existing renewal energy technology. limitations aren't technological but new technology will help ease that transition. it will speed it up. so we're looking at not just better solar panels and wind turbines but energy storage is critical because the wind isn't always blowing. the sun isn't always shining. there's new technology that may really help with the speed up of that transition that we need. >> there's also a very white paint coming on the market next summer. i'm serious. >> it helps a little bit. >> everything helps a little bit. might as well take it all. michael, thank you very much. appreciate it. >> always a pleasure. >> that's going to do it for me today. deadline white house starts right now. right now. hey, everyone. it is 4:00 in the new york.

ecision today by the nation's highest court that could have major impcations. the unprecedented and historic prosecution of donald trump. the justices announcing they will hearen appeal by a defendant. josepher fisher. he has been indicted on seven charges including obstruction of official proceeding, which is a charge brought by jack smith against dald trump. now fisher is to dismiss that count. central question before the supreme court according to the "new york times" quote, can the government charge defendant in those cases uederal law that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct an official congressional proceeding. here's how the times lays out the move. theecision to hear the case will complicate and perhaps delay the start of mr. trump's trial. now scheduled to take place in washington imarch. supreme court's ultimate ruling which may not arrive june

will likely address the viability of two of the main counts against mr. trump and could severely limit efforts by the special counsel, jack smith, to hold the former president accountable for the violence his supporters committed at the capitol. whatever the justices decide could have a major immacht on the investigation. prosecutors have charged more than 300 with obstruction of official proceeding. the supreme court's decision today just one of many factors that could have ended the case. there's also the matter of trump's appeal on judge chutkan's ruling that trump was not immune from prosecution because he was president at the time the crimes occurred. just moments ago, judge chutkan ordered a stay of all proceedings in the federal election case until trump's appeal is settled and that, and it is a lot is where we start today with former lead investigator for the january 6th select committee and at the

table, nbc news justice reporter and author, ryan riley and msnbc legal analyst, lisa rubin. could not think of better people to be with us today. lisa, break down this ruling. what does it mean? >> essentially confirms what jack smith's team told her over the weekend. the trial cannot go forward until trump's assertion of constitutional immunity is resolved either by the d.c. circuit or by the supreme court. at the same time, she's giving jack smith's team what they said they wanted. they are saying to her you still have jurisdiction to enforce the basic rules of this proceeding. that means you can enforce his conditions of release, which are the circumstances under which he's still a free man having been indicted and maybe most importantly, you can enforce the protective order. trump has been given 13 million

some pages of discovery in this case and a protective order precludes him from sharing with the public. like regina george. he still needs to keep those materials secret until further order by the court. so this is essentially what jack smith's office told her should happen but now it cements it. it makes it official and means the next step has to be taken by the supreme court or if they decline to take up the case by the d.c. circuit. >> so, tim, given all of that excellent context, what do you think? did a march 4th trial date just become less likely? >> yes, less likely but not off the table yet. there's a scenario by which the supreme court could immediately decide that the significance of resolution of this immunity issue justifies immediate relief. they would expedite briefing in its revolve early in the year and we maintain the march 4th

trial date. they could also say no, we're not going to take the case in which case the d.c. circuit has to go first. they could also do it on an expedited basis and then the supreme court could decide not to take it or it could go forward on march 4th even after a d.c. circuit ruling if the supreme court is still considering it. so it's not off the table that march 4th holds. judge chutkan notably didn't vacate the trial date or any other deadlines. she essentially held them in advance as this appeal of the immunity issue moves forward. so i'd say it's less likely than it was before this order but it is not yet a sure thing that it will have to be extended. >> i want to add on to this the news out of the supreme court about joseph fisher. again, if you were donald trump's lawyer, if your strategy is to do everything you can to delay a trial, do you then sense an opportunity right now? >> yeah. absolutely. but it's important to realize that donald trump is in a very

different position because of the official proceeding than mr. fisher. he is claiming there needs to be some nexus to documents. 1512 c 2 follows c 1 which talks about destroying a document and his argument is that you have to read c2 in connection with the document issue. the law that was designed to protect documents. donald trump does have involvement with documents. the submission of these fake electoral certificates. even under the theory of 1512, arguably that could be applied to president trump in a way that doesn't apply to the rioters at the capitol. obviously, supreme court interpretation of 1512 has a bearing but even if fisher wins and the government loses, it doesn't mean the 1512 counts go

away and he's charged with two counts beyond 1512 which would be unaffected. >> i want to come back to this question of obstruction and how it affects people differently, but your sense of how this affects the election. >> i thought the march trial, that judge chutkan really was getting everything on schedule for it to take place and the date is up in the air with all these new legal developments. they're going to continue down the avenue on this. the impact i'm most interested in in addition to the trump case is this is going to impact other cases. a lot of people are being held, some pretrial. that's one of the charges they're facing. so it really has had this enormous impact and you're going to have to go back potentially and look at each of these cases individually and figure out whether or not time gets shaved off of some. >> why did this not come up sooner? >> it had to work its way through the system. this started because of judge carl nichols decided this

shouldn't apply to this sort of activity. the cases he's handling, he's the only judge who did this in the d.c. court, he said this charge cannot go forward. so it had to work its way up through the system. so in the case of two of these individuals who were appealing this to the supreme court, they haven't gone on trial but the other one has been sentenced separately for everything except for that one charge. these are individuals, a lot of whom physically stormed the capitol. joseph fisher, the former cop from pennsylvania, he was involved in this push. there's photos of him at the trump rally. sort of hamming it up with all these celebrities in the maga world then storming the capitol that day. the individual who has been sentenced was a part of the sort of appeal was arrested while he was wearing a shirt that said i was there on january 6th. so yeah. it's a really full spectrum you're getting of the defendants here. >> can i add something here because one of the things an this statute and i haven't

focused on fisher's ser petition until today. the meaning of the word corruptly. but that's not what fisher's appeal is about. it's about whether or not it's lawful to charge him with otherwise obstructing or impeding. here's where it's pardon the impression, kind of stinks to be a text dualist. we've seen from the conservative movement that what should matter when we're looking at the meaning of the statute. here, aside from this mutilating or concealing a record, they are prohibiting. they blocked doors. they prevented members of congress in both chambers from safely voting on january 6th. i can't think of any clearer meaning or obstructing a proceeding than these cases. whether it applies to donald

trump might be different but at least it should apply to the conspiracy count to obstruct a proceeding on the indictment. >> i appreciate as a person who decided not to go to law school that referencing these statutes can be technocratic, but the 1/6 committee recommended it for a reason. tell us why. >> yeah. so we were relying upon the d.c. circuit which is now being appealed that was consistent with every other trial judge other than judge nichols. as lisa said you can't obstruct a official proceeding, impeding, interfering with or taking steps that are going to make that proceeding less likely to occur. the plain language as lisa pointed out is otherwise applies to this whole other category of conduct between mutilation of a document and that has been the consistent interpretation of

every other federal judge and the supreme court will evaluate that. our recommendation was specifically that 1512 c2, this otherwise provision, applies to blocking doors and probably the submission of the fake electors, the attempt to subvert the news that the department of justice, all of the multipart plan, constituted a conspiracy to including documents, obstruct an official proceeding. so again, either way the court goes, jack smith has an argument that donald trump has violated 1512 c2. the other defendants have weren't involved in documents have a stronger way to go. >> you point this out in your piece today quote the supreme court which has a 6-3 conservative majority has often shaped the justice department's broad application of criminal statutes. did they see this challenge

coming? >> you know, i don't know. this i think is something that certainly this challenge originally comes from federal public defender in this individual fisher case and the others are from people who hired more lawyers more politically aligned. i think this is a case where the lawyer here is treeing to get the best result for their client and has this cascading impact on the nation and the 2024 campaign. if you move this further from suddenly a march trial closer to the summer, then you're talking about theoretically if this went through, if trump was convicted, even if you were convicted. so it's really all about management at this point and any little hiccup that comes along can throw everything off. the thing i think back to history when we're looking back at this, there's going to be a

lot of scrutiny over what was going on at the justice department before the special counsel was announced and the year before we had that appointment made. that's the question of whether or not this could have been avoided add this case been brought sooner and not been so tight on the deadline up until 2024. >> lisa. >> one is that i completely agree with ryan. all of these exigencies of timing are in part due to inaction at the department of justice or at least a failure to appoint a special counsel. my mom used to have a mag nant that said your lack of planning is not -- >> i want to ask you because i know you have followed these 1/6 defendants closely. have they had a response to what we're watching? >> we've seen filings on it already because people want to delay their sentences. there's another cop, a lot of

cops around the capitol. a former retired police officer who had a tambourine when she was storming the capitol, got in cops' faces, pushing to the front of the line and yelling in this really excited style and helping bring the mob inside the capitol and she wants to have her sentencing delayed. that would have an impact on her sentencing. i'm expecting when i go look at the docket, we'll see cases. last week, there was another former cop, i say it again, from california, who was convicted and sentenced to seven and a half years or rather 11 and a half years in federal prison. i expect he'll be appealing that, too. he's working pro se. >> i love that you have knowledge of the props an attire that people thought was somehow appropriate during this time. tim, obstruction charges. two of the four counts of jack

smith's indictment. talk me through what a trial could look like if it proceeds without those obstruction counts? >> well, let's say even again to be clear if the supreme court rules on behalf of mr. fisher, i think the 1512 counts survive because there's evidence that president trump did alter, mutilate documents given the fake electors. the other counts don't touch 1512. conspiracy to defraud the united states. and deprivation of civil rights, those counts will remain. now the immunity argument you mentioned, the president saying he can't be charged with anything, that's a separate issue. i think the four counts go forward. they may be later but i think jack smith has enough evidence to get to a jury on all four

counts regardless of which way the supreme court goes in this specific fisher appeal. >> tim rejects my hypothetical, which i appreciate. i'm still curious about the question though, which is if you were trying this case without the obstruction charges, what then does it look like? >> a focus on, first of all, conspiracy to defraud the united states charge substantively and tim, you disagree with this, but the evidence in favor of that is a lot of the same evidence that you would use for 1512 c charge. it may not include evidence of what actually happened of people blockading the entries to the house chamber and senate chamber, for example, but a lot of the other stuff, particularly the fake electors scheme is nothing but conspiracy to defraud the united states. so to is the campaign by jeff clark to send this proof of concept letter to states begging them to somehow defer their judgment on who the electors

should be until after mike pence can make a ruling on january 6th. so i don't know that the ef dench yar presentation changes that much and deprivation of civil rights is essentially what jack smith and his team are saying they tried to take the right away from millions of americans the right to choose their president. again, i don't know how that really changes if you were to remove an obstruction charge. >> all right. no one is going anywhere because when we come back, happening now in court, ruby freeman is testifying against rudy giuliani. plus, the supreme court picking up another important case with huge implications. this time, the very common abortion pill. and later in the show, the evidence free fishing expedition against joe biden will be put to a full house floor vote in the

next hour. this as the president's son in a rare public statement called the republicans' attempt to link his behavior to his father's shameless. all that and more continues after this. do not go anywhere. e continues after this do not go anywhere and my friends are nearby. i can do it with the help of a barber, personal shopper and exercise buddy. someone who can help me live right at home. life's good. when you have a plan. ♪ ♪ the ball is out and there's a pile-up. -let's go! -get in the pile! ugh, i'll deal with this tomorrow. you won't. it's ripe in here. my eyes are watering. i'm a busy man. look how crusty this is. shameful. ugh, it's just too much. not with this. tide. tide can tackle any pile. that a tackle pun? just clean the pile, ron.

okay. this too. that was easy. when stains and odors pile up, it's got to be tide. with 30 grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. -ahh, -here, i'll take that. woo hoo! ensure max protein 30 grams protein, one gram sugar, 25 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients for immune health. (♪♪) you're probably not easily persuaded to switch and nutrients f mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? did we peak your interest? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. there are no term contracts or line activation fees. and you can bring your own device. oh, and all on the most reliable 5g mobile network nationwide.

wireless that works for you. it's not just possible, it's happening.

emotional testimony underway for a former georgia elections worker -- spouted by rudy

giuliani. ruby freeman is testifying now in front of him. she and her daughter, shaye moss, are seeking up to $43 million in damages from giuliani. earlier in court today, the lawyer representing freeman and moss was forced to ask the judge to reprimand giuliani for disparaging remarks he made publicly last night about the trial and about them. we are back with time ryan and lisa. ruby freeman. >> yeah, so she really went through hell i think after all these lies about her as well as her daughter. we heard testimony from her daughter earlier this week and it was really just, watching that -- >> devastating. >> there was the before and then there was the after. she said sort of the lights went off for her in terms of she was this shiny person beforehand and as a result of this, really tearing apart her life. her life will never be the same because of these lies. if we rewind this, where it all

started, it was because people who believed in these conspiracy theories about mass voter fraud in cities were looking at videos. it's inherently racist what was happening. they were looking at videos thinking there was criminality. the same thing played out at the tcf center in detroit. there was this call for people to flood into detroit and go to that election center. what you ended up having was a bunch of republicans who weren't comfortable in detroit, who were around people they haven't been before and here we are. so now we're hearing this really dramatic testimony about real life impact those lies had on people and the jurors are going to decide ultimately how much he should have to pay as a result of those lies. >> i want to stick on that point, lisa. this is some of what he had to say about freeman and moss.

i want to note none of it is true. >> earlier in the day when ruby freeman and shaye moss and another gentleman passing around usb ports as if they're vials of her heroin and cocaine. >> shaye moss told the committee she was handing her mom a ginger mint. an expert witness testified the cost to repair their reputations, $47.8 million. >> ashley humphries, an expert in reputation costs, essentially on social media, also the expert witness for i should mention e. jean carroll and her trial on defamation, came to court today and tried to quantify their damages. you can't quantify pain and

suffering. you can't quantify shaye moss saying my ninth grade son failed out of school. i got a change of haircut and color because i didn't want to be recognized in public. but what you can quantify is how much it would cost to repair their reputations through basically an aggravated campaign to make people like and trust them again and stop harassing them. that's what ashley humphries testified today would cost in her estimation, $47 million to do. >> tim, the judge has found giuliani defamed freeman and moss by baselessly accusing them of election fraud. why would he take the stand? >> it's interesting, before i answer that question, the difference between what we were talking about before the break and now. we spend a lot of time as lawyers wringing our hands about the meaning of 1512. c1 versus 2. they're real victims. real people were affected. they're exhibits a and b of

that. this is not simply an esoteric argument about the interpretation of a statute. it's about real people who were threatened with death. you go on to rusty bowers and al schmidt, brad raffensperger, so many people were in this category. look, a lot. to answer your question as a former prosecutor, it is candy when a defendant takes the stand typically. it is very generally good for the prosecutor to have a chance to directly question the defendant in any case. this is a civil case. but i have a hard time understanding what giuliani could say that would benefit his defense. particularly when he's gone out on the steps of the courthouse and essentially doubled down on this baseless allegation that ruby freeman and shaye moss were somehow engaged in election fraud even when the judge found it was baseless and defamatory. so i don't know. i think a lot of lawyers spend a

lot of time trying to analyze decisions like this when there's no explanation. >> tim, ryan in studio, what a treat. thank you so much. up next, the supreme court taking on another case with huge implications, deciding whether or not the abortion pill will remain widely available to women across this country potentially its biggest case since dobbs. that story is next. s next

my little family is me, aria, and jade. just the three of us girls. i never thought twice about feeding her kibble. but about two years ago, i realized she was overweight. she was always out of breath. that's when i decided to introduce the farmer's dog to her diet. it's just so fresh that she literally gets bubbles in her mouth. now she's a lot more active, she's able to join us on our adventures. and we're all able to do things as a family. ♪ get started at betterforthem.com

okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. yay - woo hoo! ensure, with 27 vitamins and minerals, nutrients for immune health. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. (♪♪)

the supreme court has decided to hear a case about whether mifepristone can remain available. the potential impact on limiting access to this pill, it cannot be understated. mifepristone is vital for the millions of women living in antiabortion states. women even in deep blue states where abortion is legal would feel the effects as well. it comes after the controversial ruling this week telling kate cox, a woman desperately seeking an abortion, forcing her to go out of state for care. joining us, michelle goodwin is

here and president and ceo of the planned parenthood action fund remains with us. alexis, let's talk about the stakes, potential impact of the mifepristone case. >> you laid it out in drawing the connection from kate cox to the implication for millions of potential patients across the country. we are seeing the real implication of what it looks like when politics make decisions for providers and ken paxton and the texas supreme court can decide whether or not kate cox gets access the life saving care and now you have the supreme court making decisions about abortion medication instead of the fda. millions of patients use access to medication abortion have done so safely and effectively for the last two years and i think it is critically important now when you have over half of abortions done by medication

abortion that people understand immediately as the provider that the mifepristone will continue to be available and it's important to reassure folks and also alarm folks that in fact, mifepristone is before the supreme court again. you know, what more can we say after this week? >> i do not envy the duality you're contending with. we often talk about how they are not two separate fights. vox reporting this. while the court seems likely to decide the judges shouldn't be allowed to up end the -- the fact these cases are once again before the court is a reminder of just how broken the federal judiciary is. your reaction to this case getting as far as it has. >> thank you for this again. we talk a lot about democracy and how these cases have significant impact on democracy

today. i think what we see is a broken democracy across the united states in states where there are people who have no access to reproductive healthcare in texas while the supreme court there said that there is a significant position in the state's abortion ban. certainly that does not seem to hold true in any meaningful way given that kate cox now has to leave the state with a nonviable pregnancy where she's already sought medical counsel where doctors have said it's nonviable, that her health is at risk. if you have across the united states people who may die before they're able to get the reproductive healthcare they need then that is a broken system and it's reflective of a broken democracy. it's worth noting in a majority of those antiabortion states, the majority of the legislation happens to be male with a small group of women. >> this was a conservative legal run around blue state

legislatures and yet, i want to be clear. put a fine oint point on this. the plaintiffs did not get everything they wanted. >> no, they didn't. they didn't get what they wanted from the fifth circuit then they tried to take that to the supreme court. they asked the supreme court, please review the original year 2000 decision to approve mifepristone and today and granting agreeing to take the case, the supreme court accepted two petitions. one from the fda and one from a drug manufacturer, but it didn't agree to review that original decision. irrespective of what happens here, there will be some access to mifepristone but to alexis and michelle's point, perhaps not enough and perhaps not to millions of women for whom that difference in how many weeks pregnant they are, how many doctors visits they'll have to make will make the most difference. >> alexis, i want to circle back to this question. i think when we talk about abortion access, it can feel

very anonymous. someone like kate cox puts a face, a name, a real story on that. nbc news asked both texas senators who are fiercely opposed to abortion rights. this is what john cornyn said. i'm not a state official so i'm not going to comment on what state officials are doing. i'm happy to comment on anything i'm responsible for. real show of courage there, alexis. >> you know who showed courage, kate cox. right? by suing the state, by putting her name and telling her story and sharing with so many of us the pain and the trauma that she and her family were going through. and describing what her journey has been like to this point. i think it is shameful that the senators of texas, the u.s. federal senators of texas you know, continue to you know, to

push blame or responsibility on the state of texas when there are many opportunities for the u.s. congress to act on protecting women's health. and you know that i think is really what is going to continue to be at stake next year. so i'm celebrating the bravery of folks like kate cox and the center for reproductive rights who brought the case and really i think we should be shaming the likes of ken paxton, the likes of the texas supreme court and you know, folks who will not step up and do anything to protect us. >> right because here's the thing, michelle. you can have this conversation in the context of reproductive rights. also in the conversation of big government overreach. magazine reporting this. in october, a woman was charged with a felony after her miscarriage. on november 30th, her case was bound over to a grand jury. this is part of a larger trend of prosecutors and judges weaponizing the law to punish

and control pregnant women. this is what you have been arguing your entire career, mesh. >> that's right. my book, policing the womb was ten years in the making of documents this what is happening. we have in south carolina, lawmakers that have proposed the death penalty for women who go out of state even to obtain abortions and doctors. we have louisiana, lawmakers there proposed the death penalty. in texas, the crushing effects on doctors making it up to 99 years incarceration. $100,000 fine. losing licenses. all across the country, there's the weaponization against doctors, against parents. you have states where bridges that would have been too far a few years ago where there are now no exceptions for rape or incest. you see the cruelty that is being unpacked in the united states while it is also the deadliest place in all of the developed world for a person to

be pregnant. there is nothing but cruel and unusual punishment that is associated wit these ste abortion bans. >> alexis, i have about a minute left but i want to get in this headline about what is happening in florida. florida, one of nine states ere groups are pushing to get es on the ballot that uld bar restrictions on abortion rights. republican voters are coming out publicly to support and advocate for it but the state's republican attorney general has filed a brief urging the state supreme court to keep the question from appearing on the ballot regardless of how many signatures are collected. they don't want people to get abortions. they don't want people to have access to healthcare. they also don't want people to exercise their fundamental rights as americans. >> they're afraid. is actually how you would end that sentence, right? because here's what's happening now in florida. florida is the most important state right now to protect abortion access in the south. it is a critical access point for millions of people across

the south right now. the people of florida protecting freedom have done such an extraordinary job over the last few months. they have gotten 1.4 million petitions signed so far. that is well ahead of the 900,000 needed to get the petition on the ballot. and that also includes 200,000 republicans. so that is why they are trying everything they can to thwart democracy because that is their only pathway to essentially fighting, getting abortion access remaining secure for the people of florida and the millions of people relying on them in the south. i couldn't agree more with michelle. that abortion and democracy are so linked at this moment and that's why we have to continue fighting. >> alexis, michelle, thank you both so much for spending time with us. lisa lives here now. after months of fireworks,

testimony in the trump civil fraud trial is over but not without action today. that's next. is over but not without action today that's next. here we go. can we land? you're old enough to do it in the sky now. but it's gross. there is no way we're landing. are you sure no one is watching? gwen mallard! do it now, or we leave without you. ok. (carolers) ♪ iphone 15 pro, your husband deserves it! ♪ (mom) carolers? to tell me you want a new iphone? a better plan is verizon. (dad) no way they'd take this wreck. (carolers) ♪ yes, they will, in any condition. ♪ ♪ get iphone 15 pro and ipad and apple watch - all on them! ♪ (mom) please forgive him. (carolers) ♪ it's all good - just a little awkward. ♪ (soloist) think we'll wrap this up. (vo) it's your last chance to turn any iphone in any condition into a new iphone 15 pro with titanium and ipad and apple watch se - all on us. that's up to $1700 in value. only on verizon.

as americans, there's one thing we can all agree on. the promise of our constitution and the hope that liberty and justice is for all people. but here's the truth. attacks on our constitutional rights, yours and mine are greater than they've ever been. the right for all to vote. reproductive rights. the rights of immigrant families. the right to equal justice for black, brown and lgbtq+ folks. the time to act to protect our rights is now.

that's why i'm hoping you'll join me today in supporting the american civil liberties union. it's easy to make a difference. just call or go online now and become an aclu guardian of liberty. all it takes is just $19 a month. only $0.63 a day. your monthly support will make you part of the movement to protect the rights of all people, including the fundamental right to vote. states are passing laws that would suppress the right to vote. we are going backwards. but the aclu can't do this important work without the support of people like you. you can help ensure liberty and justice for all and make sure that every vote is counted. so please call the aclu now or go to my aclu.org and join us. when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special we the people t-shirt and much more. to show you're a part of the movement to protect the rights guaranteed to all of us by the us constitution. we protect everyone's rights,

the freedom of religion, the freedom of expression, racial justice, lgbtq rights, the rights of the disabled. we are here for everyone. it is more important than ever to take a stand. so please join us today. because we the people means all the people, including you. so call now or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty. the office put eric lewis on the stand today as the final

witness to rebut the testimony of the expert witness. it capped off 44 days of testimony, dozens of witnesses including the former president. the judge is expected next month. joining us now, two particular faces who have been following the trial from the beginning. "new york times" investigative reporter, sue craig. lisa is back with us. takeaways. last day of testimony. >> it was you know, didn't end with a bang, but a whimper. but this isn't the end. we are going to get post trial briefs on january 5th and that is the thing i'm most looking forward to because that is where the lawyers are going to stitch together all the evidence that's been introduced, all the testimony. all the moments that might not have made sense at the time will come together and both sides for lack of better description are going to bring it. they're going to give their best interpretation before the judge to him and i will be watching on

january 5th for those briefs to come in. furiously. banging my keyboard waiting for it to refresh. >> and we'll have you hear so you can do a readout for us. sue, your sense of how this went for trump. >> i don't it went that well and for me, i really when i think about this trial, i really have stepped back and tried to think of it in context of so many things that i have seen since i started covering his finances and you know i look back to that story that my colleagues and i did in 2018 where we found in that instance that donald trump had, had engaged in tax fraud schemes in order to enhance the money he got from his father. in that story, we looked at some things that had to do with real estate appraisals. the same thing that's under the mike scope in this trial. we saw they engaged in behavior where they had real estate appraisals and a charitable contribution, a building in question, and they would go high

on that because they wanted to get a larger deduction on the tax form. the same way we saw instances from the trumps where they were looking at assets that had to go in an estate and had to go low. this time last year, we were in the middle of a criminal trial where they were engaging in behavior in order to avoid taxes you know, shenanigans with payroll taxes and they were trying to avoid taxes in that instance and were found guilty and faced a fine. the trump organization did. now we're in the middle of another instance where appraisals are in question because they're trying to get better rates from banks. i think this has been a pce of a puzzle for me abo habitual behavior. i love that stitching together of the facts. here's what the ag had to say today. while the judge already ruled in our favor that donald trump engaenled in years of significant fraud and unjustly enriched himself and his family,

this trial revealed the full extent of that fraud. your sense more specifically of how the prosecution feels this case went. >> i think they feel pretty comfortable. the task for them here, many people have reported that what this trial was about was damages and functionally, that's true, but it's really about intent. the six remaining claims this were left to try all necessitate proof of intent by the defendants. you know as well as i do that getting proof of trump's intent, whether we're talking about this case or one of the federal indictments he's facing, can be very challenging. in that respect, trump took himself out, right? he took the stand and he admitted he reviewed his statements of financial condition. sometimes he even corrected them. were there valuations that struck him as too high, indeed. now, did he deflect blame for that and put them on his

accountant? a broker who he said was responsible? all sorts of other people. yes. but at the end of the day, his testimony will be part of what i think will be a very damning ruling against him and the other defendants here. >> sue, your reporting highlighted the shadowy nature of the trump finances. did you think you'd see a day where the trump family business was on trial? >> i can't say i thought it would end here in a trial like this. but it has been revealing just kind of and it has brought together all the things. kind of desperate things we've reported. i have to say i, you know, when you think about how this trial went, the one thing that's always been in my ear in the courtroom has been how donald trump's lawyers have been playing to the appeal, the appellate court and that can't be a good posture. he came into this already being found liable and is facing huge

ramifications. there's a monitor who has to watch him and depending on how this goes, he can be no longer allowed to do business in the state of new york at all. it is an end i wouldn't have predicted but we did see the pieces that suggested something like this might happen. it's rare to see consequence come to donald trump. >> indeed. suzanne, lisa, thank you both for spending time with us. we're going to take a quick break and then we'll be right back. take a quick break and then we'll be right back this is stella. sfx: [ding] she has big ideas for this year's tree. real big. so they went to michaels and found inspiration

in the one holiday shop as expansive as stella's imagination. because sometimes the best way to find a little holiday magic is to make it yourself. together they turned that little holiday magic into a seven foot tall... [roar] untraditional tradition. turn ideas into i-did-its. sfx: [ding] ♪ ♪ shelves. shelves that know what taste buds want. shelves smart enough to see, sense, react, restock. ♪ so caramel swirl is always there for the taking.

millions of children are fighting to survive due to inequality, conflict, poverty and the climate crisis. save the children® is working alongside communities to provide a better life for children. and there's a way you can help. please call or go online to give just $10 a month. only $0.33 a day. we urgently need 1000 new monthly donors in the next 30 days to help the children we support around the world. you can help provide food, medicine, care and protection,

plus so much more that a child needs by calling right now and giving just $10 a month. all we need are 1000 monthly donors in the next 30 days. please call or go online now with your monthly gift of just $10. thanks to generous government grants every dollar you give can have up to ten times the impact. and when you call with your credit card, we will send you this save the children® tote bag as a thank you for your support. your small monthly donation of just $10 could be the reason a child in crisis survives. please call or go online to hungerstopsnow.org to help save lives today.

-- they do not really know what the eight americans are still alive or who was holding them come the family said you have to hold onto the possibility that some kind of christmas miracle in the coming days they could see their loved ones return home. >> monica abba, thank you . coming up, he's become an obsession for the house gop, the subject of endless speculation and their entire republican agenda, the president's son hunter biden broke his wrist today, stepped away from the capital, that story, right after this week. f

do you have evidence, if you have evidence, you wouldn't be having this conversation. >> will, i see the evidence differently, i inc. that is why we need to have the votes, and have the debates and the hearings. >> heavy seen direct evidence for providence president biden? >> we have to connect the parts, that has to be here. >> he is not the president or the vice president at that time. where's the doing? he was not even a president candidate at the time periods, keep he was a candidate, what source are you with? >> i'm with nbc. >> apparently you will never believe us. >> there has not been for most produced a smoking gun. >> we never claimed we have direct money going to the president. >> it is 5:00 in new york. came in for nicolle wallace, you heard it right there, republicans have no evidence of wrongdoing by the current

president of the united states, yet a little thing like a lack of fact does not stop the impeachment inquiry into him. >> it is remarkable being voted on today on capitol hill, the mechanisms the founding fathers had reserved for high crimes and misdemeanors. today's gop only care about getting you, not about the truth, as a nation we spent -- impeachment in recent years, this effort -- our colleague writes that the acsations against biden have not been confirmed or approved by anyone. it's thother three impeachments, the conduct of the presents are accused of his plan for evyo to see, there's no doubt as megan entered, no doubt that mike tried to coerce ukrainian private and into opening a probe against biden, trumps speech on january 6, 2021 is one evidence of what he hoped supporters have accomplished on margin on the capital, the point is alleged in those impeachment, that was not

really in question. the question was whether the conduct was bad enough to merit political death penalty. we do this out of the house votes to formalize the republican party's impeachment inquiry into president biden, which allows them to better enforce their subpoenas in court. subpoenas like the one they issued to the president's son hunter biden. this morning he refused to come in and testify behind closed doors. he said he repeated his offer to testify publicly. >> for six years i have been a target of the unrelenting trump attack machine shouting where is hunter? well, here is my answer. i am here. let me state as clearly as i can , my father was not financially involved in my business, not as a practicing lawyer, nor as a board member of charisma, not in my partnership with the chinese private is an easement, not in by investment at home or abroad. and certainly not -- in the

depths of my addiction i was extremely irresponsible with my finances. but, to suggest that is grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond the absurd. it is shameless. there is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business, because it did not happen. >> that is where we start today with democratic congresswoman jasmine, crockett, the headshake says it all, tell me why are your colleagues doing this when they don't seem to care about the 91 criminal charges against their parties leader? >> [ laughter ] alicia, i don't even know what america is becoming. the fact that we had a president that went through two impeachment is wild just in and of itself, but the fact that we are going to try to draw some false equivalency and act as if trump and biden are on the same

level, i will tell you this, they are not on the same level. president biden is head and shoulders above trump in every single way. especially when it comes to someone who absolutely avoids being a criminal. we know who trump is, but they want to ignore that, they want to act as if an impeachment is a nothing burger, that is exactly why donald trump got his peace. that is not why he went through the four indictments and the 91 counts. it is because donald trump is a criminal, and of story. the idea that they will somehow get to president biden through his son, who was drug-addicted, and the only thing they revealed in the hearing is that we had a president who loved his son even through his imperfections. it's been a congresswoman, let's play a little bit of what they said earlier this week on fox news, take a look. >> if they have that stuff. the republicans at this point,

they have a lot of lectures and spreadsheets, but they have not connected the dots. they connected about, the car department of -- did on hunter, they did not show where joe biden did anything illegally. >> one, when you lose steve tucci, and two, on a new snack last night the chair the committee that you are on, the house oversight committee said this. he's had that position from the very beginning. >> is had that position from the very beginning, going on fox and friends because of him, he's the one guy that has been -- we will find it at your point they don't want to talk about the evidence, congresswoman. >> the lack there of. let's be clear, the lack of evidence. in addition to the fact that it will be interesting to watch the boat. we note that the likes of ken buck has been clear that there was not anything that he felt like

warranted an impeachment. we know that james palmer, the witnesses that he decided to bring the very first hearing, also said the same thing. when your own witnesses are out here saying out loud i don't know what to do with you, but let me tell you what was very interesting, he loved to go on fox and the lefty throughout these conspiracy theories and not have a receipt to back him up. but today, when we were sitting there in the committee hearing room and we were waiting to see if hunter biden was going to show up in the committee hearing room, james palmer was really quiet. everybody else was talking, he had nothing to say. it is funny that the chairman had so much to say when the cameras were rolling, he has nothing to say behind closed doors. he knows, like the rest of us, that they have not connected any. to suggest anything, this is just like we heard them say today, he said this is about

trump 2024, and of story. i am tired of it. especially when you come from a district like mine where i had a man who lost his life as a postal worker, for those who care to know what we are supposed to be doing, we are supposed to be looking into things like what are the policies to protect workers at the u.s. postal service? i cannot get a hearing on that because we want to have hearings where we show new photos of hunter biden which, last time i checked, that definitely has nothing to do with an impeachment. >> i want to say on that point, congressman, a purpose of the institution, the purpose of something like impeachment where we often talk about the many ways trump and the gop have undermined american institutions, and i wonder as you watch it go down, if you are concerned that your republican colleagues are undermining -- to the impeachment itself. >> they are not only doing that, what we are seeing is the crumbling of our democracy in front of our eyes.

this is not to sound dramatic. i recently did an interview and if we don't do anything than our democracy is on the line. let me tell you, we are seeing it all before our eyes, whether you want to look at the opinions coming out of the court or look at the clown show known as the 118 congress. , every once in a while they tell you the truth -- more than just talk, they need us to move policies that will better our lives, those herds will only be deepened because you have unserious people . it some point in time we have to say it's not about whether you are democrat or republican or an independent. what we need to find out is who cares about democracy, who cares about the institution, and who cares about me as a person and that's you need to vote for. right now we have a bunch of people that want to play

politicians, instead of actually being politicians. and it is hurting us, not only domestically, but internationally. i fear for our international security almost on a daily basis because of the ineffectiveness that we see coming out of this republican majority in the house. their eyes not on the ball. >> congresswoman, thank you so much for getting us started. i want to bring it to our conversation david jolly, joining at the table is founder of iraq and afghanistan veterans of america and host of the independent american podcast and host of the podcast -- for vanity fair, molly, i often joke to you if you miss congress, and i have to admit or guess that this week you do not. math is not my strong suit, but i think about this right. this by republicans they cannot afford to lose more than three and their party because the majority is razor thin at the moment. the only have ken buck you has said he's going to vote against it. talk to us about what we see

from republicans and about this moment we find ourselves in. >> the vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry as part of the past, mike johnson would not let it come up in the house if he did not have the votes for it. would it essentially does is gives the house republicans more legal leverage to use. in fact the subpoena of hunter biden and his show no show depending on which side of the aisle you are, that would be more unfortunate if they had already passed the impeachment authorization, they have not. they will likely do that today. here is what i would say about the republican party and what they are doing to the institution. the bad faith in partisanship in this moment is obvious by republicans. i think what is less obvious is the political incompetence about what they are about to do, it is the 18 or so republicans that biting districts, the by argument for opening it is this is just a fact-finding boat, not a judgment, we are not going to impeach joe biden, the house

just needs information. that is a stupid analysis by biden district republicans, this is why. you will vote to impeach joe biden because if you do not, after opening the inquiry, that by not doing so you will be exonerated and the income but going into his re-election. so, set that up. obviously it is a dark period for the nation if republicans impeach joe biden without the actual evidence. there are no allegations that have so far come forward. they will be in a position of denigrating the institution by using the impeachment tool when there is no evidence, but also looking like absolutely fools going into a re-election for impeaching a sitting president for no reason. i know that they think they are settling the political score. but what they are doing is showcasing their absolute ignorance and their incompetence politically, and the disrespect for the institution of the house. >> was talk about all of that, let's talk about what we heard earlier today in the debate.

>> the likely nominees of the republican party who faces 91 criminal charges in various courts is also impeached not once, but twice, and we have evidence. and whenever the former president is accused of wrongdoing, his favorite movies to accuse an opponent of doing the same. for this to work in his president biden to be impeached too. >> this has never been about the truth. this is about avenging donald trump. this is about undermining our democracy, and influencing the 2024 election. >> there is a through line to all of this. donald trump will violate the law and constitution to gain power, and to keep it, and republicans will enable him every step of the way. no matter how destructive the consequences to our institutions, or to the country. >> we have known republicans who do this at all costs, but i

take david's point, heading into the election it makes them look foolish, and also take representatives crockett point, that there are actual services that the united states congress is supposed to provide, the actual policies that are supposed to be followed, the reason that these committees exist is not to do this. >> correct, stupid season is every day now in washington a couple weeks ago without that tommy thibodeau was the dumbest member of congress, now we have a competition, this could be an open competition to see who can be the least impressive member of congress, they are just not good at this. and the american people do want to see them get things done, it's happening on the heels of the zelensky visit. they did not show up to support an ally that is fighting putin and standing on the lines for freedom and has been in women dying in the bud, but they show it for this circus. it is obviously political. the goal is chaos, the goal is to blow it all up, many of them are political suicide bombers, they want to create the sciatic environment where the government doesn't work, there's an audience that is watching, the independence, this does not bring them to the republican party, this does not help donald trump or their

party in the general election, the more they doubled down the more they drive this people away, they want to seem aggressive congress get anything done, like a defense budget or support for our allies. >> is the government. >> anything basically funding the government. when they cannot get that and they hurt themselves and is not a political strategy. >> you talk about? let's talk about -- you told you today he wanted to give trump who was twice impeached quote a little bit of ammo to fire back. >> yeah, and when he was asked who said why are you doing this? he said trump 2024. so, look. trump has said publicly a number of times that he wants them to impeach biting, correct? this is what he wants, he wants to flood the zone with expletives. and i think this is what they are doing. you know, the republicans, the way we got here was that republicans refused to stand up to donald trump. the way we stay here is that republicans refused to stand up to donald trump. i mean that is it, there's

nothing getting done. and people were very hard on mccarthy because he was just naming post offices and was unable to pass legislation. they are not even naming post office now. we really, you know, they are just completely deadlocked. we have seen, by the way, speaker charts and putting things on the floor he has not had the boat. i'm not convinced that he has the boat because, as congressman crockett said earlier today, the math is not working. >> let me just mention speaker johnson, the first impeachment was underway, here is what the speaker of the house had to say when it was the president from his party under the microscope. >> the founding fathers, the founders of this country, warned against single party impeachments. they said that it would be bitterly divided and perhaps irreparably divisive. the founders of this country want us against a single party impeachments, because they feared it would bitterly and perhaps irreparably divide our

nation . the founders of our nation one against the single party impeachment because you know why. because they feared it would bitterly and perhaps irreparably divide our nation. >> the founding fathers warned us, they feared a single party impeachment. they know it would bitterly divide the country. it might be irreparable damage to the country. >> you have to admire the consistency of the messaging, save for the fact that now when it's actually applicable, it is no longer his reference point. >> imagine that, a republican speaker asking in bad faith today. the one thing that has gone from -- to mccarthy to johnson might be the bad faith of some of these moments. but look, this is a moment of serious consequence. and i think what mike johnson is also doing is about having mike johnson. if we look at what he has done in the first month here, he had to keep the government open by working with good democrats. how did he do that? he adored donald trump for

president to make my treating the green back up a little bit. this week he is having to move with a budget where he whipped out all of the hard right maga priorities because the math is the map and the votes were not there. so, he was the governing speaker saying we cannot pass all of these priorities. nine in trouble, what am i going to do, i'm going to wait for the impeachment inquiry, and when he pushed on it he said we are not pursuing impeachment, we just ask questions. i have to tell you, this has to be -- we will probably talk about hunter, but that's what hunter biden did today is so important, he punched back. you don't just get to dismiss the bad faith and pretend it's not happening, it's happening and it's real and it has to be there. >> indeed, no one is going anywhere when the vote gets underway we will go to it. there some bombshell reporting in the mar-a-lago documents -- by the ex-president who repeatedly reached out to potential witnesses. we have that, after a very short break.

plus a big victory for democrats is that they tried to win back control of the house -- the votes they need to retake power. this continues after a quick break. do not go anywhere. o anywhere. ♪ i wanna hold you forever ♪ hey little bear bear. ♪ ♪ ♪ i'm gonna love you forever ♪ ♪ ♪ c'mon, bear. ♪ ♪ ♪ you don't...you don't have to worry... ♪ ♪ be by your side... i'll be there... ♪

♪ with my arms wrapped around... ♪

i took it as a direction. as the president of the united states, with me alone saying i hope this, i took it as this is what he wanted me to do. i did not obey that but that's the way it took it. >> he does not give the questions he does not give the orders. he speaks in code. and i understand the code because i have been around him

for a decade. >> we heard it time and again that donald trump has a way of telling people what he wants without actually saying it, like a mob boss. with that in mind, reporters from cnn say that nbc news did not -- provides a good into what could be an example of that behavior. they found that a former employee at the mar-a-lago club quit three months after the fbi seized classified documents there has contacted by the president himself within days of quitting. according to two sources, the former president calls his ex- employee on his cell phone to ask why he was leaving. the employee told the former president who had another business opportunity he wanted to pursue. the message later got back to the former employee that trump thought he was a good man. all that seemed harmless, consider this about the unnamed former employee. he had moved several boxes for chump and was also pretty conversations referenced in the indictment between trump and his two co-defendants, the mar-a- lago property manager and

trumps body man, putting the former employee in a unique group of mar-a-lago staffers i could be in a position to provide invaluable information to investigators. trump pleaded not guilty to the 40 county was charged with this summer. joining the conversation, peter strauss, they are all back with us. describe to us what the dynamic is like, the way that trump issues orders without ever saying them out loud. >> well, i think you are exactly right. and analogizing the to an organized crime family boss, let's keep in mind this is not for trump, back doing during the mueller investigation one of the attorneys called mike flynn's attorney to remind him that the president had certainly strong feelings for him and those remained, cassidy hutchinson before she testified before the january 6 committee received a message from somebody that was close to trump saying we know you are

loyal and you are going to do the right thing. so, this behavior time and time again is exactly what you indicated, this is not trump directly saying i want you to lie or i want you to obscure the truth, this is his way of conveying exactly what he wants done. now, in this reporting allegedly trump himself is in part. he reached out to his former employee directly, and they are showing up at the gym, there's a lot of very close contact that it seems as an investigator, if i saw a witness and something i was investigating being approached this way, it is very clear that the intent was to intimidate or try to get their cooperation to not provide the truth or cooperate with investigators. >> the report details a larger pattern as they kept in touch after the employee left mar-a- lago, and offering a lot of legal representation to get to a golf tournament, reminders that he could always come back

and work for trump, how do investigators then separate what might to be seen as kind, genuine gestures with things that were intended that's actual pressure? >> well, that's difficult to do, that is part of what we saw going back to the mueller investigation, that is how you tease apart what are expressions of support are making sure that these mean something, versus something that in effect is coercive, then something that goes beyond that and crosses the line into something illegal. it is difficult, the issue is that trump has done this for so long, he's very good at making sure that he is not the person directing this, that he has somebody else do it, and there's that clip of what michael cohen said, he does not tell the second party what to do, they just know what it is that he wants accomplished. so, it is challenging, there are some things, if an attorney were to approach somebody that they knew already had representation and it is not clear whether this former employee, while he had his own

attorney, if trump's attorneys knew that or not, there are ethical issues there saying get him in trouble, but it absolutely points to jack smith's interest about what this employee, not only what they have to say about what took place at mar-a-lago, but what that shows about trumps state of mind. >> i just want to underscore the stakes and what we are really talking about here, given the number of legal cases that we are asking everyone to keep a track of. this is a recording of something that was mentioned in the indictment, it is audio of trump allegedly showing classified information on the plan of attack. this was done by the military, given to me. i think we can probably do it. >> yeah, let's try, yeah. >> is president i could declassify it, but now i can't.

>> it is so cool, luckily i am interacting., and you probably almost did not believe me. >> no, i believe you. >> brings some drinks and please. >> if you think about donald trump reaching out to former employees, just checking in on them, just seeing how they are, after they have left his employee, a reminder of what it is we are really talking about, the stakes of what transpired. again, the stakes that donald trump is incompetent or unfaithful to the interest and fidelity of our own country is ultimately what the nation will see play out here. and whether it is that recording, where he will have to choose that actually it didn't happen, what we have heard is not true or he can do whatever he wants. he has to choose which defense he wants to pursue, or if what we also when he invited russian leadership into the oval office or the behavior with chinese

leadership in a moment of national security. this is where donald trump's failure of leadership can really hurt the united states, among dozens of other examples that we all witnessed. i think the last point is so important, and there is reinsurance to all of us following the trials. all of this, the contact of the employees, the president wants you to know that you are a good person or you would not cross the president, or social you don't think that happened. all of that type of witness and present it -- intimidation is -- under most conditions, and it will present to the judge or to a jury the president's frame of mind that arguably has consciousness of guilt, what we have seen in these cases is that justice is working, it is slow but it is working. and i believe all of these reported out stories and anecdotes will be the fabric that leads to his conviction. >>'s side griffin, none of this is actually -- this is recordom the daily beat, this shows trumps legal defense

fund raising about 1.6, this shows trumps legal defense fund isg about 1.6 million over the last six months and spending le than 30,000. more notable than how little legal defense group has spent is what they did not spend it on, mainly legal services, as wellas what they paid for, a party at r-a-lago, the nd says the purpose is to raise money and pay for or help defray legal expenses related to defending against legal actions arising from an individual or group's participation in the political process. none of it appears related to the mission, it is so on brand. >> you remember that erik trump got in trouble for having events at trump properties with his charity. so, you see that this is like right out of the trump family playbook, he is selling nft's with pieces of the suit he wore during the mug shot. like this guy is a merchandiser in chief. i think what is really important about this is that you can tell, he is worried.

he has all of these criminal account. so, he really has pushed these republican congress people to start this by the base impeachment, in the hopes that they can distract the people, because remember. trump does these cases in public, right? who does these cases, he tries them and he workshops things in public, as somebody who thinks about all of this, this is a question of national security. when you hear that audio, flashing around documents, talking about tax stands, there's the fact that he did it, there's also just a complete irreverence for what should be a very sanctified thing. >> when i hear that every time it is hard not to feel my blood pressure go up. i get physically outraged and angry and especially folks who serve in uniform feel the same way. dirty people do dirty things and dirty ways. he has been dirty his whole life. he has not been stopped. i think the justice system is working, but is not working

fast enough. too often we are worried about the election were not worried about the fact that he continues to be a national security risk every day he's out in the open, he has classified information, he's threatening people foreign and domestic and supporting our enemies, and he continues to be, in my view, the number one national security threat to our country and threat to the world. we need those guardrails to work a lot faster, because we kind of just forget that he may have just disclosed classified information to adversaries, these are huge things that right now could become putting american lives in jeopardy right now around the world. that's how high the stakes are, sometimes people get washed over because he's been so dirty for so long. at some point it needs to stop. it's been a do not forget, i stay up at night thinking about it. pete, thank you for spending some time with us, everyone else is sticking with me. when we returned by the highest court in new york state may have held democrats take back the house, elias who helped win the court fight will be our guest after the break. h

so now, do you have a driver's license? oh. what did you get us? [ chuckling ] with the click of a pen, you can a new volkswagen at the sign, then drive event. sign today and you're off in a new volkswagen during the sign, then drive event. please be a phone, please be a phone. is it a phone? oh, it smells like a cat nip toy from chewy. that's not a phone. get a free, $30 egift card at chewy. this is better than toilet paper get great deals on gifts that deliver excitement, at chewy.

- "best thing i've ever done." that's what freddie told me. - it was the best thing i've ever done, and- - really? - yes, without a doubt! - i don't have any anxiety about money anymore. - great people. different people, that's for sure, and all of them had different reasons for getting a reverse mortgage, but you know what, they all felt the same about two things: they all loved their home, and they all wanted to stay in that home. and they all wanted to stay in that home. - [announcer] if you're 62 or older and own your home, you could access your equity to improve your lifestyle. a reverse mortgage loan eliminates your monthly mortgage payments and puts tax-free cash in your pocket.

call the number on your screen. - why don't you call aag... and find out what a reverse mortgage can mean for you? - [announcer] call right now to receive your free no-obligation info kit. call the number on your screen.

in addition to the dubious impeachment vote have any momentarily, which will likely only imperil the blic influence in the house, now a major new court decision could have major implications for ntl from 2024. new york's highest court ordered the states congressional district to be redrawn before next year, and democrats who control final approval with the opening to

slip as many as six seats and swing districts that president biden oneb, now voting rights attorney and founding of the site, mike elias is firm, his law group living litigated by new york voters that led to this , congratulations. what happens now? >> now you new yorkers get a new fair map for 2024. it is congratulations all the way around, by the way, congratulations on your new show, i'm already setting my dvr or whatever the modern equivalent of it is. so, if you are able to renew your, what it means is that you are finally going to have the independent redistricting commission draw and submit a second map to the legislature which is what the state constitution requires. and we will have more representatives in our democracy as a result. >> talk to us, about what we have artie seen, and unusual beauty busy round of redistricting legal -- what

this does and what we will see in 2024. >> look, what you are seeing around the country is a wave of victories in court, my team is doing an amazing job. in alabama we saw that the republicans there through that legal map, they were struck down and went all the way to the supreme court and that the supreme court would reverse it, now there's going to be a second opportunity there, same thing in louisiana, same thing in georgia. so, those are three states where most likely democrats will pickup seats as a result of additional majority opportunity districts being drawn. republicans gerrymandered north carolina, now in the state of new york, where that state is now going to essentially funded gerrymandering, one can expect he will see democrats gain between four and six new congressional districts. really, if you want to understand control of the house

in 2024, you need to be following what is happening in the courts, that's why we started these things. because the courts are setting the stage for what these maps are going to look like, and of right now i was a betting man i would bet that mike johnson will be a short part one term speaker and jeffries will have the gavel next year. >> bold predictions, we will play that back on the day after election day. to your point, a lot of republicans are not thrilled with what is happened out of new york, republican congresswoman desmond the chair the new york gop responding saying the decision opens the door for democrats to read our congressional district lines so that elections are decided not by the voters, but by politicians in a back room, that is rich, your response? >> so, last night i don't drink up all but last night i kicked back and celebrated with a glassful of her tears, it was quite a wonderful cocktail.

but look, republicans have been denying minority voting around the country, that is what develop alabama was out and with louisiana and georgia are about, they have also been relying on unfair maps in states like new york, not only new york, in ohio, for example, now what they have done in north carolina is --, so republicans are in no standing to complain about fair maps coming to new york, and it is important that, as people say, both sides do it, both sides don't do it, what we asked for the courts in new york to do was to be bipartisan, equally divided, independent redistricting to submitting a new map, that is a far cry from what you hear about republicans around the country. anytime elise stepanek is unhappy i think it is a good thing for voters. >> if you allow me to shift gears, we are getting very close to a vote on the house floor. your sense of what

republicans voting on what we know is a sham impeachment today, what they might want to consider. >> this is going to be the last significant book for a number of them are going to the next election and lose their seats, lawlor of new york and others, but what you see republicans doing right now in the house is absolutely shameful. you know, president biden has not done anything wrong. i don't mean he's done a little thing wrong that doesn't rise to the level of impeachment, he's done nothing wrong, they have trumped up this fake impeachment because they are a shameless party that has no positive path, no positive agenda for the american people. all they have is the exercise of raw power to try to govern the majority they in fact don't enjoy majority support. it is a sad thing they are about to do, but almost certainly the final there in the electoral conference for next year.

mike elias i'm not allowing you to go, but i want to bring in allie who is life at capitol hill, and is checking the vote. we are getting really close here. >> you, really close. they are finishing up a motion that has nothing to do with the impeachment inquiry vote, then we expect them to move on to actually vote to open the impeachment inquiry. the number today in terms of the majority is 215, according to my colleague kyle stewart who sits in the chamber. that means the republicans for usual because the majority is so slim can only afford to use -- lose a handful of votes, one less than they would've been able to afford two weeks ago after the ousting of george santos. this is actually a really interesting way of tracking the house republicans because those members mark was talking about, people like mike lawlor who are in by then-winning districts, and so-called moderate members of the conference, they are now being put between a rock and a

hard place politically, because heading into next year, the overarching team of republican work in congress is going to be continuing to investigate president joe biden's family, and trying, though they have continued to fail, trying to link him to his son hunter's business dealings, and also trying to make those impeachable offenses. this is difficult for them, they have to move forward to an actual impeachment, or effectively equipped him. what would you hear consistently and what democrats have pointed out over the course of today is something that congressman troy tells said , a supporter of former president donald trump, he was asked about the impeachment inquiry and his only response was trumped 2024. it is clear that democrats are going to continue to try to make the case, as they have been, that this is republicans trying to muddy the waters for 2024, and for republicans they have to try to find ways that that is not what they are doing, but that comes harder when the evidence is limited

and nonexistent as it continues to be. >> about to starting any minute, forgive me if i had to cut you off when we got to the house for so we can see the introduction of the text, but allie just tied it all up in april. you see what has just played out in new york courts, having an impact on the way that some people in the house floor think about the book today. >> reminded of nancy pelosi, who never wanted her congresspeople and foldable districts to have to take notes like this. she knew that they could lose their seats over it. then you put someone in like mike johnson, who is number five, who has barely been in congress, he's been in nine years, never been in leadership, and he is just doing it, and you will see these voters have to you know, these congresspeople have to win, keep their seats in by the districts and have to answer for impeaching the president on five. >> 216 is a magic number that we will be looking for. talk to us about independence

and the this is what they want. >> will, on the redistricting i think that is a really important issue. it's been a going to stop you right there, lifeless into the house floor. some of this is on the adoption of the resolution, those in favor say i? the supposed say no? in the opinion, of the chair they have it. the speaker, the gentleman of massachusetts take recognition. >> asked for a recorded vote. >> those favoring a recorded vote will rise. -- have arisen, members record their votes by electronic device, this is a five minute boat. ute boat. >> all right david, this is the moment of truth, can they get to 217 votes? and with it what does it mean

for our democracy, that this is how republicans in the house of representatives are choosing to spend their time and within their taxpayer dollars? yeah, it would be surprising if the boat had come up without knowing that they have a magic number to get there. and the justification of some is that this is just a pursuit of information. but, as we discussed earlier, that is not really good enough, because if you open this up you are either going to ultimately exonerate joe biden or vote to impeach without any evidence, apparently. but, what republicans would have to get to is two areas federal prosecutors could not fund, which is some level of foreign influence, a violation of his son that tied in business to his father, or some act of public corruption. i think what the white house needs to be careful of, and this is critically important for controlling the narrative. the house has the constitutional authority to do this, they can do this on bad faith and do this on partisanship and do it without

evidence, but in the eyes of the constitution and the court, they have the authority to do this. so when house republicans go to white house to say we want these documents and we want people to testify, we have an open impeachment inquiry, the white house has to make a tough decision, because if you don't cooperate, you are now opening up an obstruction charge, we always see that in impeachment proceedings, kind of the easiest thing to add on because every white house is providing information to what they believe is a bad faith impeachment. and, knowing that, house republicans are probably going to impeach joe biden. i believe since january this is been in the works, they plan to impeach joe biden in the screen, if that is in the round of likelihood? do you want obstruction to be one of the charges? i don't know the answer to that. is for the white house and democrats have been very dismissive about the process. can you remain dismissive? or, where i think they should go is to lean into this and

crush, absolutely crushed on pac-10 basis, the republican narrative here, crush it intimately, and give the independent voter, give the persuadable voucher and people in the press the evidence to recognize every single day that republicans are acting in bad faith and pursuing the political act, not a constitutional one. >> allie? >> yeah, i was just telling your producers, we are always having to go in conversations here, as we are watching this boat unfold, so far, at least according to -- in the chamber, no defections, including a name that is early in the offer that that we look for, ken buck of colorado. our understanding or our expectation was that he was going to vote against opening the impeachment inquiry, this is critical of the fact that they are doing it, he says they feel that they don't have enough information to do so, but instead we just saw him vote yes to open it, which means now it is likely we end up

seeing every republican voted together to open the impeachment inquiry, we can see some defections, there's still a lot of voting left to vote, but at the same time that is one notable boat that we've been looking at, he could've been the odd man out in this conference, instead what it looks like is that there's been a really big seat change which in the conference which a few weeks ago which speaker mccarthy endorsed and named the idea of an impeachment inquiry, now the new speaker mike johnson actually putting the impeachment inquiry on the floor. they say the reason there's been such a seat change is because when mccarthy endorsed the idea, he was still pretty fringe, they were lacking the votes, members were outspoken against the idea of opening an impeachment inquiry. now what leadership has told us is that because members went home for thanksgiving, they feel that members heard enough from their district, maybe it does not mean that the members are backing impeachment, but they are backing and impeachment inquiry that allows

them to continue investigating, frankly what i found fascinating is as i watched members talk about this march toward impeachment, many of them have made sure to stay, they even said this during the debate on the floor this afternoon, many of them have tried to make sure to say this is only an inquiry, not an all- out impeachment. but again, it's the point and david just made, which is that once you get into an inquiry, you have to decide if you are taking the route to impeach or you are not, there are political ramifications for both. >> we now have passed the 217 number, which was the magic number, of course that number could change. david, that ken buck, the fact that he said he was likely going to vote against this, he's now voting for it, i want to know what that says to you. i want your thoughts on this distinction republicans are voter for versus voting for inquiry -- we're gaveling. there you have it.

221. >> on this vote the ayes are 221 and the nays are 212. the resolution is adopted. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to -- >> david, how embarrassing. >> yeah. listen, this is a matter that has been under investigation by federal prosecutors for five to six years. the only charges they arrived at, which are serious, are individual tax charges against the president's son and the purchase of a gun by the president's son. if there was evidence of public corruption that touched joe biden certainly federal

prosecutors under the trump administration would have seen that. the other embarrassment here is they're talking about activity when joe biden was not in office. it's not related to any activity in the presidency today. where it touches the vice presidency there was no evidence as well. republicans have put themselves in a bad spot. will it matter politically? the base wants this. the fox news viewer wants this. the republicans want this. democrats clearly don't. what do voters see in this moment? do they see an embarrassment that republicans brought upon the nation or do they buy the story line? that's where democrats have to decide how they'll hit back. the democrats have to make a political decision here because republicans have launched this missile. >> mark elias, what does this tell you? >> if you heard what ali said before the vote, there are no

moderate republicans. we need to stop with the nonsense. there are no moderate republicans in the u.s. house of representatives. there are proud maga and there are scared maga. that's it. 221 of them. every single member of the republican house, whether they were a proud maga or scared maga, just voted for a bogus nonsensical impeachment motion to proceed because they pay homage to donald trump. it's a shameful moment in american history. it's a shameful moment for each one of these members. it's an important member that every american watching should realize. there's nothing other than an authoritarian maga movement in the republican party and come next november those members of congress, a large number of them, will lose their seats over this.

>> proud maga, scared maga? >> when i look at this i see america 2023 and 2024. republicans on one side. democrats on the other. the entire country divided and the congress arguing over ridiculous things. i see another great moment for putin. he looks at this and sees the american congress divided. he sees americans fighting in the streets. it's a divided america that's a national security for us and i think the world is watching. >> doesn't it matter who's driving it? >> it does matter. absolutely it matters. it goes to the fact that congress can't get anything done. a lot of them are checking out of politics. americans are pushing back and saying, i'm sick of all this. that's the reality. >> i think that's been part of the challenge for democrats which is who benefits from that, republicans. >> yeah, but two parties are not the same. >> i'm not saying they are. >> right.

you're saying two camps. democrats believe in the democracy, american democracy the way it works. republicans not so much, right? and less and less every day. we see this with mike johnson. and mike johnson got this job by trying to overturn the 2020 election. that's how trump knew he was loyal. these two parties are not the same. >> no, but their candidates are equally popular. that's the reality of where the country is. parties are divided. most of america is not in either camp. they're frustrated. >> but republicans want you to adopt that framing. >> david's right. the question is can biden go on the offensive and make this a winning moment. it's another test for biden and his leadership and it's a test for his party. this is the race. this is the race for the white house and the future of our country. >> ali vitali, have you learned

what happened with the ken buck vote? >> reporter: i haven't seen him yet. it's clear he wasn't a big fan of some of the arguments the white house might have been making around the idea that it wasn't an official impeachment inquiry. i have to dig into this with him when i see him around the capitol. it's important now as your panel is talking about the political landscape of what it means to be a republican in 2023 going into 2024. there were no defections. every republican showed up to vote in what leadership is calling in the last few minutes in a statement a critical step wherein they say they won't prejudge anything, but one of the people running the impeachment inquiry, congressman comber, said he would vote to impeach right now. some are prejudging the process. i think when your panel is talking about how biden and trump are similarly popular, in my conversations, when i put my 2024 hat on and think about the

campaign, sometimes the power of suggestion might be enough. the idea there's no evidence behind this impeachment inquiry is something that all of us know and are tracking closely. for the casual viewer, the concerns i've heard from democratic sources is the power of suggestion of corruption could be enough to make republicans feel like, well, both candidates are corrupt. that's almost fine. certainly we, as journalists, hold our candidates to a higher bar. it's something i've heard from democrats who are worrying about the political implications down the road. now in 2024, you come back to government funding deadlines that republicans and democrats have to deal with. you come back to the supplemental funding for ukraine. border provisions within that. you come back to full steam ahead on the investigations front and that will dominate congress' news cycle here. that's going to be one of the

dominating themes on the campaign trail for voters. this does become the republican platform as they've been using their gavel to be a counter puncher for former president trump as he tries to take back the white house. >> ali vitali, i have to free you up to talk to members of congress. thank you for being with us. i have to tell you, mark elias, i take the point about the power of suggestion and the way republicans seem to be banking on that. to compare the inquiry into president biden with the multiple inquiries into former president trump is to compare apples and kittens. >> yeah, it's all relevant. it's out of stalinish russia. there's no comparison. donald trump tried to overturn democracy. he's been indicted in four different courts, including in

washington, d.c. and a conspiracy in georgia to try to overturn democracy. let me correct one mistake. it's not true to say both parties are equally unpopular. >> it's not true to say president biden and trump have an equal number of supporters in the election. donald trump lost the popular vote in 2016. he lost the popular vote even wider in 2020. if the u.s. senators weren't two senators per state, we would have an overwhelmingly democratic senate. there are reasons why the system is rigged to make it look like both parties are equally popular. republicans are making it harder to vote and easier to cheat because the advantages they have to frustrate the will of the majority, to keep women from being able to exercise their right to have reproductive health decisions be their own,

all these structural impediments are things they need to rely on and they need to engage in voter suppression, in gerrymandering, in undermining the voting rights act. it's simply not accurate to say the american public set a pox on both houses. both parties have their challenges. time and time again when americans are put to the test they overwhelmingly on a popular vote basis support democrats, which is why republicans support the popular vote. >> mark elias, david jolly, molly, thank you for spending this time with us. thank you for being with us. we're grateful. "the beat" starts right now. welcome to "the beat." we're tracking a lot of news