if you love a little levity after this jam-packed news day you're in luck. after a new deal in place late night shows are back ipproduction tonight.

i'll be a guest along with the very hilarious tracey morgan with the newest edition. i make an impassioned case for minivans. trust me, persuasive. you can catch that tonight on 12:35 a.m. on msnbc. that is "all in" on this tuesday night. alex wagner starts right now. >> i love tracey morgan and chris hayes. did he make an impassioned case for mini vans? >> i don't know. i should follow up with him and ask did i persuade you on mini vans? thanks to you at home for joining me this evening. there is as you know major breaking news tonight about the republican party and its leadership from the former president of the united states who was just smacked down by a judge in new york to the historic chaos unfolding in the house of representatives where

kevin mccarthy was just ousted as speaker of the house. and we are going to get to all of that this evening. but to understand how we got here we need to go back exactly 1,000 days ago to january 6th, 2021 when a violent mob stormed the u.s. capitol. in the wake of that deadly attack minority leader kevin mccarthy took to the house floor and said this. >> the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. >> that moment was the closest kevin mccarthy ever came to pulling himself out from under his party's hard right base. it did not last long. after that rebuke of donald trump, mr. mccarthy spent each and every paying penance, trying

to work his way back into the good graces of the far-right. less than three weeks later mccarthy flew down to mar-a-lago to pledge fealty to donald trump. later that year mccarthy refused to work with democrats to establish a nonpartisan commission to investigate the events of january 6th. when democrats went ahead with what became the january 6th committee, mccarthy did everything in his power to discredit that investigation. when republicans narrow mid-term victory handed them an equally narrow majority in the house, mccarthy will still working off his debt to the maga base after 14 bruising failed votes for speaker, he effectively sold his speakership to the maga caucus. he gave conservative house freedom caucus members coveted committee assignments. he opened a wide ranging investigation into the so-called weaponization of the federal government. and he gave far-right republicans the ability to oust

him from the speakership with just a single member needed to call that vote. but even after all of that far-right republicans still wanted more, and speaker mccarthy obliged. he started a standoff with the white house over the debt ceiling. he opened an impeachment inquiry into president biden. he passed an ultraconservative bill to fund the government, which included massive cuts to social safety programs. but none of it was enough. and it all came to a head today when speaker mccarthy learned a lesson he probably could have learned a thousand days ago. you cannot appease the mob. this was the moment today when kevin mccarthy officially lost his speakership. >> the yeas are 216. the nays are 210. the resolution is adopted. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the office of speaker of the house of the united states house of representatives is here by declared vacant. >> today these eight republicans voted with all of the democrats in the house to remove mccarthy from power to end his speakership. in a last ditch effort to save mccarthy his allies made overt appeals to democrats to bail him out. they asked democrats to vote with republicans to keep mccarthy in power, but democrats in the house had already learned over the last thousand days that they could not trust kevin mccarthy. kevin mccarthy had either ignored them entirely or sold them out again and again. just this week after democrats helped mccarthy avert a disastrous government shutdown, mccarthy went on television and tried to blame democrats for the dysfunction. >> i wasn't sure it was going to pass. you want to know why? because the democrats try to do everything they can not to let

it pass. >> democrats were the ones who voted for this in a larger number than republicans to keep the continuing resolution alive. >> that moment was reportedly foremost in democrats' minds when they voted in lock step against kevin mccarthy today. he had his chance to earn their trust and he blew it. tonight congressman mccarthy announced he is officially giving up. he will not run for speaker again. >> i believe i can continue fight maybe in a different manner. i will not run for speaker again. i'll have the conference pick somebody else. >> house republicans are now in the wilderness, uncharted territory. for now congressman patrick mchenry will serve as interim speaker. he says he aims to hold an election for the new speaker next wednesday. on that note, republican congressman neelz has already nominated donald trump to be a speaker.

and he can do that because the speaker does not have to be a member of the house? but does he have to be in good standing with the law? just asking because today a new york judge had to place a gag order on donald trump for lies he has been spreading about court officials working his trial. but when trump was asked about the man he used to refer to as my kevin, trump imposed a gag order on himself. he had nothing to say. so just who gets to be the next speaker of the house very much an open question. maybe going to take a few rounds of voting or maybe more than a few rounds. as he was leaving the capitol tonight, republican congressman dusty johnson summed up his party's predicament saying you really have to whether or not the house is governable at all. i'm not sure i wish this job on anyone. joining me now is jennifer palmieri, former communications director under president obama.

david plouffe, senior white house advisor also in the administration, and brandon buck, former aide to republican house speakers paul ryan and john boehner. it's great to have all of you to talk about this historic moment and historic not really in a good way. david, how do you feel about what happened today? >> i'm not sure it's a job worth having. someone will take it. thal make a big of commitments and promises to try and appease the right. i think it sets up chaos and turbulence and potential damage to the economy in the not-too-distant future. i think if you're an american it's a pretty unsettling but predictable turn of events. now, nancy pelosi was able to manage quite fine with a majority this narrow, but i'm not sure anybody who comes in

the aftermath of mccarthy has any chance of landing the airplane that will benefit the republican party but certainly america more broadly. >> it really bears mentioning pelosi was speaker with very similar margins, and it looked nothing like this chaos. what did you make of democrats' position here absolutely not trying to help kevin mccarthy in any way? >> i talked to a lot of democrats today, i spent all day on the hill, alex, you know what that was, your circus days. a lot of people sending their regards to you. i talked to a lot of house democrats, a lot of moderate democrats, and i think particularly the moderate democrats, they thought really long and hard about whether they should throw kevin mccarthy a lifeline, and i think had they thought they were dealing with somebody, a man of integrity, this was someone that continued speakership might help avert

chaos. people might consider bringing that, but they were really convinced, he was not a man of his word, someone that had misled republicans and democrats. and i talked to congresswoman elissa slotkin who said they're having a mini war in their caucus and they need to sort that out. i talked to nancy mace and congressman tim birchet of tennessee. both of those two voted 15 times to make kevin mccarthy speaker in january, right? and i think in the both cases they felt mccarthy in addition to not governing well and congressman birchett is worried about spending he publicly mocked them. nancy mase felt misled particularly on some of the

abortion policies she expected to be dealt with in the house. so it was a lot of bad faith across the board that, you know, in addition to the maga will trying to control him that brought him to this point. >> jen, just to follow up on that, the way in which this was very deeply personal for those who voted to oust him, there was reporting that that interview kevin mccarthy did on sunday with margaret brennen on cbs, was played to the democratic caucus before they made their votes really just to kind of drive the knife in his speakership, to show democrats just what a turncoat kevin mccarthy was. did you hear that from democrats, moderates who might have otherwise been inclined to support kevin mccarthy as he continued to hold onto the gavel? >> yeah. >> full stop. >> yes i did, full stop. and it seemed this ran at the beginning of the house democratic caucus, and it had

the intended effect, but i think democrats have been wrestling with this for a while, this question of how they're going to deal with it. they thought this is not a partisan decision. i think they really thought we can't trust this man, we can't give him our vote certainly with no kind of assurances, they're just going to have to it on their own. yes, it puts you in a dangerous situation pluf described but republicans had to figure it out. >> but, dot, dot, dot. what is the answer here? i think let's talk for a second about nancy mase who was upset for personal reasons, for policy reasons but not necessarily who wanted the speaker to be more extreme on certain social programs, for example, on abortion, and yet the person she's going to end up with is likely to be more hard right than kevin mccarthy. is that not correct? >> certainly.

and i don't know if they're further to the right but everyone of those folks who kicked out kevin mccarthy know they can do that to the next person, and whoever is speaker is going to have to look over their shoulder than anyone ever in the past. what dusty said is absolutely right. we're right now not fit for governing. we're in a party much more made for being in the minority. we like to vote against things. their problem is not really with the speaker of the house. it wasn't with kevin mccarthy, it wasn't with paul ryan or john boehner. these guys just don't like the reality to govern. there are things you have to do like keep the government open, raise the debt limit, fund the government in the long-term, and those are fireable offenses. they set a bar he can never meet. the next person is going to have to meet that same bar as well.

it's the problem being speaker these days. you're basically running around trying to make the fantasies of these numbers become a reality. i understand stickup more and fight back. all that stuff you talked about in the open wasn't enough to save mccarthy, it was required to get to this point. and that's the reality of being republican speaker right now. you have to do so many things and it worked for them in their own political world. >> david, in this bizarre world which we all unfortunately live some days matt gaetz is incredibly powerful. if you're joe biden looking at all of this unfold, what is your assessment of the situation as it concerns your own priorities? >> well, what a frightening fact it is matt gaetz is one of the

most powerful? we're the most powerful city in the world. listen, joe biden along with i think every democrat and a lot of republicans wants to keep the government open. that's a complicating factor. honestly the list of legislation beyond that i don't think he can expect much, but i'm sure biden can find ways to lift this up on the campaign trail, which is if you get donald trump and matt gaetz, you know, full control from a policy standpoint, from a leadership standpoint, from a moral standpoint, you know, it's devastating. so i think this dysfunction -- i don't want to oesh state it because swing voters from arizona, wisconsin, the presidential race don't pay much to congress, but to the extent the trump circus looks like it's on steroids now and in the

entire party is going to follow him where it's about theater and performance. but, listen, i don't see how the government is going to stay hoep in 43, 42 days whenever it is because to brenden's point i think the lease just got a lot shorter. the leash was already like 3 inches. now it's almost completely nonexist tpt. and so at the end of the day it's going to make the next 45 days harder. but i do think having all that dysfunction as the backdrop of a presidential race one of joe biden's core arguments is going to be you don't want to return to the circus. it's a supporting fact. >> please stay with me because we have a lot more ahead including the eight republicans who voted yes on making mccarthy the first speaker ousted from the house of representatives. turns out those eight republicans all have one big thing in common. and after that what happens when donald trump gets a gag

order? stay with us. when donald trump gets a gag order? stay with us

goli, taste your goals. congressman, will you resign? >> that was the now former speaker of the house speaker mccarthy moments after he was

effectively fired from his job this afternoon. mccarthy walked right past reporters ignoring their questions whether he would resign with a big smile plastered on his face. now, most politicians would not want to be the reason their party leader had to make that kind of walk of shame not just out of fear about what the party might do as retribution but also out of fear how their constituents might respond. and okay, most republicans did not actually vote to oust kevin mccarthy today, but eight of them very much did. and if you look at how eight all of those republicans did in the 2022 mid-terms, you're going to notice a pattern. they were all elected with incredibly safe margins of victory. in other words, they are not too worried about getting elected. compare tat to, say, lauren boebert, here was her vote on the house floor today. >> boebert. nay. >> no for now.

>> congresswoman boebert sort of trying to have it both ways there. she wanted her rebel street cred, but in the end she didn't actually vote to oust mccarthy, and that may have something to do with the fact ms. boebert's last election was one where she only won by 546 votes. in other words, lauren boebert cannot afford to alienate any voters. but these eight people, they could. i think that is an important part of the story here. still with me jen palmieri, co-host of the circus. brenden, it seems to me the safety of the members in these districts really has a role to play in terms of just how insane they can afford to be in the house of representatives. is this the root of the problem? and can republican leadership do anything about it? >> it's the root of what

happened today, absolutely. the culture of the house republican conference is always to do whatever is best for the base, and that goes for everything we do. when i first got to the hill, you knew who your majority makers were, those people in the swing districts you had to pay attention to. you understood you couldn't go too far and understood you needed to vote a certain way because they were the ones who kept you in the majority. everything is about not only playing to the base but also throwing your colleagues under the bus. they're very cavalier with some of their swing district members. now, there aren't many of them left, and that's why it is. no one pays attention to the middle anymore. i don't think see reason why that's going to change course anytime soon. we only have a few swing districtsch. >> there's also the strange cognitive dissonance between the far right caucus doing as much

as they can foomake trouble for rino establishment republicans and some of those that are left trying to blame this entire mess on the democrats, which is what was happening today. republicans out there saying speaker mccarthy was being thrown overboard. and my question is who is that logic going to work on? >> i think they didn't know what to do. we went from 24 hours ago kevin mccarthy tweeted "x" whatever, bring it on. and 24 hours later he is gone and just so he would not run again to be speaker of the house. i think that they were just spinning their wheels and turning, and the default is to blame democrats for not standing by kevin mccarthy. what do you think would happen to kevin mccarthy if democrats started to vote for him? i think republicans would have bolted from mccarthy even sooner. i just don't there's any scenario under which kevin mccarthy was going to remain the

speaker. >> david, what -- is there any argument that republicans can make to swing state voters that doesn't make them look like a ship of fools as it regards to the speaker vote? >> no, not -- and the point brendan makes is really important. that's what john boehner did, nancy pelosi did. that's different now. and it's a very fragile majority republicans have. if you lay out your turn out on the districts democrats should win somehow comfortable. that's the model, not the real world. i don't think so. and again, i think you've got trump, you've got the chaos in the house. i think there's a lot of swing voters out there who say they don't want to return to that. and i think particularly if

democrats, and i think they can make the argument, hey, if trump wins and republicans win in the house, do you really want this ship to turn. no. i think brendan's point is so important. they've created this false reality. it's a world they want to live in, which is not the world that exists. and swing voters don't really exist in that world. it's all about catering to 12% of the population which is our core maga base. >> david, just to follow up on that, it defies logic given that the vulnerable swing state republicans are the ones that have handed kevin mccarthy the speaker's gavel in the first place, right? brendan says i think rightly so the house republican conference is very cavalier with their most vulnerable members. >> yeah, i mean, cavalier is too strong a word. they don't care basically. and again, this is, you know,

nancy pelosi, john boehner, all these folks, you know, they have their governing path they have to put on course but then you have your political. and you're worried about those vulnerable members particularly if they have a narrow majority. so those are the people that i think are most interesting. when they go back to town halls, when they're doing interviews with reporters and those vulnerable reporters in new york and california and other swing states, this kind of chaos really doesn't suit them. and, again, this is a majority run into a presidential year and election and seems many republicans in the house could care less. >> to be continued i suppose. the co-host of the new msnbc podcast how to win in 2024, excellent, which is available now wherever you get your podcasts. thank you all so much for your

time. i sincerely appreciate it. we have much more still to come tonight including the humiliating split screen for the republican party today. the speaker ousted, the front-runner gagged. what it says about the party of lincoln. that's ahead, but first what donald trump did to earn a gag order in court today. neil katyal is here to talk about that next. katyal is here about that next.

is it possible my network could take my business to the next level? it is with comcast business.

powering all your devices with gig-speed wifi. and you get fast downloads and uploads. pick it up! pick it up! oh we got this! because it's powered by the next generation 10g network. more speed for your business? it's not just possible. it's happening. get started for $59.99 a month for 12 months. plus, ask how to get an $800 prepaid card with a qualifying internet bundle. comcast business, powering possibilities.

it only took two days, technically a day and a half, for donald trump to be gagged by judge engoron in his new york fraud trial. it all happened after trump went on truth social and posted the name, photograph, and instagram account of the judge's principal law clerk. the post attacked the clerk for being in a photograph with senate majority leader democrat chuck schumer. then trump went to the cameras outside the courthouse and continued his evective. >> the attorney general is a fraud and we have to expose him as that. you see what's going on. it's a rigged deal. but, frankly, schumer and the

principal clerk, that is disgraceful. >> judge engoron did not take any of this lightly calling the attacks unacceptable and inappropriate, he ordered trump to remove the post, and according to nbc news, the judge told the court to consider this a gag order on all parties with respect to posting or publicly speaking about any member of my staff. the judge said that violations of this order would lead to swift, meaningful sanctions. i'm joined now by former acting solicitor-general neil katyal. first of all, great to see you in person. new york city is where all the action is legally speaking. first of all, meaningful sanctions, what does that mean? >> it could mean if anything if there's a gag order imposed and it's violated, it's putting someone in jail. the gag order is hard to get in a case. i don't think i've ever seen it -- >> really? >> because people use common

sense. it's kind of like failing kindergarten. to get a gag order imposed you've got to kind of try. manage to work at it and succeed. but it took a lot of work on his part, and now i think the judge is basically saying you attack a member of my staff and there will be serious sanctions. >> well, and yet as hard as it is to get the gag order, i think it's the broad expectation that trump is inevitably going to violate it in some fashion or slander some other person involved in the case whether it's the prosecution or judge itself. so would your expectation be this is going to be the punitive ladder up in terms of the judge issuing more gag orders until at some point he's forced to do something more drastic? >> yes, exactly. so basically you ask if trump is going to violate the gag order, almost certainly yes. if it's more likely he'll violate the gag order than almost anything like george

santot being the next speaker, we're talking significant probability he's going to violate the gag order, and will the judge at that point take the really heavy medicine of putting former president in jail or will it be some sort of warning and monetary fine first? i suspect the latter where, but it really does depend on how violates it. >> and is trump's existential goal to stress test, and the idea he wants -- part of this is he feeds off this controversy. he gains strength from disruption and -- i mean honestly can you say as a lawyer we as a country could really face the possibility of a president, criminal defendant being put in jail? that just seems -- as necessary as that may ultimately be, that seems hard to fathom. >> trump is kind of vaulder mort like figure that gets his strength by basically attacking institutions, and he's done it

here. he's done it in the january 6th trial which there's another potential gag order in the hearing on that that's coming up. so, yes, that's how trump acts. and judges are loathe to jail anyone particularly before a jury convicts. so you don't like to do stuff in advance, but when you have a litigant that behaves this way, you have no other choice. if this were any other litigant we'd already see serious sanctions and perhaps even jail at this point. >> you mention judge tanya chutkan overseeing the case. she's having a hearing on october 16th to sort of determine whether or not there's going to be punitive measures taken against trump. the prosecution and the doj would very much like the president to be censored in some way. are judges watching others behaviors in this? does judge engoron in the tish james games sort of set a

precedent for judge chutkan or are these separate and apart from one another? >> the technical answer is they're separate and apart from one another. judges are human beings, and every time you cross for example new york crossed the threshold of indicting a former president. never been done before. but the manhattan district attorney alvin bragg does that. and lo and behold you see indictments in other jurisdictions both federal and fulton county, georgia, as a result. here this judge has taken a step of issuing a gag order against the former president. yes, this is a new york civil trial, but you can bet dollars to donuts that judge chutkan, a very respected judge in d.c., is watching these proceedings and thinking i'm going to wind up in a mess too with a defendant attacking my clerks, attacking myself and the like. she's incredibly careful and i think tried to do everything to

avoid a showdown, but that showdown is now looking inevitable. and as you say on october 16th there will be a hearing, and i did expect at that point there will be some sort of order imposed on donald trump as the court can't tolerate those. trump is expecting i'll bring this to the supreme court, the sanctions and the like it's my free speech. he'll lose that every day of the week. this is supreme court and regardless people who have disagreements about various things, abortion, whatever, but they really care about the decorum of court proceedings, the legitimacy of courts, and they'll not stand for this kind of behavior with a federal judge. >> yeah, and they prove themselves to be particularly sensitive to criticized lobbed from the outside at the justices, right, whether that criticism is warranted or not. one would imagine they'd be sympathetic to the judges in this case who may be recipients of trump's slander. there's a kind of libelist rhetoric or threatening rhetoric that trump issues forth on

social media, but there's also the fact, neil, that he's been in this courtroom, and he's kind of a big presence in this -- in this civil case. he's outside on the court steps. he's doing his version of tweeting. i've got to wonder i think it's clear the new york civil case deeply affects him perhaps because it's a financial case, but could you make the case the things he's saying on the courtroom steps are themselves an intimidation here? >> i would distinguish between what he's doing in court and out of court. in court it's his absolute right to be there. if he wants to be there and watch the proceedings, he should. and he obviously cares about how he's perceived on this network, and that's fine. the stuff he's doing outside the courtroom i have a real problem with. i think any second grader knows you don't go and attack the judge in your case. that is not an appropriate way to behave, but trump lacks the dignity of even a second grader.

and i do think it's real problem, but, you know, if he continues with the attacks and the staff order applies to only attacks on the staff, not on the judge. if he keeps attacking the judge i do expect yet another gag order to be filed this time about the judge. >> can they stop him from coming to court? >> it's a civil trial and you have an absolute and he's not going to be banned from attending his own trial. >> it's going to take several months. neil katyal, no disrespect to kindergartners and second graders. with first grader and a kindergartner i can say they're behaving better. still ahead the vote to oust kevin mccarthy today is historic but follows a pattern for the republican party. just how many of the republican

party has been pushed out one way or the other? we're going to count them coming up next. other we're going to count them coming up next. we planned well for retirement, but i wish we had more cash. you think those two have any idea? that they can sell their life insurance policy for cash? so they're basically sitting on a goldmine? i don't think they have a clue. that's crazy! well, not everyone knows coventry's helped thousands of people sell their policies for cash. even term policies. i can't believe they're just sitting up there! sitting on all this cash. if you own a

life insurance policy of $100,000 or more, you can sell all or part of it to coventry. even a term policy. for cash, or a combination of cash and coverage, with no future premiums. someone needs to tell them, that they're sitting on a goldmine, and you have no idea! hey, guys! you're sitting on a goldmine! come on, guys! do you hear that? i don't hear anything anymore. find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. there is a better way to manage diabetes. the dexcom g7 continuous glucose monitoring system eliminates painful finger sticks, helps lower a1c, and it's covered by medicare. before using the dexcom g7, i was really frustrated. all of that finger pricking and all that pain, my a1c was still stuck. before dexcom g7, i couldn't enjoy a single meal. i was always trying to outguess my glucose, and it was awful.

before dexcom g7, my diabetes was out of control because i was tired, not having the energy to do the things that i wanted to do. (female announcer) dexcom g7 is a small, easy-to-use wearable that sends your glucose numbers to your phone or dexcom receiver without painful finger sticks. the arrow shows the direction your glucose is heading-- up, down, or steady-- and because dexcom g7 is the most accurate cgm, you can make better decisions about food, medication, and activity in the moment. it can even alert you before you go too low or when you're high. oh, the fun is absolutely back. after dexcom g7, i can on the spot figure out what i'm gonna eat and how it's going to affect my glucose! when a friend calls and says, "hey, let's go to breakfast," i can get excited again. (earl) after using the dexcom g7, my diabetes, it doesn't slow me down at all. i lead line dancing three times a week, i exercise, and i'm just living a great life now. it's so easy to use. it has given me confidence and control, everything i need is right there on my phone.

(earl) the dexcom g7 is so small, so easy to use, and it's very discreet. (dr. aaron king) if you have diabetes, getting on dexcom is the single most important thing you can do. (david) within months, my a1c went down, that's 6.9. (donna) at my last checkup, my a1c was 5.9. (female announcer) dexcom is the number one recommended cgm brand and offers 24/7 tech support, so call now to get started. you'll talk to a real person. don't wait, this one short call could change your life. (bright music) 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. i do hope that i have left a few footprints behind that may be of value to those who come after me just as i have benefitted from the footprints of those who i followed to this most wonderful of institutions, the people's house.

>> dennis hastert, the man you saw just there was this century's very first republican speaker of the house. he held the speaker's gavel from 1999 to 2007. he got the job after the hasty departure of his predecessor, newt gingrich. that's because when republicans lost five seats in the house during the 1998 elections, they turned on gingrich. and his long time ally congressman bob livingston threatened today challenge him for the speakership. to this day david hastert remains the longest serving speaker in the conference. and he might have retired but after several years hastert was convicted of crimes related to child sex abuse. then there was john boehner who as speaker in 2015 faced the threat of a motion to vacate from congressman mark meadows. that motion never came to a

vote, but the effort alone led boehner to resign in the middle of his term. served for four years as speaker. and then there was paul ryan. his time as speaker coincided with donald trump's election and a new era of politic and the republican party, for that matter. ryan reportedly told friends that serving as speaker during the trump administration was, quote, agonizing. trump went after ryan with public insults in addition to trump's near daily controversies that ryan had to govern through. about 30 months into the job paul ryan opted to vacate the speaker's chair and also to retire from public office entirely. but now as of today kevin mccarthy the party's fourth speaker of the century served for 269 days before being ousted by members of his own party in a historic vote. so by our count here as my friend chris hayes pointed out to me arguably the most

successful republican speaker of the house in the 21st century was a serial child molester. now, to be fair it was only 2023. the gop has 77 more years to burnish its legacy this century, but, wow, does the trajectory so far not look great. coming up we're going to talk to npr about how republicans used to do it a couple centuries ago and used to do it a lot more effectively. that's when we come back. stay with us. fectively. that's when we come back stay with us from chrome to duckduckgo.

duckduckgo is a browser you download to your mobile and desktop devices. unlike chrome, the duckduckgo browser

has privacy built-in. it comes with a private alternative to google search, which doesn■t spy on your searches, and it blocks cookies and creepy ads. and there's no catch. it's free. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you around. join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on mobile and desktop today. you know, president abraham lincoln says i'm an optimist. >> that was how the former speaker of the house kevin mccarthy began his press conference earlier thisey. now, abraham lincoln may or may not have actually said that, but he definitely warned his colleagues at the illinois republican convention in 1858 that a house divided against itself cannot stand. 165 years later the republican party is quite different from what it was when abraham lincoln

issued that warning, but the party is again a house divided, ousting its own speaker for the first time in american history. is there any historical parallel for the death of this division? is there any way out of it? i know just who the ask. joining me now is the author of differ we must. steve, thanks for joining me on set. >> thank you so much. >> first your thoughts on kevin mccarthy invoking abraham lincoln today. >> well, having written this book on the efforts to build political coalitions and build on the majority, it's been noted just a few lawmakers were able to return mccarthy, but part of that has to do with the kind of politics they practiced over the past several years. you can argue had republicans stood for something different the past several years they

would have a big majority now and matt gaetz would have much less influence. instead, mccarthy is where he is, and by the way matt gaetz doesn't have a majority. and when lincoln said a house divided itself cannot stand, what he meant was sooner or later one side of the other has to win. >> absolutely, and i think you made the good point in the book lincoln was somebody ready to have difficult conversations and ready to have polite disagreements with one another. i would suggest to you the chasm separating the parties, it's hard to imagine the camaraderie in the same way. and yet when you look at the way in which democrats with very little apology secured kevin mccarthy's fate as an ousted speaker, one wonders if mccarthy had played that hand with democrats a little bit differently, if he perhaps had not gone on the sunday shows and said the potential government

shutdown was all their fault, if he had made more of an overture towards democrats, could his speakership have been saved? >> i think democrats probably did not act on personal considerations but on their calculations on their interests just as mccarthy was acting as he thought on his interests. and there may well have been a different politics when democrats would have seen it in their interest to prop up mccarthy, but they had so many substantive differences it seems clear to me they wanted to republicans to have to sort out the house themselves. >> even though the net result may be a radical far right speaker. let's talk about the parallel between now and the precipice between the american civil war. and the parallels you see between now and then and whether we are inevitably headed towards a fight among each other? >> i don't expect a war.

we have profound differences but often about means, about attitudes, about cultural trends. and i don't mean aren't real issues like abortions. they're about a few words on social media, and it's hard to see anything that compares to slavery. >> and that i think is a well-taken point, but when you look at january 6th when it is about -- >> political violence is very possible because we saw it on january 6th. we've seen a lot in american history and very possible we'd see something less -- >> i guess i wonder when you look at the lessons and conversations you outline in this book how do you extrapolate between what can and should happen today? >> lincoln is someone i was talking about interests a moment ago. lincoln thought about the interests of the person he was talking to, person he was dealing and tried to appeal to those interests. he tried to understand the other

person and figure out an argument why they should support him, support his point of view. that didn't always work. he was dealing with some very, very unpleasant people or people with very unpleasant views, and he was trying desperately to build a majority against slavery, which is very hard given the attitudes of the overwhelmingly white electorate at the time. and one of his insights i think was not to throw away people who might be of use to him some time, be civil to everyone but also insist on principles, and maybe from time to time you would find just enough people to ally with you to make a majority. the republican speaker of the house in the party of lincoln fell a few votes short. >> he sure did. i do wonder taking those votes to heart president biden he very much wants to talk to the part of the republican party in congress not entrenched in magaism. >> biden i'm not going to judge whether he's doing good or

badly, but he's attempting that lincoln style of politics. i want to disagree with policy and issues but there's a tent for negotiations. >> biden is always ready for a second chance. >> it's what democracy is. and if we think about the definition of dempocracy the person across the table who holds terrible beliefs, who's wrong about everything still has power because they still have the vote. the only way that wouldn't be true is if we didn't have democracy. if we're going to have democracy, we have to deal with people we dislike. >> i listen to you all the time, my friend. a treat to have you here in the flesh. thank you for your time tonight. congratulations on the book. again, it is "differ we must." that is our show for this evening. "way too early," with jonathan lemire is coming up next. today this body filled with people in fancy suits led by a few republicans who are running for scissors and supported by democrats who have personal issues with