting couch because bill clinton had a relationship with an intern back when he was in the white house and said he was unfit to be president of the united states. a judge has said donald trump is a rapist, and yet they line up right behind him, just like these republicans who are all law and order and rule of law, continuing to line up against the guy, and they're doing it in a way that's eviscerating or they're attempting to eviscerate the rule of law, the justice department, the fbi in the process. >> i think where we've come since 2015, what's happened to the american conservative movement, think what's happened to our political culture. it's easy to dismiss donald trump as this narcissistic clown, but it is hard to understate the impact that he's had on our political standards. and to your point, look, you are seeing a full-out attack, not

just on the culture of facts, which we had back in 2016, but now on all of the institutions of our constitutional republic. there's great piece in "the washington post" that talks about how all the other republican candidates are going after the courts, the system of law, the deep state, sowing distrust in any institution that might challenge or hold someone like donald trump accountable. and the willingness to accept lies, i think has been established over the last few years, but the thing about the moment we're in right now, donald trump is -- you mentioned what's going to happen in the future. it is rock-solid certain that donald trump will continue to make the threats, will continue to make the insults. everything that's happening now will get worse, and the republican party and the evangelical church will go along with it. and to your larger point, this has long-term implications.

things like this, when they are broken, they are hard to put back together. >> what baker says in the "wall street journal" piece, reverend al, is if republicans continue this line of thinking, if they continue their support for donald trump, they needn't fool themselves. a second trump administration would destroy the department of justice, would destroy the fbi, would destroy the federal government's rule of law, would destroy judicial independence. it would destroy the third branch of america's government. it would rip to shreds madisonian democracy. they need to understand what they're doing, and perhaps they do. i'm just trying to figure out what is so important about this former reality tv host that they're willing to literally throw away madisonian democracy to defend him. >> that is what really has

troubled me, is that it's clear that you can have political debate, those of us on the left, those on the right, but when you see what is going on now, i think "the new york times" has a story about it this morning, where you have the actual institutions of government that would be totally altered by the politics of today, particularly if trump were to win. i mean, are these people really saying that's what they want to advocate, the absolute destruction of the justice department as we know it and all of the institutional law pillars as we know it? because that's where they're going. they are undermining the very principles that the country was founded on, and that is democracy as opposed to autocracy. and i think that is one thing to be caught in the heat of the campaign, another thing to say i want to completely overhaul the

government. and that is the line they have begun to cross in the politics of some of those that are running in the republican primary. >> and for what? >> for what? >> to lose again. >> i know. >> to lose again. i know they're looking at polls. no. he loses. he loses every single year. and he has since 2017. so they're willing to throw out the rule of law? they're willing to just ignore all of this? he's going to lose again. >> and they're also willing to throw out common decency. if you look at what trump has completely admitted to doing and what he considers normal and the way he has behaved toward people, especially women, hush-money payments to a porn star for an affair, telling the attorney of e. jean carroll, who a judge says he raped, and he -- >> and mocking her. and mocking her in the next debate. >> mocks her in the debate,

defames her again. he's being sued again. tells her attorney, you're not my type. can't even identify her and one of his wives. i'm just saying common decency. forget all this criminal stuff that's going on if you can't get your head around it, if you really, really think, if you really think it's a witch-hunt, deep inside think that, that's you, that you have to work with and look in the mirror, that's your choice. but do you want the person running our country, making choices? representing us? >> that's a deeply disturbing thing. they have actually convinced themselves that it's a witch-hunt. they have a guy who stole nuclear secrets. they have a guy that stole -- you know, all these other things. why didn't hillary clinton -- why wasn't hillary clinton ever arrested? it was donald trump's justice department. i know facts don't matter to so many, but it was donald trump's justice department in 2012 that told donald trump there's nothing there, there's no crime. 2018, the same thing.

there's nothing there. there's no crime. trump kept going back to -- donald trump's justice department. of the people he appointed, jeff sessions, people he appointed, there's no crime there. so when donald trump steals nuclear secrets, you can't go, yeah, but hillary clinton -- no, you can't. when donald trump steals secret war plans to invade iran, you can't go, oh, but hunter biden. no, you can't do that. but that's what they're doing, and they know it's a lie. they really do. they know it's a lie. they know the game they're playing. right? and yet they -- they always say, oh, well -- even if these op-eds and editorials where they actually take on trump, they go, oh, yeah, but the democrats. oh, yeah, but hillary clinton. oh, yeah, but hunter biden.

they can never just say it's wrong that he stole nuclear secrets and no former president has ever done that in american history. it's wrong he tried to overthrow a presidential election. you can't "yeah but" hunter biden, talking about stealing a presidential election. and yet you do that. you do nothing but degrade yourself daily. those things that you write, those things that you say, they're with you forever on this. you're choosing a failed reality tv host and a failed politics over america's rule of law. over judiciary. over madisonian democracy. and it's -- the further we get away from this moment, the more horrific it's going to look. >> a second ruling from that federal judge, chuck, allows testimony from that civil case

including donald trump's deposition to be give on the manhattan district attorney alvin bragg for potential use in the stormy daniels case. trump is facing 34 felony counts related to a hush-money payment he allegedly made to the adult film actress to cover up an affair. he has pleaded not guilty. what does this mean? how does this change things, chuck? >> it's an interesting ruling, mika, but not terribly surprising. i mean, what a defendant says can be adduced against him in trial. it's an admission. now, people may wonder why something he said in one trial can be used in another trial, but it really doesn't matter where you say it or how you say it, just that you've said it. because it was done in a deposition in a civil case, prosecutors in manhattan had to ask for it. they applied for it. they said, judge, since mr. trump said these things in your case, can we use them in our case?

simply he said yes. this is routine, by the way. this is not hearsay. it's an exception to that rule. if a defendant says something, it can be adduced against him in trial. that's all this is. by the way, does it strengthen the hand of alvin bragg and his prosecutors in their hush-money case? it does. it's more evidence. they can use it if they want, choose to ignore it if they want, but it's there for them if they believe they need it. my sense is that it will be helpful to them in proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt. to a unanimous jury in manhattan. >> so let's talk about the hearing or the proceedings last night in d.c., chuck. i'll start with you. trump's lawyers once again are talking about the first amendment. it's such a -- forgive me for my editorial here, but it's such a bad-faith argument. and everybody in the republican establishment now that is

saying, well, yes, they don't like trump, but attacking him for the first amendment, he set up false electors. and in setting up false electors, his goal was -- and we have all the testimony for being who worked for donald trump -- to take away the votes of people who voted in seven american states for president. he wanted to take away their votes and replace electors that represented them with fake electors. it was a conspiracy. it was a lie. that's what he's being charged for. but talk about the protective order and the back and forth from last night. what does it mean? >> yeah. what's a protective order? let's start with that for some context. ostensibly it's used to protect information. but at the heart of it we're protecting two other things, people and process. these, by the way, are utterly routine in criminal cases. i don't think i ever prosecuted a case where i didn't have a

discovery order and a protective order. and by the way, i never had an issue with it, and the folks on the other side abided it, and it helped to streamline the process. that's a key thing to understand here. mr. trump's attorneys don't want to help streamline the process. they want to argue against everything and anything. so why not start with the protective order? all the government is seeking here is the knowledge that if they turn over stuff, which they must, to the defense's part of discovery, that that information, right, the processes and people that underlie that information will be protected as the case builds to trial. why do you want to protect that stuff? well, some of it is sensitive. some witnesses told the truth. some didn't. there's a personally identifiable information in the discovery that will be provided to the defense. you want to protect that too. this is not a hard call. but if you look at it through the prism of what the defense attorneys are trying to do, all

they are trying to do, joe, is disrupt. and by the way, it seems to be working. normally protective orders and discovery orders are signed by both parties and submitted to the judge, you know, perhaps on the day of arraignment, if not soon thereafter. what's actually going on here is the defense attorneys have bought themselves a few days in another hearing to contest something that is normally never contested, because typically both sides, both parties have an interest in protecting information and protecting the process and protecting the people. that's only true on one side in this case. >> so, ken, i spoke to some folks in trump campaign finance reform yesterday and they pretty clearly admit they're trying to delay things, they see the south florida matter, the classified documents case is moving along slowly. they seemingly got an assist from that judge yesterday. but in washington, that judge wants to move things along quickly.

they also argue donald trump is running for president, needs to make political arguments, the first amendment stuff we've covered on this show. so give us your analysis as to what happened yesterday. what should we expect between now and that deadline at the end of the week on this matter? >> well, jonathan, i agree with chuck and i'll add to what he said. in terms of the delay, it looks like they've bought themselves a week delay here. it was really interesting because what the special counsel last night asked the judge to do is simply to rule, just to impose the protective order that they believe should have been imposed, and as chuck said, is generally noncontroversial in 99.9% of cases, but the judge didn't do that. this judge, who does want to move the case along, it's very clear, scheduled a hearing for friday, so that's more delay and more litigation and more lawyer time over something that really shouldn't be controversial. it was really interesting to read the special counsel's rebuttal last night of trump's lawyers' attempt to craft a

narrow protective order. they said donald trump wants to try this case in the media. he wants to that i can take all this secret discovery we're handing over, including very sensitive information, subpoenaed phone records, witness interviews, transcripts, and he wants to be able to make some of that public. they even pointed to the full ginsburg appearance by john lauro, one of trump's lawyers, on the sunday show, and they hinted -- and they're right -- technically if you read the local criminal rules in washington, d.c., you're not supposed to go on television and talk about the in evidence a case. but that's exactly what he did. they were saying, judge, this is only the beginning. this is exactly what these guys want to do, so don't let them do it, impose our order. she didn't do that. she may ultimately, but she scheduled a hearing to argue about it, and that's exactly what trump lawyers want. they want to delay this. they're making arguments that donald trump has first a amendment right to make public evidence that the special

counsel has gathered in their two-year investigation, the special counsel saying that's ridiculous, that's not what this is for. discovery is for the trial, not the air out in the news media. this also sets the table for what is sure to be another battle somewhere down the line as to whether all these attacks that donald trump is making against the prosecutor, against the judge, against witnesses, whether ultimately those can be toll rated or whether the judge at some point will have to try to regulate them, even though donald trump is running for president and that's difficult. the way another judge in washington did with roger stone. remember, there was a gag order against roger stone after he put a target on a photo of a judge. we're going to come to that point, i predict, at some moment in this case. but it's a devilish problem for a federal judge dealing with a defendant who is running for president. >> right. or dealing with a defendant where the common understanding of the system and fairness is that no man is above the law.

at some point, that's going to have to come to bear. ken dilanian and former u.s. attorney chuck rosenberg, thank you both very much for being on this morning. coming up, we'll go live to ohio where voters are casting ballots in an election that could determine the future of abortion rights in that state. ali vitali has the latest straight ahead. ht ahead from prom dresses... ...to workouts... ...and new adventures. you hope the more you give the less they'll miss. but even if your teen was vaccinated against meningitis in the past... they may be missing vaccination for meningitis b. although uncommon, up to 1 in 5 survivors of meningitis will have long term consequences. now as you're thinking about all the vaccines your teen might need, make sure you ask your doctor if your teen is missing meningitis b vaccination. stop right there!

this week, get the denny's super slam starting at $7.99. hungry for all your breakfast favorites? when you want america's biggest breakfast starting at $7.99... at denny's, it's diner time. now open really late. meet the portable blender we can barely keep in stock. blendjet 2 gives you ice-crushing, big blender power on-the-go. so you can blend up a mouthwatering smoothie, protein shake, or latte wherever you are! recharge quickly with any usb port. best of all, it even cleans itself! just blend water with a drop of soap. what are you waiting for? order yours now from blendjet.com before they sell out again! - i'm lynette.

this is my husband, arthur. blendjet.com before they - yeah, you wouldn't believe we're in our 70's, huh? (lynette and arthur laugh) - i have recommended consumer cellular to so many people. - she was the one to convince me to come over to her side. (arthur laughs) - that's right! - [announcer] come over to consumer cellular and start saving. get unlimited talk and text with a flexible data plan, starting at just $20 a month. - the coverage has been excellent. - you know, it gives us exactly what we want. - you should go with consumer cellular! - [announcer] switch today. call or go online.

- the will states that mr. marbles will receive everything he needs in perpetuity. thanks to autoship from chewy. - i always love that old man. - and he gets the summer house. - what? - [narrator] save more on what they love and never run out with autoship from chewy.

we are now in the second week of fulton county, georgia, district attorney fani willis' indictment window. remember that? she said around the first two weeks of august. security around the courthouse has increased, and so has the number of people who have received subpoenas to testify before a grand jury as part of

the d.a.'s presentation to seek indictments. nbc news can now confirm at least four more people received subpoenas, among them former lieutenant governor geoff duncan. as we await final indictment decisions, the "wall street journal" is reporting that it's likely we'll see racketeering charges against the former president of the united states. alexi mcammond, as we cover all of this, what stands out to you, especially with a fourth indictment looming? >> well, to your point, mika, i mean, i think it's really revealing that what voters and especially republican primary voters want in not just their nominee but in the future president is someone who is facing this tangled web of legal threats and folks around him who are now being called as witnesses who have served as his lawyers and aides and assistants. we're seeing the way that he is trying to claim that he just sexually abused someone but didn't rape someone, as if

that's somehow better. i think as we see polls show that republican voters continue to want someone like trump, it doesn't mean they'll make it easier for him to win a general. as much as his team may want to delay and gum up this process, it won't help him necessarily in the long run. the other thing that i think is really important for the republican party is there are folks running for office right now who have to answer for trump's legal situations. i'm thinking of someone like the attorney general in kentucky who is running for governor. at the first debate he was asked about whether he was still proud to have donald trump's endorsement after the situation with stormy daniels came out, and that's just one example of the number of republicans who will have to keep answering not just for trump's behavior but for the legality or potential criminality involved in what he is doing as this campaign goes on in this year and through 2024. >> richard haass, just goup go

down the list of our former party members who have to, when they're setting up stage, are you proud and still support donald trump's endorsement and still support him despite the fact he was found liable of sexual assault in new york and the judge said what he actually did was a commonly used term would be rape, that he raped e. jean carroll, that he is charged and he's got his own people testifying against him for stealing nuclear secrets, for stealing secrets about invading iran, stealing secrets about america's weaknesses militarily, that he's accused of having a conspiracy scheme to set up fake electors and defraud the united states government and take away the rights of millions of americans in seven states to vote and to rig the election. they're having to ask these questions, and i don't know about you, but one thing that i found really disturbing over the

past week or so is establishment republicans that claim to be anti-trump say, i'm anti-trump, but this latest indictment on stealing the election, they're just going after him for the first amendment and why aren't they going after hunter -- these people know better. they know better, richard. really, i will say, i have despaired over the fact that people i've known my entire life, adult life, are now playing stupid, pretending this is about the first amendment and not a conspiracy to set up fake electors to steal seven states away from the rightful winner of the 2020 presidential election. how does america move forward when you have 40, maybe 45% of americans who support a guy that steals nuclear secrets and tries to rig elections? >> it's the reason none of us

should be sanguine about the future of american democracy three years off from the 250th anniversary of the declaration of independence. one of our two major parties essentially no longer believes in institutions. it's essentially put the emphasis on a person and on causes rather than on principles or institutions. that's something the founders never anticipated. >> can i correct you, richard? you said on a person and on causes. there's no cause. donald trump, there's no cause for donald trump. it's all about donald trump. >> it's his personal cause celebre. >> that's what's so crazy about this is it's not even about causes. it's all about this one person and this cult. >> right. don't disagree. it's an angry, populist movement. trump is quite clever, quite brilliant in some ways at reading what everyone is feeling angry about, the politics.

so they're prepared to tear down the temple. you to dent hear mr. trump, you don't hear other people talk about what they would really put in its place. you went through all the agencies they would tear down, justice and the rest. think'd also tear down the energy department. that's become another battlefield, if you will. they would strip away all the funding the united states does in renewable energy. again, there's a kind of, again, tear down the temple, we know what we're against, we're not going to do anything that the elitist, that the establishment wants, so this has become a truly destructive movement. and if it ever wanted to succeed, you are confident that he would fail, i hope you're right, but if it were to be the opposite, if these people were to gain power again, then i really do think that for only the second time in american history we would put on our collective fate at risk. coming up, what's driving the day on wall street. we'll go thrive cnbc for "business before the bell."

up next, presidential candidate and former new jersey governor chris christie joins "morning joe." we'll discuss his surprise trip to ukraine last week and his meeting with ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskiy as well as the latest on his campaign for the white house. "morning joe" will be right back. more shopping? you should watch your spending honey. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. check it out, you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, i'll look into that. let me put a reminder on my phone. save $700 dollars. pick up dad from airport?

ohhhhhh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ (upbeat music) - [narrator] what if there was a hearing aid that could keep up with you? (notification dings) this is jabra enhance select. it's a smart hearing solution

that makes hearing aids more convenient and less expensive. it connects with your phone so you can stream calls and music. with jabra enhance select's premium package, better hearing doesn't have to start in a doctor's office. it starts with a free online hearing test you could take almost anywhere, so you can get your hearing aids custom programed for you and delivered in days. from there, you can fine tune your settings with your remote audiology team seven days a week, so your hearing aids work when it matters most. (notification dings) in fact, more than 95% of enhance select premium customers report hearing better with their friends, family, and colleagues. with jabra enhance select, you can get the same advanced hearing aid technology and professional care you expect from a clinic at a fraction of the cost. for a limited time, get $300 off select hearing aid models. visit jabraenhance.com.

shingles. some describe it as pulsing electric shocks or sharp, stabbing pains. ♪♪ this painful, blistering rash can disrupt your life for weeks. a pain so intense, you could miss out on family time. the virus that causes shingles is likely already inside of you. if you're 50 years or older, ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingles.

what is the purpose of the u.s. military? i'll tell you what it is. it is to protect americans on american soil first and foremost. not some random war that's arguably a repayment for a private bribe. a family of the united states.

$5 million from burisma. >> come on, man. oh, my god. and the ghosts of a thousand warriors and republican presidents and reagan and eisenhower and everybody who fought to keep europe free from russian aggression rise from their graves. >> that was candidate for the presidency on the republican side, vivek, baselessly suggesting over the weekend that the united states' aid for ukraine is repayment for an alleged bribe between members of the biden family and the ukrainian energy committee. >> yeah. that's why -- that's why all the european countries suffered this past winter, because they wanted to help hunter biden. seriously? the fevered swamps are now --

like they're wading in. republican presidential candidate, former new jersey governor chris christie, just came back from ukraine meeting with president zelenskyy. chris, governor, whatever i'm supposed to call you, so i've gotten feedback early on, nice guy, seems to be a really smart guy. we talked about him coming on the show early on. maybe i'll have him on the show. but his statements keep getting more bizarre by the day. he talks about defunding the fbi. he says stupid stuff like this. and, you know, it's more -- i think it's a reflection on him of course, but it's also -- it's a reflection on just how crazy these republican candidates think they have to be to win the votes of the base. like, what's going on out there when he's having -- he's having to say this? and by the way, for the record, there's a guy that i don't think

voted republican until 2020, and he wrote in his book that donald trump behaved abhorrently after january 6th. that's all changed in a couple years. >> well, good morning, joe and mika. good to see you. look, i don't take the stuff that he says seriously. you know, the fact this is a very, very ambitious guy who is basically playing the role so far this this race as, you know, donald trump's wingman, and, you know, that's his call. >> but, governor, isn't he hearing that from the audience? you and i both know, we've seen politicians basically telling people what they need to hear, they're basically a mirror of the audience. he wouldn't be saying that unless he's hearing it, right? >> he's hearing it certainly from some elements of the party, but i don't think it's a majority of the party. it certainly has not been my experience. i'm headed to new hampshire later today. the last time i was up there a couple weeks ago we heard a lot

of support, two-thirds of the audience was very supportive of my position on ukraine, which is that we haven't done enough and that while, you know, i think that president biden has certainly done better than president trump and president trump did better than president obama on this, we have more to go. having gone over there now, joe and mika, and watched for myself what the folks in ukraine are going through, what they've already gone through, the idea that this is something that america does not have a vital interest in to me is just absurd. not only because we should be standing up against a barbaric russian administration that is doing things like the gouging of eyes, the cutting off of ears of men in ukraine before they tie their hands behind their back and shoot them in the back of the head, and then go into those homes where they've taken these

men out of, and rape the women. nearly 20,000 children have been kidnapped from ukraine, brought to russia, to be separated from their families, programmed to be anti-ukraine and to work for the russian federation. i met with some of those parents, guys, and i could tell you as a dad, it's unimaginable to me that your child would be yanked away from you. you don't know whether they're dead or alive, whether they're being cared for or abused. these are the things that vladimir putin is imposing upon ukraine. and this is the guy that donald trump says is brilliant and a great leader. if that's brilliant leadership, you can keep it. it's barbarism. >> yeah. it's barbarism. he's also a guy that set back his own country probably a generation, exposed his military as being extraordinarily weak.

so make the argument if you will about why the united states needs to continue supporting ukraine. you talked about the human rights element of it. geopolitically, what does the world look like if the united states and europe, nato -- what happens if we send a message to the world we're going to let the worst regimes on the planet invade countries next door to them? >> well, you started answering the question for me. i'll finish the answer. russia/ukraine is the undercard. it's the undercard. because the chinese, who are funding the russian aggression against ukraine, are watching. and if we cut and run on

ukraine, the next fight is going to be in taiwan. and there it's not going to be us just supplying weapons. it's going to be american men and women who will be send three-quarters of the way around the world to fight there. and they're going to have to fight there not only to protect the freedom of taiwan, but for those who don't care about that, be practical. two-thirds of the world's semiconductors are produced in taiwan. they run our computers, automobiles, and just about every element of american life will be controlled by the chinese communist party. i don't think that's a place we want to be in for a practical, economic, or technological perspective. and when you look at what's happening here, then go to the middle east. the iranians are obviously coordinating with the russians and the chinese to provide more sophisticated we havery to the russians.

and the folks in the middle east, the saudis, the emirates, the qatar is are all going to look at this and say it's not worth it to be friends with the united states anymore. we might as well cut the best deal we can with the chinese because when things get tough, americans run the other way. one of the points of my campaign, guys, is america has never been great by being small. right now in elements of my party and in elements of the democratic party, we are arguing over what i consider to be small issues. they're not unimportant, but they're small. the big issues that we have to deal with, and one of them is american leadership around the world, those make america bigger, stronger, richer, freer. every time, going back to 1776, the civil war, world war ii, and the cold war ending in the reagan era, we have presidents who said we'll take some

sacrifices and go big. we always came out on top. we had a country after the revolution. we had a united country free of slavery after the civil war. >> right. >> we protected a free europe and a free rest of the world and became the leader of the world after world war ii. and reagan in nine years took down the berlin wall, and in ten years eliminated the soviet union from the face of the earth. >> right. >> that's the kind of thing we should be doing. and the ukraine fight, joe, is the undercard. if we do it right, there won't be another fight. if we do it wrong -- >> i completely agree. >> -- not going to be good. >> and if biden had not worked with strong republican allies in the senate especially and with strong allies in nato to do this, then of course you would have some of the same people saying the reason taiwan was invaded by china was because the

united states didn't defend ukraine. so, yeah, they're being hypocrites. almost like when you hear governor christie say that we need to focus on big things instead of some of these small distractions, it's almost like he's saying america's standing in the world, america's role in the world is more important than bud light or mickey mouse. >> or woke, whatever that means for republicans who just use the word randomly. >> the yankees are woke. >> chris, i want to get to how we got here. the ongoing legal suits, the potential fourth indictment coming in. did donald trump commit a crime or two?

folks to allegedly delete the surveillance cameras, it reminded me of what maybe abbott and costello means the corleones might have looked like. this is both criminal and completely stupid, which is the combination donald trump is bringing to the country, the combination ofgi criminality an abject stupidstupidity. coming up, the state of the race for the white house next on "morning joe." f the race for the white house next on "morning joe."

trying vapes to quit smoking might feel like progress, but with 3x more nicotine than a pack of cigarettes - vapes increase cravings - trapping you in an endless craving loop. nicorette reduces cravings until they're gone for good. if you're looking for a medicare supplement insurance plan that's smart now... i'm 65. and really smart later i'm 70-ish. consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan from unitedhealthcare. with this type of plan, you'll know upfront about how much your care costs. which makes planning your financial future easier. so call unitedhealthcare today to learn more about the only plans of their kind with the aarp name. and set yourself and your future self up with an aarp medicare supplement plan from unitedhealthcare.

i need it cool at night. you trying to ice me out of the bed? with an aarp medicare supplement plan baby, only on game nights. you know you are retired right? am i? ya! save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, 36 month financing on select smart beds. shop now only at sleep number.

♪ chevy silverado has what it takes to do it all. with up to 13 camera views. and the z71 off-road package. ♪ you ok? yeah. any truck can help you make a living. this one helps you build a life. chevy silverado.

people ask what happened with you and trump? i say he beat me like a drum and i acknowledged that he did. i've come to like him and he likes him and that gets us through 18 holes of golf. >> we're going to love him. we're going to love him. i know, it's half and half, but when i need some of those liberal votes, he's always there to help me get him, okay? >> you need to help this man, donald trump. they're trying to drain him dry. >> he's there when you need him. >> donaldjtrump.com, go there tonight, give the president some

money. >> please help president trump. if you could afford 5 or 10 bucks, give it. >> that last clip, of course -- >> i'm praying. >> from the one-man broadway show jim baker. jim and tammy faye baker. you know, he kind of has in those last couple of clips -- now, mind you, this is after he said he'd given up on donald trump, he's off the train, but he's got the jim baker haircut. he's got the phony tears. he says pray for him. if there were a broadway show on the life of the ptl club and jim

and tammy faye baker, he also has the same scruples. >> a star is born, joe. take this right to broadway. it's amazing. the man is a human pretzel, i tell you. he just keeps going back and forth and twisting himself this way and that way for donald trump, who of course will do nothing but abuse him, because that's what donald trump does. it's really sad. he represents my great state of south carolina and there you have it. >> i can only speak for myself as a man. it doesn't say anything about manhood or womanhood or whatever hood, as a man, reverend al, i don't know how he does it. i don't know how he shames himself and humiliates himself

and is attacked and kicked around and then gets on tv and starts crying. >> there's something donald trump has been able to identify in the makeup of lindsey graham that he plays on. there's a need. has nothing to do with man or woman, there's some need. he's a needy guy who needs some confirmation or affirmation from somebody that he thinks is tough. trump plays on it. usual if a mark is conned once or twice, you get used to the game, but lindsay keeps going back with his pocket full, saying, come on, take more from me. it's unbelievable.

to our top story on this fourth hour of "morning joe." defense attorneys for donald trump are pushing back against special counsel jack smith's request for a protective order of the 2020 election case against the former president. senior white house correspondent kelly o'donnell has the very latest developments. >> reporter: this morning, donald trump versus the special counsel playing out in the courts and in public. >> a sham indictment. >> we have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. >> reporter: the most recent battle over a protective order requested by the special counsel intended to protect evidence that will be shared with the trump legal team that mr. trump could make public, those concerns prompted by the former president's own megaphone. from campaign rallies to his social media blasts. no, i shouldn't have a

protective order placed on me, because it would impinge on my right to free speech. jack smith, the special counsel, is now frequently the focus of the former president's fury. >> jack smith. he's a deranged human being. you take a look at that face, you say that guy is a sick man. >> reporter: trump's history of speaking openly about his cases, worried that if he were to expose evidence like grand jury transcripts in public, that could have a harmful chilling effect on grand jury witnesses. >> president trump being attacked for his first amendment rights. >> reporter: but the former president's lawyers say he would accept some rules on the most sensitive government evidence, urging a more limited order. chris christie, once a federal prosecutor, argues there are limits on free speech. >> is this the kind of conduct that the republican party or the american people want from

someone who's going to be president? >> let's bring in joyce vance and jeffrey rosen, a contributing editor at "the atlantic." it's good to have you both on. joyce, what do you make of what went down yesterday and what trump's attorneys are arguing? it feels like delay tactics, but also it feels like this judge is going to be pushed to the limit every step. >> reporter: sure. i think that's right. with trump, when doesn't it feel like delay tactics? that's his only legal strategy here. we never hear denials that he engaged in criminal conduct or any kind of substantive defense.

it puts pressure on the judge hearing the d.c. prosecution of donald trump. we've now reached the point where we have to work to keep the many criminal cases separate. the judge seems to be more than up to it, firing back on his own, sometimes within minutes, setting hearings, requiring responsive pleadings. she seems fully engaged and ready to go. what's at stake here is whether donald trump gets to try this case in the press, taking information and letting him talk about it in public or whether he'll be required to try his case in court like any criminal defendant. protective orders are routine. they're almost never controversial. they protect witnesses and they protect the process from premature disclosure that can taint jury pools.

everything the former president is doing here is out of bounds and designed to damage the rule of law. >> speaking of out of bounds, jeffrey rosen, many of his supporters, many news outlets that are blindly pro-trump and i must say many establishment republicans who claim to be never trumpers have suddenly started all sort of saying in unison this is a first amendment issue, as if having a conspiracy to create fake electors and steal the votes of millions of americans from seven states somehow contained and protections afforded by the first amendment. talk about that, if you will, and what the pushback to that lie should be. >> it's true that the core of president trump's defense in this trial is going to be that he does have a first amendment

right, because he believed his own election lies. and if, as he claims, he legitimately was trying to stop the steal,then he can't be prosecuted for so-called fraudulently trying to overturn the election. but that first amendment defense, which he's definitely entitled to put on although it may not succeed, is different than this broader effort to attack the legitimacy of the judicial process itself. this is a direct attack on the rule of law. the stakes could not be more grave. the closest analog in history is the treason retire of aaron burr where jefferson is indicting his former vice president for treason. there's an effort to question the legitimacy of the entire process. alexander hamilton says, this is the fulfillment of our fears, that a demagogue might subvert the american public. when a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity, he

may ride the storm and direct the whirlwind. burr is acquitted on the technical claim that the treason requirements weren't met, and jefferson accepts the verdict. what's important for the country is republicans and democrats accept the legitimacy of this proceeding and not attack it, not call it nazi germany or a sham indictment, because if our institutions fail and if both sides don't embrace the rule of law itself, then we may see a tragic rupture of the american institutions of democracy, much as was narrowly averted in the 1800s. the stakes could not be higher that the the historic moment. >> if republicans actually turn this proceeding and say it's a sham proceeding and turn against the rule of law, it's going to be difficult for american government to move forward.

i keep hearing these arguments about the first amendment. gerard baker, former editor of the "wall street journal," said republicans need to know what they're doing here and stop this magical thinking that this is just a republican versus a democrat, that this is donald trump versus joe biden. they need to understand what's at stake in this primary process that if they go down this road and decide they're going to delegitimize the rule of law and the justice department and the government's very checks and balances, he said they're in it for the long run and our rule of law in america will be shattered and never look the same.

>> well, look, when i was the post's south america correspondent, i covered a lot of countries that had just returned to democracy from years of dictatorship. there was no faith in institutions. once you lose that faith in the system, in the process, in democracy, in all institutions, especially the judiciary, it is very difficult to get back. it takes a long time. it doesn't just snap back. this is very serious because it goes away and what you're left with is something very, very unlike what we have now. we have an independent judiciary and a judicial system that, at

least in my experience, is the best in the world. it's the best system of finding truth and meteing out justice that i have encountered in the world. this one works very well. to break it is just unconscionable, unthinkable, and it would take a long, long time to get it back. in the case of the protective order, i assume there will be a protective order. the judge will issue a protective order, and i assume donald trump will violate it. if joyce vance is with us, i have a question for joyce.

what happens then? what sanctions would she likely apply if donald trump were to violate the protection order that she issues? >> that's the question that hangs over these entire proceedings. what do you do to donald trump? do you take him into custody like you would most defendants who violate a protective order? that's one of the sanctions. there are other sanctions. you can engage in discipline along a spectrum. you can certainly admonish people, you can certainly issue a gag order. we saw that happen in the roger stone case. here's the problem. once you do that you're in a setting where the former president begins to litigate those sanctions. that goes back to this notion of delaying the trial, of slowing everything down. i think the prosecution and probably the judge too at this point are hoping they can sidestep these issues and move forward in a linear fashion, but

that may be an unrealistic hope when you consider that what donald trump really wants to do is to make sure things move as slowly as possible, make sure he can play the victim as much as possible and perhaps raise a little bit more cash to pay for his legal defense along the way with fund-raising. >> joyce, what's your topic on sisters-in-law, your podcast? >> every friday afternoon we talk about the issues that we think people need to understand. it's sort of like peeling back the curtain on what we would be talking about if we were getting a glass of wine on a friday afternoon. i think the most important issue this week for americans is precisely what you've been talking about, that this is a criminal justice proceeding that would take place with anyone for

whom there was significant evidence that they committed a crime. what americans need to understand is that the process is legitimate. what the result will be is up to a jury of 12 people that will hear all of the evidence. the process itself is our rule of law in action. i'm very taken by the comparison to the latin american countries where people lost confidence in the courts, and that had spillover impacts for their entire government functioning. we need to make sure the system maintains its legitimacy. >> really quick, joyce, if this were just a regular person and not a former president and that person was going on social media threatening people involved with the case and insulting the judge, would something different be going on potentially? >> i think there would be serious conversation about a gag order if this was going on with another defendant. the problem here is that

imposing a gag order gets into questions involving a political candidate, and those are some close calls. there are legitimate reasons to give candidate trump room to speak. nothing easy happens with trump ever and it's not going to happen easily here. >> there you go. joyce vance, jeff rosen, thank you both very much. joining us now, former msnbc host chris matthews. chris, it's great to have you back on the show. >> thank you. >> what do you make of where donald trump stands now with his protective order potentially and joyce vance even talking about this judge having to consider all sorts of potentials because of the way he behaves? >> i had the same experience as

gene. our great pride is we've had clean elections. we've had people who conceded defeat at the end of them. in the entire age of television when we first got tvs at home, the defeated candidate went on television and said he lost or she lost with hillary clinton. you can call jack smith deranged, make fun of him the way you did of jeb bush or marco rubio, but once this guy is in court with you and has the law on his side and operates with procedure, you're going to look like the bad guy. the beauty of this is we're going to have a concession speech basically on television in the form of a trial. i think that's something trump is scared to death of, where he sits in the defendant's booth in that desk and he has to act like a defendant in a criminal case. >> chris, you and i have been

around politicians in washington for a very, very long time. i'm just curious, we finally got ron desantis yesterday to say, of course donald trump lost, but this is something the majority of republicans don't want to say. usually they only say it when they have no shot at winning a primary. >> when they're on their way out the door like mitt romney. okay, i can leave the room now and speak honestly. but these guys have an oath too. i do think this idea of, okay, you're donald trump, you're watching election reports coming in from arizona and fox tells you you lost there and then you look at wisconsin and you find out they're 12,000 short in

georgia. you're facing real numbers like you did in 2016. this time they're against you. it's close. as jefferson said, if it's one vote, it still matters. you've got to accept the loss. in realtime, he was accepting reality. it's a tough judge in this case. i think she's going to insist of hearing the truth of what trump did to the country. he lied and said, "i won," knowing he didn't. those people in the republican party are not with trump right now will think this is an honest case. i've come a long way with newt gingrich and jimmy carter and everything where washington was no good. it eventually became the deep state. it was corrupt jim wright, then it was corrupt everybody and nixon. and everybody's corrupt. and finally the whole city is

corrupt. this trial is going to be held in washington and we have to face the reality that some people aren't going to believe it, because we've come this far. >> chris matthews, as always, thanks a lot. polls are open this morning in ohio, where voters are casting their ballots in a closely watched special election. ohioans are set to decide whether it should be harder to change the state's constitution. the outcome of today's election could have a major impact on abortion rights in november. for more, let's bring in nbc news capitol hill correspondent ali vitali, who's live in columbus, ohio this morning. what can you tell us? >> reporter: this is really a proxy battle in the post roe era. we talk often of the dobbs decision and the political implications. this is a test of how it will

fare politically in a red state. republicans have a stronghold on the way the politics are done. it becomes clear that voters here, despite this being an august special election, voters are still tuned in. you're seeing turnout of over 500,000 people. it might sound like a small number, but it's much higher than we've seen in competitive senate and gubernatorial primaries in recent years. it's a testament, i think, in talking to people on both sides of the issue, to the fact that voters are engaged. they are aware that right now today they are voting on something that has to do with how constitutional amendments are adjudicated. what they're really voting on is something that will have an impact on a ballot measure that's coming up in november that will enshrine abortion

protections into the state's constitution. republicans in ohio had gotten rid of august special elections. they said no more. then they looked a little bit down the calendar, saw this abortion referendum coming up in november and instead made the decision to do this special election today in august to make changes to the way you can amend the state's constitution. i talked to one republican state legislator yesterday who said this could be a moment where his party did the wrong thing strategically. watch. >> what's the lesson for your party if come tuesday night or wednesday morning, the ballot initiative fails? >> maybe we should spend more time thinking through things before taking this step. >> maybe less red meat for the

base? >> there is a way to provide the red meat and do things in a thoughtful way. i'm afraid this was rushed a little bit, because we had to make a certain deadline to be able to get it done. i think it could have had a little more debate. i'm not sure i would have put it on the ballot if it wasn't that rushed format, if it didn't seem pretty hypocritical to what we did just a few months ago by eliminating special elections. >> reporter: there's the hypocrisy angle. if it were just republicans versus democrats on this issue, there are more republicans registered in the state of ohio. they would likely win. but abortion is not a clean sweep issue. there are concerns about what this could say on the anti-abortion side of this if

issue one actually fails. >> thank you very much for that report. coming up on "morning joe," china's economy could be weaker than it looks, and it may be due to something called economic long covid. we'll explain what that is coming up. plus, in the aftermath of "oppenheimer" we share the stories of the downwinders, the nearly half a million people who lived and worked in towns downwind of where the atomic bomb was first tested. how some families are still feeling the effects of the fallout. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. g "morning " we'll be right back.

♪♪ with fastsigns, create striking custom visuals that inspire pride district-wide. ♪♪ fastsigns. make your statement. ♪ with wet amd, sometimes i worry my world is getting smaller because of my sight. but now, i can open up my world with vabysmo. vabysmo is the first fda-approved treatment for people with wet amd that improves vision and delivers a chance for up to 4 months between treatments. which means doing more of what i love. ♪ vabysmo is the only treatment designed to block 2 causes of wet amd. vabysmo is an eye injection. don't take it if you have an infection or active swelling in or around your eye, or are allergic to it or any of its ingredients. treatments like vabysmo can cause eye infection or retinal detachment. vabysmo may cause a temporary increase in eye pressure

after receiving the injection. although uncommon, there is a potential risk of heart attack or stroke associated with blood clots. open up your world! a chance for up to 4 months between treatments with vabysmo. ask your doctor.

♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ wow, you get to watch all your favorite stuff. only pay for what you need. it's to die for. and it's all right here. streaming was never this easy, you know. this is the way. you really went all out didn't you? um, it's called commitment. could you turn down the volume? here, you can try. get way more into what your into when you stream on the xfinity 10g network.

♪♪ welcome back to "morning joe." look at seattle this morning at half past the hour. it's good to have you back with us in the fourth hour here. new analysis of the chinese economy suggests it could be weaker than it looks. axios talked to economist adam posen about the economic long covid plaguing china following long-term lockdowns that stunted the economy. he argues that china's arbitrary restrictions of economic activity goes back to 2015 and has resulted in citizens hoarding their money instead of investing or spending it. >> gene robinson, i've thought for the past couple years that this is really the top economic story, this slowing down of china.

i'm not saying it's exactly what we saw with japan, but the parallels are so sharp. we were told in '87, '88 and '89 that japan was going to overtake us, they were going to buy everything. we were going to be japan's granary by 2020. they were going to surpass us. they could have, but they made one unforced error after another, haven't they? and here we are with china's economy just dragging along. >> it is like the japan story on steroids, a much bigger story and potentially an even bigger sort of crash of china's economy as that population ages, just like japan's did. they've just got a whole bunch of problems coming their way. it starts really, i think, with

president xi's economic policies, which were bad. he sought to centralize everything back under state control that certainly affected negatively the dynamism of the chinese economy and then covid had a huge impact. it's just an astonishing thing. they were going to overtake us any year now, and now that keeps getting pushed further and further into the future. you just kind of see that curve leveling off as the china economy frankly stagnates. we were used to 10% growth per year in china, and now we're talking about fraction of a

percent growth happening in what used to be a really dynamic economy. you've got to put a lot of it down to president xi. >> you look at three decisions. we said it in realtime. we were shocked he was doing it. the first decision had to do with the crackdown in hong kong. hong kong was a vibrant economic center of asia. it still is an economic center, but nothing like it was. so you had the crackdown in hong kong. then you had xi aggressively going after the best and the brightest, the entrepreneurs, the people who were extraordinarily successful who had created some unbelievable brands there. he cracked down. you look at jack ma. the guy disappeared because he decided he liked power more than he liked entrepreneurs building out the economy. then finally, the third thing

was, of course, the long covid lockdown that was the most extreme of the major economies in the world. those things have had a massive impact on the economy. shares of us banks dropped in pre-market trading this morn morning after moody's downgraded the credit ratings of several american banks. joining us now, anchor of cnbc's world wide exchange frank collins. let's start with the downgrading of ten banks. what does it mean overall? >> first off, down grading on concerns about their profitability and the credit strength in the sector, so very serious concerns when you're talking about financial companies that lend money to other people. moody's warning they may

downgrade some of the nation's biggest banks like jp morgan. the market just opened. shares are down between 1 and 2%, very sizable downside moves. second quarter results showed growing profitability measures and a big slowdown when it came to not only lending by banks but demand by consumers for lending. another big issue, commercial real estate. more and more people are working from home, less people going into the office. that's a big area of profitability for many of these banks. they lend to commercial builders or other companies that want to build out office space. that's obviously seen a big shift ever since the pandemic. some of the names that were already downgraded, mid-sized lenders, capital one, citizen's financial and also fifth third

bank corp. morgan stanley has said loan demand is continuing to weaken, something the fed has highlighted. >> you mentioned working at home. you have news on zoom. tell us about it. >> i think this qualifies as irony. zoom is telling its workers to get back to the office. if you live within 50 miles of the office, they want to see you back in the office two days a week. the ceo is basically saying zoom works better when people come into the office, very ironic. during the pandemic, zoom became a verb. you zoomed people. it was a pandemic darling. i think zoom, like a lot of other big tech companies, google, salesforce, they're trying to have the balance of hybrid work and flexibility and also people coming into the

office to collaborate and be more productive. also, the mega millions drawing is tonight. it is the largest jackpot ever? >> yeah. it's 1.55 billion. the lump sum is just 750 million, guys. chances of winning, basically one person in america has a chance of winning. we've gone 31 drawings without a winner so a lot of anticipation. still ahead on "morning joe," one of the consequences of the manhattan project that has been overlooked for decades. we're digging into the long-term effects for the people who lived downwind from where the first nuclear bomb was tested. that's straight ahead on "morning joe."

subway's now slicing their deli meats fresh. that's why the new titan turkey is proferred by this football pro. and proferred by this football pro who actually uses her feet. and if we profer it, we know you'll prefer it too. i use my feet. have you seen me scramble?

[whistle] rover! he will bark at you once, but then you're best friends for life. helicopter on your finger to get his attention like this. king king... ♪ he loves people. can't wait. ♪♪

the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. and it could strike at any time. think you're not at risk? wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist

about shingles prevention. the release of christopher nolan's film "oppenheimer" as brought renewed attention to the history of the manhattan project, the research team that would bring the world's first nuclear weapon to life. but little is known about the consequences faced by many residents who lived and works in the towns neighboring the trinity testing site, where the bomb was first detonated. daniella, what did you find out? >> good morning, guys. almost half a million new mexicans were affected by the radiation fallout of the trinity test. these residents, who were not part of the manhattan project, say they were never warned before the bomb went off and never evacuated.

we went to the site and surrounding towns to find out why they were never compensated and what comes next. >> how long has your family had this ranch? >> since the late 1800s. >> the family has called this ranch home for over a century. today they are known as downwinders, one of the families who live downwind from the trinity test site in the new mexico desert. the blast location was famously depicted in the recently released hollywood film "oppenheimer." this is the trinity test site, where 78 years ago the world's first nuclear weapon was successfully detonated. the ranch is just 35 miles east of trinity. >> they had cattle trucks on the outskirts of town that they were going to evacuate people with. >> but they never did?

>> no. >> while the infamous trinity blast took place nearly eight decades ago, the family says it continues to feel its impact. their mother and three of their older siblings were at this ranch when the test bomb detonated. cancer diagnoses followed. >> my mom had cancer. >> you had three brain tumors? >> mm-hm. it was one, but it would break out and grow again. i was going blind. >> margie here has survived thyroid cancer. my brother greg died of stomach cancer. >> it's unclear what the team now about the effects of radiation exposure. the resulting dust cloud, quote, was potentially a very dangerous hazard extending 90 miles northeast of the site.

the ranch was right in that zone. for decades, doctors have drawn connections between radiation exposure and health problems, including cancer. >> the stories from hiroshima and nagasaki, we know there are multiple tims -- types of cancer. we're still learning about the health effects of radiation, but clearly cancer is very well documented. >> a new study released last month finds that the fallout of the trinity blast was far bigger than originally thought, impacting as many as 46 states and canada. in 1990 legislation known as a radiation exposure compensation act was signed to provide monetary compensation to individuals residing downwind from atomic weapons tests.

it cluded utah and arizona, but not new mexico. now an amendment that would include new mexico downwinders has passed this year. >> it is environmental injustice at the most explosive proportions. there was no good reason for it. >> today fernandez is helping lead the bill through the house and helping downwinders' families connect the dots between medical issues and the original blast. >> people didn't know about anything before it detonated. in this little village back then, there was no electricity. we lived very isolated. they didn't know what radiation exposure was. no one knew what cancer was. we hadn't heard those terms in our community before. >> the work conducted at trinity

led to the eventually bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki, japan, which ended world war ii in the pacific. now downwinder advocates say it's time for the u.s. to compensate all downwinders for the role they played to end the war. >> we didn't know how bad radiation was back then, but we know better now. >> we reached out to the department of defense and the department of energy seeking comment about why these downwinders were never warned in advance about the trinity blast, the lack of monitoring and inspection in the immediate aftermath of the blast and why the downwinders have never been compensated. both agencies declined to comment. >> wow. >> no comment. daniella, thank you very much for that report. wow. >> isn't it fascinating that when they provided relief, they provided relief to everybody but new mexico. any reasoning why congress left the original downwinders out of

that bill? >> yeah. i mean, from everybody from activists to legislators, everybody says that's the $2.5 million question. from the reports about this and how it's been measured in the past are just coming to light now. it seems like we'll finally get some restitution for these people who have been suffering for a while now. >> daniella, thank you. >> great work. coming up, a look at the new documentary exploring the life and legacy of the nun who could very well be the next catholic saint. that is straight ahead on "morning joe." orning joe." check. psych! and i'm about to steal this game from you just like i stole kelly carter in high school. you got no game dude, that's a foul! and now you're ready to settle the score. game over.

and if you don't have the right home insurance coverage, well, you could end up paying for all this yourself. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem, yeah, like me. thanks, bro. take a lap, rookie. real mature. when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v

to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. what if your entire day glided like dove men?

it's made with a plant-based moisturizer and glides on without irritation. so you can glide through your entire day with confidence. ♪♪ feel the dove men glide. david: as we start a new school year, there's something new happening in california's public schools. they're called community schools. leslie: it really is shared leadership with families, students, educators, and communities. jessie: i feel like we're really valued as partners. david: it's a more innovative, holistic approach. grant: in addition to academic services, we look at serving the whole family. narrator: wellness centers, food pantries, and parental education. jessie: they're already making a difference. david: california's community schools: reimagining public education.

[ speaking in a non-english language ]

that was part of the trailer for the film "with this light," which traces the story of a woman who could be the next catholic saint. her name is sister maria rosa lagol, known as the mother teresa of central america. as a girl growing up in honduras, she lost her mother at just 6 years old, inspiring her to create homes for orphans. starting her mission in the '60s, she would create over 500 homes for children, teens and single mothers. joining us now, the film's co-director, laura bermudez and executive producer jessica sarahwitz. thank you for being with us. >> as we reviewed the story of this amazing woman, clearly if

she had gotten the conviction she wanted to do something at 6 years old, this was even before she had taken into the ministry, even before she was a nun, explain that motivation and do you think the motivation she had as a preteenager helped lead her into ministry and lead her into her life's work? >> she had a calling for sure. she was an orphan and she saw this nuns, franciscan nuns where she is in honduras and she knew, she just said it, she grabbed her things and she went -- she told them where are you and she told them, oh, i'm in the city in honduras and she just went. didn't ask for permission from her grandparents. >> her calling. she thought it was her calling? >> definitely, right, jessica? >> absolutely. >> this is gene robinson.

where does the process stand in the process of sainthood right now? >> right, well, there is a committee that is formed already in honduras. and the community has really gotten together and collected a lot of testimonies, which is really important because they're searching for the miracle. and, of course, the miracles exist. so, but they have to be collected in a particular way, in a particular format and it also gives an opportunity for the community to come together and feel heard, which is truly important. >> i watched the documentary last night. and i loved it. it was beautifully done. i have a question about the making of the film. you know, you portrayed central america in a forward positive-thinking way, where oftentimes in storytelling central america can be done in the lens of trauma, political

instability, violence. but you managed to do it in a very authentic way and really centralized women at the center of it. did you have trouble getting support making this film? >> this -- we wanted to change the narrative because we are usually portrayed as a victim narrative and with the support of all women-led team, like jessica and nicole, the co-director, and all of us wanted to do something. and as a honduran, myself, we don't want those victim narratives anymore. like you said, violence, yes, this is a very complex country, but this is resilience. this is a story from within. a leader of honduras that changed things, an orphan that worked for so many, 87,000 people. this is huge. so this was important to us. so, we didn't have problems because we had just an amazing team that we all wanted this, from all levels.

>> and, jessica, last word to you, what are you hoping people will take away from this? >> i'm really hoping that people take away a sense of hope and also to understand that there is really no small acts of kindness. sister demonstrated this over and over, that, you know, when community come together, anything is possible. because it is not money that really, you know, moves mountains, it is faith. it is faith. and so i hope that this film inspires the viewer, the audience, and it gives just a little bit more energy to go out and serve. >> with this light is in theaters now and is available through video on demand starting on august 15th. >> what a great message. >> laura bermudez and jessica sarowitz, thank you for bringing

us her story, this incredible story, with lots of hope. that does it for us this morning. ana cabrera picks up the coverage after a quick final break. cabrera picks up the coravege after a quick final break. ♪ chevy silverado has what it takes to do it all. with up to 13 camera views. and the z71 off-road package. ♪

you ok? yeah. any truck can help you make a living. this one helps you build a life. chevy silverado. ever since i retired, i've had trouble falling asleep and staying asleep - you know, insomnia. which was making my days feel like an uphill battle. that is, until i discovered something different, quviviq - a once-nightly fda approved medication for adults with insomnia. not getting enough sleep was leaving me tired. -oh come on! but quviviq helped me get more sleep. quviviq works differently than medication you may have taken in the past. it's thought to target one of the biological causes of insomnia: overactive wake signals. and when taken every night, studies showed that sleep continued to improve over time. do not take quviviq if you have narcolepsy. don't drink alcohol while taking quviviq or drive or operate heavy machinery until you feel fully alert. quviviq may cause temporary inability to move or talk or hallucinations while falling asleep or waking up. quviviq may cause sleepiness during the day. quviviq may lead to doing activities while not fully awake that you don't remember the next day, like walking, driving and making or eating food. worsening depression, including suicidal thoughts, may occur.

most common side effects are headaches and sleepiness. it's quviviq. ask your doctor if it's right for you. stop right there! this week, get the denny's super slam starting at $7.99. hungry for all your breakfast favorites? when you want america's biggest breakfast starting at $7.99... at denny's, it's diner time. now open really late. trying vapes to quit smoking might feel like progress, it's diner time. but with 3x more nicotine than a pack of cigarettes - vapes increase cravings - trapping you in an endless craving loop. nicorette reduces cravings until they're gone for good. right now on "ana cabrera reports," a brutal wave of extreme weather. mother nature unleashing severe storms, stretching from tennessee to new york. at least two people confirmed dead. check out this video of a