us and i will say that the community here has really rallied behind us and we are feeling an incredible sense of support from people here. we are really grateful for that. >> i've got to say this. covering this conflict, one of the struggles i think is relating to different parts of the conflict. and it's just human nature that certain things will grab you and as an alumni of brown, i've been very invested in the nephew and his friends story just for that silly reason, that relatability. we are just hoping the absolute best for him and i help you can keep us up today about him and his recovery. i really do hope i get to meet him at some point. >> thank you, i'll just say very quickly that brown has been incredibly supportive. they said hey whatever the problems, we will take care of. it relatability. we're hoping the absolute best for him, rich. i hope you can keep us up-to-date in his recovery, and i really do hope i get to meet him at some point. >> thank you. i'll say very quickly brown has been incredibly supportive. they said whatever the problems, we'll take care of it.

>> rich price, thank you very much. that is "all in" on this tuesday night. >> as a fellow brown graduate, i feel the same way. you know, unfortunately so much death and destruction becomes abstract. and when there's some sort of foothold you have into your own reality i think it makes it at once difficult and easier to be involved in the story. so i'm with you on that my friend. thanks to you at home for joining me this evening. approximately 140 police officers were injured on january 6th when a violent mob stormed the capitol. one of those officers was james, a 17-year veteran of the capitol police. this is how he described that day to pbs news outlet. >> we just hear just noise and people running at me as far as i

can see from the crypt all the way to the north side of the capitol is running at us. as bad as it looks on film, believe me it was much worse. they can stitch together as much footage as they want to, but i can tell you and anybody who was in that scrum will tell you, it was much worse in person than anything you're going to see on film. >> the officer and another fellow officer became the first members of the capitol police force to sue the person they say is responsible for that attack, not any of the individual rioters, and not the far right groups who helped organize the riot. those officers sued the man at the very top, donald trump, who urged them onto descend on the capitol with the hope of overturning a legitimate presidential election. now, these capitol police officers filed civil lawsuits in march of 2021. that was just two months after the attack. but those lawsuits have been languishing in the federal courts for more than two years

now. the d.c. circuit court heard arguments in those cases nearly a year ago, but that court still has not issued a ruling. according to statistics from the administrative office of the u.s. courts, which tracks this sort of stuff, the deliberation here has taken nearly three times as long as an average ruling from this court, the d.c. circuit court, and that delay matters not just for those capitol police officers seeking accountability here. the extraordinary delay also matters to special counsel jack smith and his federal criminal case against donald trump. and that is because in both the sieve cases brought by those capitol police officers and the criminal case brought by jack smith, trump's lawyers have made essentially the same argument. they are using the same line of defense. they argue that donald trump is immune from prosecution. according to their defense trump's efforts to overturn the

election rile up the crowd, but those efforts were somehow part of trump's official duties as president, and therefore trump is immune from any liability criminal or civil. he should not have to stand trial. judge tanya chutkan is being asked to rule on that very question right now in jack smith's federal case. but anything she decides there could be overruled by the judges on the d.c. circuit court, the ones deciding the merits of that same argument, trump's presidential immunity argument in the capitol police officer's civil suit. and so judge chutkan is taking her time here in what some people believe might be an attempt to wait for the d.c. circuit court to issue its very long awaited ruling first. now, any decision that trump gets on this from either judge chutkan or the d.c. circuit court could be appealed. and it could be appealed all the way to the supreme court. and remember it has to be resolved before donald trump goes to trial.

but if it goes all the way to the supreme court, it could delay trump's federal criminal trial for weeks or even months. so it really matters what the courts do here and how fast they do it. could they get this all done before the republican convention this summer? could they get it done before election day? how long do american voters have to wait before they know whether a man who could be dominated or even elected president, before they know whether he is a convicted felon or not. so all of that is playing out as we're learning new details unt what special counsel jack smith has in store for donald trump at that criminal trial whenever it starts. abc news has reporting today about what vice president mike pence has told prosecutors and what he might testify to at trial, that trump acted recklessly on january 6th, that pence allegedly told trump there was no idea un-american than the idea any one person could decide what electoral votes to count.

and when we're counting a phone call with donald trump on christmas day 2020, pence wrote in his book that he told trump, you know, coma, i don't think i have the authority to change the outcome of the election on january 6th. but pence allegedly told smith's investigators that the coma, that coma should never have been there. pence apparently meant to write that he admonished trump, you know i don't think i have the authority to change the outcome. so potentially damning testimony here from trump's own former vice president. but the question now is will a jury get to consider any of it before the 2024 presidential election? joining me now are kimberley at kins, and joyce vance, former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama. both are co-hosts of "the

sisters-in-law" podcast. on its face to the casual observer and i will put myself in that group it seems sort of preposterous trumps actions in and around january 6th would be one of his official duties. talk to me about the merits of that line, if you would. >> so donald trump and his attorneys would essentially have to make the case that his actions leading up to and on that day were a part of his official duties as president of the united states. they weren't a campaign event. they weren't outside of those duties. it was his job as president when he was speaking at that podium and urging people to go encourage the members of congress to do what they were doing, he was speaking as president. i am with you. i think there's a reason why he didn't give that message from the white house itself. it was because it was clearly a

campaign event at best or something outside of the realm of the presidency. keep in mind that privilegedize not extend to illegality. if something was -- if he was engaged in some sort of crime, that could be seen outside of that. if a judge deems this was a political and not a part of his duties, that could be outside of that. but because this like so many things surrounding donald trump and the events leading up and on january 6th are so novel, these are thing said that have never happened in our republic before, we need these courts to evaluate it and make these rulings before going forward. and the prn here as you outline these interlocutory appeals could slow the pace of these trials so that they don't happen before the next election. >> yeah, i'm going to try to not use the phrase interlocutory

appeal, but i absolutely understand what you are talking about. and joyce, while kimberley i think very rightfully points out these are novel cases, they're also particularly fraught, right? any decision here is going to be one for the history book. do you think that's why the d.c. circuit court is taking so very extraordinarily long to issue a ruling that could have a serious effect on this federal criminal case? >> yes, so it's an interesting question, alex. it's tough to say when we look at the statistics from the administrative office of the courts these appeals are really taking what we might characterize as too long. that's because not all appeals are the same. and the d.c. circuit hears simple cases and also hears complicated ones. so from my point of view the year mark isn't an excessively

unreasonable amount of time. that's not how typically courts could matter this kind of matter. the civil case would be decided and the court could setout the issue. the defenses are very similar. they overlap to some extent, but they still have very different nuances when they arrive in the civil and criminal amphitheater. so i suppose i'm not answering your question directly other than to say we'll stingily have to wait for the courts to do what they have do do here. >> again, to the casual observer here, kimberley, it sort of seems like a game of hot potato. judge chutkan is waiting. this decision has to be made before trump goes to trial in the federal case. the d.c. circuit court is doing

what it's doing, but it almost feels like no one wants to hand down the ruling on this. >> joyce, is right we really don't know. only the judge in this case knows for sure, but that could possibly be -- it could be a combination of all of those things, a busy docket plus this novel question, plus it is a hot potato that will be in the anals of history forevermore. it can be even slower. >> i guess the sort of acceptance that justice works its way -- there's a lot of merit to justice working slowly, but there's a case made in "the new york times" today that effectively the january 6th trial needs its own rocket docket for i think one of the reasons a lot of our viewers will understand. this is not a proposal for the courts to act in a partisan fashion. the outcome of the legal process

is not the pointch the point is that the country deserves to know that outcome before it chooses the next leader of infree world. i mean the supreme court, the court system moved very quickly in bush v. gore. why can it not move expeditiously to tell the court whether donald trump is guilty or not? >> yeah, i think that's exactly the question we should be asking. and there's no reason that the courts can't move quickly here. what we're wait on now is for judge chutkan to rule on some of these motions that could give rise to what we're not calling tonight an interlocutory appeal. i'll just say it, an appeal that takes place before the case goes to trial. we let most issues wait until after the criminal case has been resolved, if the defendant is quan victed he or she can get their appeal and court resources aren't wasted. but here with these

constitutional issues, there will be an appeal before trial. and we've seen appellate courts act very quickly. the 11th circuit acted swiftly when it was considering the first trump case in front of aileen cannon that involved whether trump could prevent the justice department from useding the fruits of the search at mar-a-lago in advancing that criminal case. the 11th circuit acted very rapidly. no reason the 11th circuit couldn't take a look at these issues which have been thoroughly briefed in a very prompt manner. and while the supreme court has the ability to take the case and hear it, and perhaps they will, they could act quickly or they might be satisfied with the court of appeals decision and permit that to stand. so lots of ways for the appellate courts to move this case forward so that a trial could begin on schedule in march if they're of a mind to do that. >> i wonder if and when the trial gets under way presumably this year, kimberley, how damaging do you think the pence

testimony might be given what we are learning from that abc reporting this evening? i mean is your expectation that he will be called to the stand? >> yes. he is going to be one of the most crucial witnesses in this case because he is the highest ranking current or former official who has key evidence directly weighing on what donald trump did or said in those days leading up to and on january 6th. i mean he probably would have loved if he testified about this under oath before as he wrote in his book, but he's under oath now. and already testified in a deposition. this is crucial evidence not only did donald trump have mike pence telling him this was not a valid avenue to pursue but that there were lawyers within the administration who were telling him this, too, and he made a choice to pick and choose who he

listened to. that could cut deeply into his defense he was only following lawyers advice. you can't just pick and choose lawyers, cherry pick the ones telling you what you want to hear for that defense to hold. >> kimberley brings up the name rudy giuliani, and i'd be remiss, joyce, if i.e. get your opinion on the news today that fannie willis, the d.a. down in fulton county, there's news she's prepared to offer plea deal or left the plea deal door open, if you will, to all the named coconspiratorteres in that fulton county case except donald trump, rudy giuliani, and mark meadows. to some extent trump doesn't surprise me being a name on that list. but i was surprised giuliani and meadows are not people she's seeking to turn into prosecution witnesses. were you? >> no, not at all. i think she's certainly not looking to hand out deals to them.

in a rico case there's a lot of advantage to trying the people at the top, the general and the lieutenants together to get in all of the evidence about the rico scheme. in some ways and we've seen trump already trying to do this with some of the codefendants and you give the general of the defendants, in this case trump the opportunity to say i didn't know anything about it, i was sitting in the oval office trying to carry on the nation's business while rudy giuliani and mark meadows were freelancing. so seating them all at the defendant's table together you really kneecap the ability to do that and particularly when you you've got many of the lower level defendants cooperating. i think willis has four right now. she's certainly trying to get more of those codefendants to become cooperating witnesses. they all continue to point the finger at different one of the defendants. that looks like a good rico

case. >> that rico case not held up by the same d.c. circuit court of appeals or the deliberations of judge chutkan on all of it. we have a lot more this evening including the world's richest man, elon musk, resurrecting the pizza gate conspiracy theory. and a temporary cease-fire in gaza while negotiators including a high ranking american tries to extend that truce. we'll talk to cia director john brennen about the possibility of a lasting peace. that's next. ennen about the posf a lasting peace. that's next. rsv is out there. for those 60 years and older protect against rsv with arexvy. arexvy is a vaccine used to prevent lower respiratory disease from rsv in people 60 years and older. arexvy does not protect everyone and is not for those

with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients. those with weakened immune systems may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects are injection site pain, fatigue, muscle pain, headache, and joint pain. i chose arexvy. rsv? make it arexvy.

in order for small businesses to thrive, rsv? they need to be smart, efficient, savvy. making the most of every opportunity. that's why comcast business is introducing the small business bonus. for a limited time you can get up to a $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet. yep, $1000. so switch to business internet from the company with the largest fastest reliable network and that powers more businesses than anyone else. learn how you can get $1000 back for your business today.

comcast business. powering possibilities.

on the fifth day of the now extended cease-fire between israel and hamas, 12 hostages held captive by hamas were released, ten israelis, and two thai nationals. this video shows some of them crossing out of gaza into egypt including one 17-year-old girl carrying a pet dog. there were no americans among them according to the white house. nine american hostages remain in gaza. in exchange for today's hostage release, israel released 30 palestinians who were being held inside israeli prisons. according to the israeli military, the 12 hostages have arrived safely in israel where their families eagerly await

reunions like this one. the young boy seen here hugging his mother is 12-year-old, an israeli french citizen. he was released yesterday, but his father remains captive somewhere inside gaza. now, the truce that allowed for these exchanges is set to expire tomorrow night. but tonight cia director burns is in qatar for a new round of negotiations aimed at freeing more hostages. a diplomat with knowledge of those talks tells nbc news that groups other than women and children are part of those hostage discussions. joining me now is john brennen, the former director of the cia and now an msnbc national security and intelligence analyst. director brennen, thank you for being here. one thing that's struck me as an interesting sort of facet of all of this is that these negotiations are being led by a representative from mosad and one from the cia, of course, in

addition to the qataris. how unusual is that set of talks, if you will, between mosad and the cia? >> well, cia has had very strong and long-standing ties to mosad, and so it's not surprising to me that cia is involved heavily in these discussions because the negotiations with hamas are taking place through intermediaries. in this case it's mostly the qataris but also egyptians. the cias has close contacts with the cia and qatari. therefore mosad also has dealings with the egyptians and qataris. unsurprising these sensitive negotiations are taking place in intelligence channels. i think there's great confidence in the players, the head of mosad as well as director burns are very close. and i do believe the progress

that's been made over the last five days is a result of hammering out these discussions and the terms of the arrangements. and the terms of the agreement have been followed through so far. so tomorrow is going to be a very critical day, the sixth day of this truce and the exchange of hostages and prisoners. and i'm confident that director burns is doing all he can to extend that truce and to get more of these hostages free. >> can i ask you what you would assume sort of the next group of hostages might be after all of the women -- the remaining women and children have been freed from hamas custody or custody of other cadical groups? >> well, i think hamas is going to keep the israeli defense force personnel. they're not going to give those up certainly at this point. the israelis have been rather insistent that any extension of the truce involved the release of ten additional hostages. now, after the scheduled release

of hostages tomorrow, i think the number of hostages will be about 150, 153 or so. so the numbers are coming down, which is good. and hamas may try to draw this truce out and offer fewer hostages for every day that the truce will be extended. clearly i think hamas wants to buy additional time. it is using the time to reposition its forces and i think to prepare for the day after the truce given that netanyahu is determined and has said publicly that israel will relaunch the military campaign. and so i do believe that hamas wants to be able to make as much preparation as possible for that eventual day. >> how significant a challenge is it that nearly a quarter of the hostages that remain in captivity are not actually in hamas custody? >> it's difficult. one of the things that i think is a positive i think hamas leadership still maintains command and control over hamas

units that had control of these hostages that have been released so far. whether or not the palestine islamic jihad and other terrorist organizations in gaza are going to be willing to give up their hostages to hamas, that's a real question mark. and there are reports that some of these hostages including the israeli military personnel, were traded and sold moopg these various gaza militant organizations. so hamas may be trying to use this period of time to try to gather under their command and control more of these hostages they can in fact trade to the israelis. >> the administration -- the biden administration has been encouraging if not urging israel to fight surgery, that is the term being reported in "the new york times" today. what do you think that practically means, and how fesable is it given what we've seen from israel thus far?

>> well, the number of palestinian civilian deaths, you know, in excess of 14,000 or so really demonstrates the israelis have been using rather broad targeting parameters when they engage in these strikes. so the question is if they go after a terrorist leader, a hamas leader, an operative or whatever, and they know where this individual is located, are they willing to strike that target knowing they're going to kill a dozen, 50 or 100 palestinian civilians in order to accomplish that strike objective? and so what i'm hoping is happening is that the biden administration has convinced the israelis to lower that proportionality number so that there's not going to be these bombing as the footage shows against these apartment buildings, these refugee camps and others where israelis might have been successful in killing a handful or even a dozen of

hamas terrorists, but at the same time they kill score of palestinian civilians as they do that. clearly the israelis know that civilian deaths will take place when they strike these terrorist targets. so the question is having the israelis scale back the scope and the extent of these strikes so that as you point out they're much more precise, surgical, and they're not going to incur the number of civilian deaths that we've seen tragically so far. >> yeah, 13,000 according to our latest reporting. and a humanitarian catastrophe over there. john brennen, former cia director, such a pleasure have having you on the program. thanks for your time and thoughts. >> thanks, alex. we have lots more ahead tonight. can the koch brothers -- with the koch brothers super pack i should say do for the haley presidential campaign do what it has done for the fossil fuel

industry? we're going to talk about the gop push to nominate not trump. but first we'll have to believe what elon musk is up to now or you shouldn't believe it. more on that after the break. ldt more on that after the break

with cirkul, your water is deliciously flavored at the turn of a dial, with zero sugar and zero calories. and cirkul has over 40 flavors, so your water can be as unique as you are. try cirkul. your water, your way. now with even more flavors. available at walmart or drinkcirkul.com.

the richest man on the planet, elon musk, flew halfway around the world yesterday.

he donned a flack-jacket and he got a personal tour of a kibbutz that had been attacked by israel. and mr. musk was pretty transparent about why he was there. shortly after landing in israel, musk posted on "x" formerly known as twitter, which he owns. musk posted actions speak louder than words. now, mr. musk did not pes spy which words he was referring to in that post, but this very public display of unity with israel and with prime minister netanyahu, that comes as elon musk is in the hot seat. he's there specifically for endorsing an anti-semitic conspiracy theory on "x" calling the anti-semitic theory the actual truth. that surprise, surprise led to a mass exodus of advertisers from the platform, which then appears to have led to this very public musk apology tour yesterday. and you might think given that

he'd just flown halfway around the world and toured the site of a massacre to cleanup the mess he had made for publicly endorsing a conspiracy theory -- you might think elon musk would think twice before endorsing another conspiracy theory. but apparently not. because today elon musk posted a meme pushing a conspiracy theory that is literally the most clear-cut textbook example of why pushing a conspiracy theory is dangerous. pizza-gate. in december of 2016 a 28-year-old man entered the comet pizza parlor in north west washington, d.c. and pulled out a semiautomatic ar-15-style rifle. the staff and patrons at comet including children all fled, but the man, ed gar welch, who had driven six hours through multiple states to get to this particular pizza place, he stayed inside. he shot the lock off a closet and he movedload the furniture.

ed gar welch was looking for proof that the pizza parlor was actually the -- let me check my notes here -- the home base of a child sex trafficking ring run by hillary clinton. that conspiracy known colocwale as pizza gate was spread online as it's over, nypd just raided hillary's property. what they found will ruin her life. all of that was fake. it has been debunked over and over again. but it still convinced adman to storm a pizza parlor with an ar-15-style rifle. and that history here of fake news leelding to a real world attack, that makes it all the more astounding that the particular pizza gate conspiracy theory elon musk pushed today

was also based on a fake new story. it came from a literally doctored new york post headline. reuters fact checked six months ago. that headline did not actually ever exist. and pizza gate has been, again, debunked over and over again. but still elon musk bought into it. a few hours ago mr. musk deleted the pizza-gate post. maybe this time he's learned his lesson or maybe not. coming up, could dark money save the republican party from a trump nomination? that's next. a trump nomination that's next.

(man) mm, hey, honey. looks like my to-do list grew. "paint the bathroom, give baxter a bath, get life insurance," hm. i have a few minutes. i can do that now. oh, that fast? remember that colonial penn ad? i called and i got information. they sent the simple form i need to apply. all i do is fill it out and send it back. well, that sounds too easy! (man) give a little information, check a few boxes, sign my name, done. they don't ask about your health? (man) no health questions. -physical exam? -don't need one. it's colonial penn guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance. if you're between the ages of 50 and 85, your acceptance is guaranteed in most states, even if you're not in the best health. options start at $9.95 a month,

35 cents a day. once insured, your rate will never increase. a lifetime rate lock guarantees it. keep in mind, this is lifetime protection. as long as you pay your premiums, it's yours to keep. call for more information and the simple form you need to apply today. there's no obligation, and you'll receive a free beneficiary planner just for calling.

i have been underestimated in everything i've ever done, and it's a blessing because it makes me scrappy. no one's going to outwork me in this race. no one's going to outsmart me in this race. >> today just seven weeks before the iowa caucuses, nikki haley's scrappy campaign got a major endorsement from americans for prosperity action, a super pac founded by conservative billionaire koch brothers. and the group has a lot of influential dark money, money that's helped to fund climate

change denialism, and the national rifle association. so its endorsement and its dollars carry some weight in republican circles. in a memo the super pac explained why nikki haley citing internal polling that showed haley outperforming trump by 8 to 14 points in a matchup against joe biden in key battleground states. but while nicky hailhy may outperform trump against biden, before she can even get to that, there is haley against trump. a recent poll from morning consult shows her trailing donald trump by 54 points. joining me now is charlie sykes, editor at large at the bulwark and host of the bulwark podcast. thank you for being here. first, let me get your thoughts on how important, how influential the koch dollars can be to a campaign like nikki haley's. >> well, let's just start off by stipumenting it is highly unlikely nikki haley is going to be able to defeat donald trump. the 54-point hole is pretty

deep, but having said that this is potentially quite significant because number one it provides her with a good deal of money. it provides her with the organizational infrastructure that afp brings, and also it is a signal to other donors that she is the one person -- she's going to be the last woman standing against donald trump. you know, as mrs. bennett said in pride and prejudice, it will throw her in the way of other rich men. so we have been talking about the possibility of the consolidation of the field, that in order to defeat donald trump, the field has to consolidate. you can't have eight candidates, you can't have nine candidates. that's what happened in 2016. and now this sends a real signal gnat this has become a three-person race is about perhaps to become a two. person race. it's still donald trump's to lose, but this is a significant move because the koch network did not have to endorse. they see the same polls you just

cited. they understand the dynamic that donald trump is likely to win this nomination, and yet they decided to get in right now and put a lot of their credibility and their resources behind this. >> i think the consolidation piece is perhaps what's most interesting in terms of her ability to do just that. i was struck by the fact announcing their pick to get behind nikki haley, the super pac had what almost sounded like an apology to the desantis campaign. i'll read an excerpt. our thanks and appreciation to governor desantis who's been a tremendous leader for the state of florida. we understand that some of the governor's supporters including some who support this super pac will be disappointed in our decision. however, as the 2024 primary season heats up we are entering a period that demands choices. it almost seems like they're trying to do some of the work for haley and bring desantis supporters over. i wonder if you think a desantis

support is somewhat -- and she has risen and taken away some support from desantis in the recent weeks, but they are so different as candidates and seemingly different on some key policy areas. i wonder whether you think it's possible for her to bring his 18% of primary voters over to her side of the aisle as it were. >> well, that's the key question, september it? because in order to consolidate you have to get somehow to 50%, and that's not going to be easy because a lot of the desantis supporters will go to donald trump because they think of desantis as basically trumpism without trump. you might as well go with the real thing. but i do think that there is a sentiment out there how big it is among republicans who say, okay, let's just move on. thank you for your service, governor desantis. thank you for your service, donald trump. but, again, what's significant to me about afp getting ipas the koch network is how urgent they apparently believe it is to stop

donald trump. and i think that's what i would focus on is they see donald trump as a real threat to -- a real threat to the nation and not just to the causes that they care about because they've had some real significant differences with nikki haley on foreign policy. they're kind of a libertarian organization, and they have garnered a very, very different direction on a variety of issues including aid to ukraine. but apparently they decided that they're willing to put all of those differences aside because they recognize the urgency of now coalescing behind anyone who can stop donald trump. that's a statement. it's an indication that if you squint just a little bit you can see maybe what normal republicans might do, and then nicky hailhy has now become the chosen vessel, and she's really been showing a bit of momentum, i suppose as much moment as anyone since that first debate, and this certainly will not hurt

her in iowa or new hampshire or in south carolina. >> yeah, and i think, charlie, your point about the kochs trying to effectively elect anyone that isn't donald trump is significant as we get some new reporting tonight. i think cnn got early access to the liz chapy memoir that is going to be coming out next week. we're going to have an interview with her, our colleague rachel maddow monday night. but i do wonder whether -- there's an excerpt in the book and i'd love to get your reaction to. cnn reports that liz cheney said that george w. bush sent cheney a private message of support after she voted to impeach trump for the january 6th attack. now, on some level that's not surprising, but why are republicans like george w. bush still withholding their public criticism of donald trump? >> well, alex, we've been asking this question for seven or eight years now, right?

when are republicans going to say in public what they've been saying in private? it is striking. i'm going to look at the other side of that. when you think about the number of people from the trump administration, the people who work most closely with him, his former chief of staff, his former attorney general, his former secretary of defense, his former national security advisor, all of whom are now very publicly and openly saying donald trump is not fit for office, he is dangerous, we cannot allow him back in the oval office, and you wonder whether or not as this moment of choosing that afp describes, you know, will lead them to come out. i think we know what liz cheney is going to say, but liz cheney is going to be a unique voice to pry some of those loose. she's an insider. she's all out of bleeps to give. she has a great deal of knowledge of what's been going on both in your experience in the republican leadership and in the january 6th committee. and she's going to spend i think

in the next year holding her fellow republicans' feet to the fire saying do you really want to do this? choose honor or dishonor, this is the moment of choose. do you want to go down in history the way that history will remember say, mitt romney, or do you want to become just another -- another lindsey graham potted plant in congress? so, you know, i do think -- this moment of choice republicans have already made their choice. i think that they -- this is donald trump's party. but what happened today is an indication that there are some folks who have considerable resources who are not just going to rollover. and now of course the question is whether that actually matters, whether or not the big money, the dark money, the billionaire donor class money actually matters anymore in the republican party, and we're about to find that out over the next few months. >> liz cheney and the koch super pac, moral compasses for today's republican party.

here we are. charlie sykes, always great to see you. still ahead this evening, the fight to stay alive while pregnant in the state of texas has reached the state supreme court. i will talk to reproductive freedom for alls about the 22 women who say the texas lawmakers need to stay out of their operating rooms. that's next. s need to stay out their operating rooms. that's 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.

22 women say texas' abortion bans have harmed them personally, some have nearly died. and they began suing the state in march. after hours of detailed testimony, a state district judge partially blocked tesh s' heartbeat ban, that law. she ruled people with specific complications or nonviable pregnancies should have abortion access. texas attorney general ken paxton pruchltly appealed that ruling taking the position that texas law already has a vague medical exception. today the state's highest court heard oral arguments. >> while there's technically a

medical exception to the bans, no one knows what it means, and the state won't tell us. a report would be saying that a patient needs to have blood or amniotic fluid dripping down their leg before they can come to court. >> the texas supreme court is expected to rule in a few weeks. joining me now. thank you for being here tonight. i think it's worth noting that there were five plaintiffs in this suit initially, and now there are 22. what does that signal to you about the gravity of this law? >> well, first of all, kudos to our friends, top-notch litigators. but it definitely says the longer these bans are in place, the more horror stories that are emerging. and as we continue to see the impact of dobbs across the country but particularly in places like texas where sb8 was in effect before the dobbs decision, months before the dobbs decision, the cases are

just piling up. and you're seeing more and more brave women coming forward. and thank goodness because their stories are eely helping shift the narrative in the country, but also they're really critical to pushing back against the texas legislature's really significant overreach. >> yeah, when you talk about shifting the narrative, i mean many of the women in these cases want to have children, something happens either with them or with the fetus, and termination is the only option. i wonder how you think that's maybe shifted the traditional political divide on the subject of reproductive freedom. >> you know, women coming forward and explaining how they're very wanted pregnancies went awry, how they almost went into sepsis, almost went into shock, almost died, the point about having to have amniotic fluid dripping down your leg before the state of texas considers you eligible in a case

like this, this is so important because it rips away the lies and disinformation about why folks get abortions, when folks get abortions and what circumstances they get them in, right? these cases clearly illustrate that abortion is health care. they also clearly illustrate why exceptions don't work and how texas has specifically designed such a vague exception that the state can't even articulate what it means. doctors have to go to court to have them explain it. >> it's made the physician-patient situation that much more fraught. what is your expectation as far as what the courts do? >> this is all about that court decision, the lower court injunction. i know our folks at cr feel very strong in their suit, in their arguments today. i think we're hopeful the injunction will be upheld and there will be further explpgz for what these exceptions are supposed to mean. i think what i want to

underscore, though, in texas, this supreme court has nine republicans questioning today whether the judge was definitely not without its own disinformation and bias. these attorneys and these plaintiffs are incredibly compelling, however, and their case is really, really strong. i think what we really have to pivot to at the national level, however, is continuing to fight for federal protections because in a place like texas, you know, crrs being surgical, but we don't have a chance to go directly to the people in a ballot initiativech this is a gerrymandered super majority of republican extremists in the legislature. the best relief for texas is federal legislation to codify roe and make a federal right to abortion again in this country. >> thank you for your time tonight. i do appreciate it. that is our show for this evening. "way too early" with jonathan lemire is coming up next. hamas hands over more hostages as a