wireless that works for you. it's not just possible, it's happening. tonight, on "the reidout" -- >> we know the civil war was about slavery. but it was also more than that.

it was about the freedoms of every individual. it was about the role of government. >> damage control for nikki haley after she did everything shy of declining to name slavery as the cause of the civil war. just the latest example of the republicans' mission to erase the difficult parts of american history. also tonight, profiles in cowardice. just as she's facing a tough re-election campaign, lauren boebert announces plans to abandon her constituents and run for office elsewhere. plus, we're just days away from what promises to be a momentous year in politics. we'll preview the many criminal and civil trials of the republican front-runner, donald trump, and trust me, there are a lot of them. good evening. i'm charles coleman jr. in for joy reid, and you're watching "the reidout." we have a lot to talk about.

we begin tonight's conversation with revisionist history by the republican party about one of the darkest and most painful periods ever in america. this time, from presidential candidate nikki haley. on wednesday, she sparred with a new hampshire voter over the cause of the civil war. >> what was the cause of the united states civil war? >> well, don't come with an easy question or anything. i think the cause of the civil war was basically how government was going to run. the freedoms and what people could and couldn't do. what do you think the cause of the civil war was? >> thank you. in the year 2023, it's astonishing to me that you answer that question without mentioning the word slavery. >> what do you want me to say about slavery? >> you answered my question. thank you. >> next question. >> next question.

now, haley has since tried to clean up the comments while also claiming without evidence that the voter who asked the question was a plant sent by democrats. it really shouldn't be hard to name the root cause of america's bloodiest and deadliest war. the civil war. see, the president, joe biden, he did it himself. in just four words on x. it was about slavery. period. and this is where things take a turn and you have to call it out, in as full throated a voice as the ones they use. i have to use your birth name, stop playing in our faces. there is something uniquely detestable and diminishing about trying to tip-toe around the history and the legacy of american slavery. for one, it rejects historical facts that have been affirmed and accepted for more than a century, but also, it reflects america's refusal to reckon with slavery and by extension, to

reckon and reconcile black humanity. now, there's nothing new about rewriting civil war history. the practice is just about as old as the civil war itself. but remember, this is a particular challenge for nikki haley who has hemmed and hawed around the confederacy, failing to criticize it and its horrors. when she ran for governor in 2010, she was asked a similar question about the civil war in an interview with a now defunct activist group. she described the war as two disparate sides fighting for tradition and change. what? she also said that the confederate flag was, quote, not something that is racist but part of heritage and tradition within the state. miss me with all of this. now, as the former governor of that state, you would think that she would know basic facts about south carolina. like how it became the first

state to secede from the federal union in 1860, which precipitated the outbreak of the civil war in charleston harbor on april 12th, 1861. south carolina's declaration of secession specifically mentioned slavery, indirectly referencing the election of abraham lincoln as a contributing factor when stating, quote, a geographical line has been drawn across the union and all states north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of president of the united states whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. haley is facing backlash over the comments less than three weeks before republican voters start voting in early primary states. but while the crowded republican field is shrinking against the front-runner, donald trump, haley is actually gaining support. minimizing the horrors of slavery, racial violence, and terrorism are pretty much standard playbook for her party these days. after all, we have republican

governors including some of her own rivals in the presidential race who have vowed to eliminate diversity education and ban books on race altogether. if you forgot, take good old ron desantis, whose campaign pitch is basically, make america florida. when he enacted new education standards requiring teachers to instruct middle school students that slaves develop skills that, quote, could be applied for their personal benefit. i have said it before, i'll say it again, miss me with all of it. it's important we understand this is bigger than nikki haley. and it's even larger than the republican party itself. this is about a set of harmful individuals who are running for the highest office in the land, and at the same time, who are committed to diminishing, whitewashing, and rewriting as well as erasing the horrors of american chattel slavery.

my friend writer molly jong fast of vanity fair said it best, moral clarity dies in euphemism. this moment, not only in terms of haley's response but in the larger inflection points when we find ourselves around american democracy demands the moral clarity that molly jung fast wrote about. it is imperative as central to our tomorrow as anything else about the fight we're currently engaged in. but it's worth asking if this so called backlash will even hurt haley or will it alienate voters in her party at all. joining me now to discuss all of this is christina greer, political scientist and host of the blackest questions podcast, and my friend and colleague susan del percio, republican strategist and msnbc political analyst. good to have you both on. i'm so happy to have this discussion. susan, i want to start with you.

the response to haley's comments seem like they may have helped her in terms of toeing the line in the republican party more than they hurt her. what does that say about where that party is and what they're trying to sort of hone in on as their core values? >> i think your opening said it perfectly. it is of right now the republican party is trying to whitewash history. and you know, again, you did it so well, i'm not going to get into the ethical lessons we have to learn because we know what they are. but politically, what's so interesting, charles, is i kept thinking of donald trump's question when he was questioned by chris matthews in the 2016 election, when he said, should the woman be punished, and donald trump looked around, he was wondering, he was thinking really hard, and he was just trying to figure out what would sound best. and he said yes, the woman should be punished. with nikki haley, you could see her struggling, trying to figure out what to say.

she didn't say what she believed. she said what she thought would work best for her in the republican primary for president. now, by the way, fyi, it's what we call politically very, very bad. it's very, very bad answer. and it will hurt her, and to do it in new hampshire of all places is just dumb. >> but christina, this is a question that she's essentially been asked before. this is not her first time having to deal with this issue. should we be surprised that even as someone sort of reaches back to 2010 and rephrases a question that i guess at one point has stumped here, that she didn't have a better answer, almost two decades later? >> right. well, coleman, my grandmother used to say, the only time we should be surprised is when we're surprised when dealing with this particular people. nikki haley was also thinking she's in new hampshire. i don't know if she was prepared

to answer that particular question. she should always be prepared. this is a question that has been asked several times. we know that south carolina also has a state black population of well over a quarter. so she should know that this is of great import to the people of her former state where she was governor. the fact she was so ill prepared, i think her opponents will most likely use this as an opportunity to try and curtail some of the winds in her sails and say she can't answer a basic question that she's been asked for almost two decades. this lack of preparation says a lot more about her and her campaign than it does about anything else. but sadly, as you and susan have both laid out, this is where the republican party is right now. they want to erase the facts. as daniel patrick moynahan said, we're all entitled to our own opinions. we're not entitled to our own facts. the republican party wants to rewrite history, especially american history. >> i want to follow up with you because there's a very linear

sort of path we can look at when you're talking about white grievance and how these things have played out going all the way back to 2017 with charlottesville and moving forward, there's been this consistent sort of approach by the republican party of downplaying white supremacy, and its effects on american history, and in the present, you have the unite the right rally in 2017. you have ron desantis and everything he's doing in florida. he's not the only one. you have this extreme pushback against the 1619 project. all of these different things. what does this tell you in terms of the notion that trumpism in and of itself may not be going anywhere regardless of what happens with respect to donald trump? >> right, i think we need to face the facts that donald trump is obviously a very powerful candidate, but his ideas have permeated the entire party.

he has sort of festered in the entire republican party and everyone has moved toward his thinking, but don't forget, his thinking has been a part of the right-wing portion of the republican party that has been very diligently since 1973, to roll back roe v. wade, these are the same people who have been working on book banning in local elections, state by state. these are people that are putting up candidates that look like governor youngkin, but if you listen carefully, he sounds just like donald trump in quite a few areas. so these are the people that have been going to college campuses and indoctrinating students to make sure they work against civil rights and civil liberties for so many americans. this are the seam anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-people of color, anti-black specifically party, and we have to be honest about the ideology of the republican party right now, extends well beyond donald trump and it's on local, state,

and federal levels. we must take it very seriously because it is anti-black, it is largely white nationalism, white supremacist, it's patriarchal and highly capitalistic in a very anti-black and anti-immigrant space. >> susan, one of the things i thought was interesting about this, especially when ron desantis and his campaign tried to sort of capitalize on nikki haley's flub, as they described it, for fund-raising purposes. is that if you look at that field, no one is innocent. everyone has blood on their hands, proverbially speaking with regards to their record on race and how they dealt with issues of multiculturism, diversity, and the like. has this become on the right a race to the bottom to see who can sort of outtrump each other in order to be second place winner? >> mostly, yes. mostly yes. and the one thing -- the one person i will kind of separate from the conversation is chris christie. not because of his beliefs that

you just described, but rather because he has made his sole mission to defeat donald trump. whereas the other candidates in the race have not done that. their sole mission is to secure themselves for the future at this point. chris christie is only in this to defeat donald trump. so as far as that part goes, absolutely. but there's no doubt that when you're looking at a question like this that was given in new hampshire town hall, it shows you that the republican party is settling to the bottom on an issue they should be rising to the top on. there's no -- there was a point, by the way, in the early '90s where the republican party did try to be much more inclusive. frankly, the time i got involved in politics, but that has changed because especially under donald trump, you can mobilize hate. and that's what the republican party is capitalizing on. mobilizing hate for a primary.

>> you know, this is very fascinating to me because i am very curious about where the bottom falls out. and i don't necessarily know, susan, whether we have reached that point. but is a republican candidate, whether it's trump or someone else, going to be able to pivot when they reach a general election to grasp the voters that are in the middle, that are independent, or voters who are centrists who are not necessarily buying what joe biden may be selling. is this a space that even provides an opportunity to walk back at all, or do they care? >> it's not so much walking back, but with donald trump, no, he'll never pivot. he'll never change. other republicans who for lack of a better word are more professional, more experienced, they know how to pivot back. they know what language to use. and frankly, in the 2024 election, it will be more about reaching out to those who are

unhappy with joe biden. when you're looking for those sliver of voters, the ones who went with joe biden in 2020, those republicans and center right independents, will they stay with biden or could they find someone like a nikki haley a more attractive candidate? right now, the polling says they'll find nikki haley more appealing. but they won't necessarily go for donald trump. >> christina greer and susan del percio, thank you both for getting us started on this thursday. up next on "the reidout," breaking news out of maine, where the state has followed colorado's lead in removing donald trump from the ballot. as colorado republicans make it official, asking the u.s. supreme court to hear their appeal on removing trump from the ballot in that state. what are the chances trump's hand-picked justices adhere to the constitution? i'm charles coleman jr., and "the reidout" continues right after this. a continued ceasefire, a continued pause in fighting and more aid from israelis

in exchange for just freeing more hostages. instead, hamas resumed attacks. not to protect the palestinian people or obtain peace, only to destroy israel. we must stand against hamas and stand with palestinians and israelis for basic human rights.

breaking news tonight out of maine, where a move by the secretary of state has made maine the first state to officially remove donald trump from the ballot on 14th amendment grounds. in a ruling just moment ago, secretary of state sheena bellows writes, quote, specifically, i find that the declaration on his consent form is false because he is not qualified to hold office of the president under section 3 of the 14th amendment. bellows added, i conclude that

the record establishes that mr. trump over the course of several months in culminating on january 6th, 2021, used a false narrative of election fraud to inflame his supporters and direct them to the capitol to prevent certification of the 2020 election and the peaceful transfer of power. i likewise conclude that mr. trump was aware of the likelihood for violence and at least initially supported its use given he both encouraged it with incendiary rhetoric and took no timely action to stop it. this now comes a day after colorado's republican party has asked the united states supreme court to overturn colorado's ruling barring trump, which basically means trump will appear on that state's ballot for now. and late today, the high court was asked to fast track its review of the colorado ruling by the six colorado voters who brought the lawsuit to bar trump from the ballot in the first place. joining me now is colorado

secretary of state jena griswold, so glad to have you here. before we even talk about your state, let's try and unpack some of this breaking news out of maine. what is your reaction to this move and what it means for the future of all of these 14th amendment challenges? >> well, good evening. thank you for having me on. and honestly, i think it's great that jenna bellows, the secretary of state of maine, followed the colorado supreme court in deciding that donald trump is disqualified from the ballot. look, it's very clear that donald trump engaged in insurrection. it is also very clear the language in the constitution, which says that if someone swears to uphold the constitution and then engages in insurrection, they cannot be placed in office again. so i do think the secretary of state of maine did the right thing, and in maine, it is her job to make this decision. she also recognizes that it's

very likely it's going to be appealed. and like in colorado, has put a stay, so a hold on her decision, to allow the appellate process to play out. >> so secretary, i would like to ask you, you know, we're expecting or actually, i won't say that. donald trump has yet to file an appeal in front of the supreme court regarding the colorado case. i should not presume, do you expect he will, number one? and do you have any sense what he may put as the issues in front of the court if he does file an appeal? >> donald trump's lawyers have indicated they'll file something, whether that's their own appeal or joining the appeal already filed, i cannot say. and if they continue to follow the argument they followed in the lower courts, i'm sure he'll wand to contest the fact that two courts now have decided that

he engaged in insurrection. whether or not he's on the ballot, i think there's a couple things that are really important. number one, that the united states supreme court considers the urgency of the time and acts quickly. whether that means denying review of the case or making decisions. but number two, whether he's on the ballot or not, he is a danger to this country. and we are only here because he tried to steal the presidency from the american people in 2020. >> how important do you think this supreme court actually weighing in on this issue is? because without clear direction from the court, it seems like we could be headed to a space where come election day, he's on the ballot in some states and not on in others, which could be chaotic for a number of different reasons, beyond simply being unprecedented. are you looking forward in a way to the supreme court getting

involved? >> i'm looking forward to certainty. my job as secretary of state is to make sure that coloradans have great elections. republicans, democrats, unaffiliateds alike. i have to certify who will be on the ballot next week friday for the presidential primary. so we are really urging the courts to act quickly, and whether that means they decide not to review or they do review the case, well, that's up to them. but i also agree with secretary bellows in maine and the colorado supreme court. they have gotten it right. donald trump engaged in insurrection. because of that, he should be disqualified by the constitution from appearing on any ballot or serving as president again. >> we have learned that since this decision has come out, not only the justices in denver but also you yourself have received a number of different violent threats from extremists about 64

death threats i'm told and 900 threats of abuse. and this is reporting coming from axios. do you anticipate that this number is going to increase as this issue is litigated throughout the highest court in the land, and if so, what are you planning to do to insure not only your own safety but the safety of the justices who made the decision? >> unfortunately, the stat you just referred to were the death threats that came in within three weeks of the case being filed. and they have increased since the colorado supreme court has made the decision to disqualify trump, both against me and against the justices of the supreme court. and yes, unfortunately, i believe that they will continue throughout the united states supreme court's action. because at the end of the day, donald trump has incited violence to try to get his way. he incited violence on january 6th, leading to the death of

police officers. he incited violence, some of the people who are listening to him were intent on hanging the vice president of the united states. and he has incited violence to election workers and secretaries of state all over this country. and i just think it underlines that he's a danger to democracy. he's a danger to the right to vote. he's a danger to women and people of color in this country. and whether or not he's on the ballot, americans have all the power come november to protect our democracy and fundamental freedoms. we have had so much breaking news around maine and everything else that we didn't even get to the conversation i wanted to have about lauren boebert. before i let you know, i have toask. she's now essentially carpet bagging to move to another district and run there. the state democratic party chair said that boebert can run, but she can't hide. what's your reaction to her

choice of changing districts to try and remain in office and run for re-election? what does that tell you about how she feels, how confident she feels the voters in her current district are in terms of sending her back to washington? >> i think lauren boebert's actions are blatant self-preservation. she knows that she has failed the citizens of her district. she has failed to deliver coloradans on the western slope, on issues that matter to them. she has failed to deliver legislatively. there is scandal after scandal after scandal. so i do think this is her trying to hold on to power and ultimately, we will see how the primary plays out in this new district, which by the way, is literally on the opposite side of the state from where she currently serves as congresswoman. >> you know, that's a very interesting point because a lot of what she hasn't done has

really gone under the radar by everyone else because of the noise that she makes and the distractions. i understand that her trip to the theater in visit to watch a production of beetlejuice did not play well with voters in that district, and now we're seeing, to your point, the effects of that. is there any sense that in this new district anything is going to change? i'm just wondering why she feels like this is the right move if whatever she was doing in her current spot didn't work. >> the district that she is moving her campaign to is a much more conservative district. and i imagine she realized that she only held on by a thread the last election, and given the recent scandals including the scandal you just mentioned, it would be harder to hold on to her seat. but ultimately, you know, that's just my perception of the

situation. but the bigger picture is that maga republicans are vulnerable to defeat in swing districts and conservative districts. we saw that play out in 2022, where we were able as the democratic association of secretaries of state to help defeat election deniers in every battleground state where they were running. i think that americans generally do not like extremism. they like people who say they're going to get things done and go do it and ultimately we'll see what happens in this colorado situation that's playing out. >> yes, we will. i'm sure we will be talking again. thank you so much, colorado secretary of state jena griswold. coming up after the break, a look at the year ahead in trump's extremely packed legal calendar. his attorneys will certainly be earning their retainers assuming he actually pays them, of course. i'm charles coleman jr., and we'll be right back with more on "the reidout."

hi, i'm kevin, and i've lost 152 pounds on golo. i had just left a checkup with my doctor, and i'd weighed in at 345 pounds. my doctor prescribed a weight loss drug, but as soon as i stopped taking the drug, i gained all the weight back and then some. that's when i decided to give golo a try. taking the release supplement, i noticed a change within the first week, and each month the weight just kept coming off. with golo, you can keep the weight off. why choose a sleep number smart bed?

because no two people sleep the same. only sleep number smart beds let you each choose your individual firmness and comfort. your sleep number settings. it's so smart, it actively cools and warms up to 13 degrees on either side for your ideal sleep temperature, and effortlessly responds to both of you. for your best sleep, night after night. the queen sleep number® c2 smart bed is now only $990. plus, no interest until january 2027. ends monday. shop for a limited time and sleep next level. only at sleep number.

here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today.

welcome back to "the reidout." i'm charles coleman jr. in for joy reid tonight. we are just less than three weeks out from the first votes that are going to be cast in the 2024 presidential primaries. that is going to kick off the election season. now, there primaries alone would

be enough to keep any candidate's calendar super packed, but for donald trump, he's also facing an even more packed legal calendar that includes his numerous court trials that are scheduled for next year. of course, trump is making every attempt to have these cases pretty much all thrown out altogether. or at least postponed, delay, delay, delay. beyond next year's election. his latest attempt will play out on january 9th in just a few short days, when a federal appeals court hears oral arguments on trump's claims of presidential immunity in his federal election interference trial. joining me now is super lawyer paul butler, a former prosecutor, georgetown law professor, and msnbc legal analyst. how are you? >> i can take the glasses off and talk to a lawyer. attorney butler, before we get there, before we talk about this mosh posh of cases that donald trump currently has facing him,

i'm presently interested in wayne county because the reports we are hearing about donald trump making phone calls there to pressure potential electors, those things could potentially land him in hot water as well. am i not seeing that right? >> i think you're seeing it exactly right. so everyone has been focused on the federal charges regarding election interference. and state charges in georgia, but in every state that was contested, trump basically did what he did in georgia. so i think what some states are doing is charging fake electors, they're watching to see what happens with d.a. willis in georgia, but trump is certainly not out of the woods in terms of other exposure in state criminal court for what he did to try to steal the election. >> so he could be looking at even more legal peril than he's

actually in now. let's talk about what he's in now. let's pull up, there's a whole chart with donald trump's myriad cases. that is packed. that's a lot of cases. that's a lot of criminal and civil work that his attorneys are going to be involved in over the next year. i want you to put on your professor hat, mr. georgetown law, mr. msnbc legal analyst x i need you to pick the hollywood square of case that his attorneys right now should be most concerned about and tell me why. >> washington, d.c., jack smith's federal election interference case. charles, jack smith may be the only person in d.c. who thinks this trial is going to happen on march 4th. but at some point, judge chutkan will get her case back from the appeals court and possibly the supreme court. and those courts will almost certainly deny defendant trump's

grandiose claims of absolute immunity. and when that happens, jack smith wants to hit the ground running. trump is of course trying to run out the clock so that the trial happens after the election so that he can then appoint an attorney general who will dismiss the two federal prosecutions. so until the supreme court says what it's going to do, every time jack smith tries to move the case forward, the trump defense team will go whining to judge chutkan. >> speaking about hitting the ground running, i want to now shift to fulton county. playing hollywood squares with donald trump and his legal entanglements. fani willis has said her office would be ready to try this case in about 30 days. you're a former prosecutor, i'm a former prosecutor. i think that is a little bit of posturing by her, but what say you? do you think that is a realistic timeframe or do you think that might somewhat be a little bit

of a bluff by her office to maintain the sense of prosecutorial initiative and aggression? did we lose paul? i think we may have lost my friend paul. i can hear you now. >> yeah, i can hear you. >> my question was, do we think that the 30 days that fani willis has advanced, do you think that's realistic or do you think there may be some bluffing that she's doing with respect to maintaining the appearance of being ready to move forward? >> it's not going to happen in 30 days. trump lawyers say that if fani willis gets her way and this trial happens even in august when the presidential campaign is in full swing, that will be the most effective election interference in u.s. history.

that's not true, but last week, d.a. willis said it's silly to think just because someone is running for president, they shouldn't be put on trial. here's the thing, charles, d.a. willis has four cooperating witnesses. and if this is like her other rico cases, many more defendants will fold before trump goes on trial. her rico case against young thug started out with 27 defendants and that was just six people on trial. even young thug's older brother pled out. so that's going to happen with regard to trump's rico case. but jury selection in the young thug trial took ten months. that's just jury selection. i think it's extremely unlikely that this trial in georgia is going to happen before the election. >> last question, paul. really quickly, one name if there's someone who we do not know yet who is cooperating, who is not cooperating, who is a codefendant, and you're the

prosecutor on this case, who do you want to flip? one name. >> mark meadows. he's got to be the one. >> my man. >> he was the president's chief of staff, closer than anyone to trump. he would be a lousy witness. he said one thing in his book and another thing under oath, but he's got the goods. >> i have been saying the same thing. that's why you're a super lawyer. thank you so much, professor paul butler, for joining us. still coming up after the break, a group of black women have filed a class action lawsuit against the largest credit union in the u.s., alleging racial discrimination in mortgage lending. i'll speak with their attorney, ben crump, right after this. this is "the reidout," and i'm charles coleman jr. stay tuned.

he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

welcome back to "the reidout." i'm charles coleman jr. in for joy tonight. nikki haley's claim that the civil war was simply about economic freedom is frankly absurd on many counts. especially considering disparities that exist today that directly stem from slavery and jim crow. disparities such as housing discrimination. during the civil rights movement, the fair housing act was enacted to try and right that wrong. but today, the home ownership gap between white and black households is even wider than it was in 1960. and a black applicant is more than twice as likely to be denied a home mortgage as a white applicant. we have seen the same narrative play out over and over again. you may remember the viral story

a few years o of a black couple's home valuation increasing by 50% after a white friend posed as the homeowner. and now, a new report from has found that the largest credit union in the united states, navy federal, has a huge disparity gap, almost 30%, accepting less than half of black conventional loan applicants. last year, a white borrower had a 75% cha of being approved while a black borrower had 48% chance. that's less than half. now, navy federal reportedl approved a higher percentage of white applicants under $65,000. as compared to black applicants who made over $140,000. in a statement, a spokesperson for navy federal defended the credit union's lending practices and said that cnn's analysis, quote, does notccately reflect our practices, end

quote. noting that they left out major criteria that wasn't publicly available. but the thing about that is, the company declined to release that data to cnn. makes you wonder. and now, there's a new class action lawsuit against navy federal on behalf of two black plaintiffs whose home loans were rejected despite their high credit ratings and incomes. the suit accuses navy federal of violating the equal credit opportunity act as well as the fair housing act. stating, there >> joining me now is civil rights attorney, my friend, my brother, benjamin elk, related the lawsuit on behalf of the two plaintiffs. good evening, my brother. what are you just get us started with the basis for this suit against the navy federal credit union.

>> our class feel that they were discriminated against when they vero did not bear alone when in their opinion they had checked every box, charles coleman. they had a strong debt to income ratio. they had great credit scores. they have a long history of mortgages on time payments. they did everything right. yet they were still denied. and then when you just oppose that fact with the horrific statistics that were released by cnn that they approved 75% of the white citizens and less than 55%, and according to that study by cnn, it said even when black people had twice as much income as the potential white borrowers who they approved.

and so it is this whole fight for economic freedom, this fight that martin luther king was fighting for the end of his life, to say that we not only have the right to life and liberty, but we have the right to pursue happiness, to give our children a better quality of life, to be able to give them generational wealth, and that is what the 21st century civil rights struggle is, charles. >> big brother, sir, i have to pick up exactly where you left off around economic freedom. there are so many different fights that we are waging a civil rights attorneys. there's a fight for inclusion, curriculum, voting rights, but this conversation about economic freedom is something that you have championed even going back to the suit that you filed against wells fargo. can you just explain, for our audience, how important that

inclusion, righting the wrongs of systemic inequity in the financial services sector is to the civil rights struggle that we are currently engaged in today. >> thank you for that excellent question because when you really think about it, it is about this economic freedom is the foundation for being able to make all of the other freedoms and constitutional promises that america makes to its citizens obtainable. when you think about, if i have economic freedom, i can have more opportunities to access quality health care. i can have more access to quality education. i can have more access to make sure that my children will inherit a better world than i inherited. but when you start denying black and brown citizens, that

economic freedom, when you try to deny them access to capital, then what you are doing is shutting them out of the american dream. that is important as the battle for justice for george floyd and breonna taylor. this that we can give to our children, the american promise of equal opportunity, the american dream. wells fargo and navy federal and other banking institutions who we are not allowed equal opportunity to access to justice is really denying black and brown citizens the american dream. and so with this lawsuit we hope to be able to help them be better, financial institutions but more importantly, charles coleman, hopefully to close the wealth gap that continues to increase in america. if we are not careful, our children will have less

opportunity to access capital than we had. >> attorney ben crump, i couldn't have said it better myself. you are struggle in terms of our communities fight for civil rights, continues to be something that i marvel at. thank you for joining me tonight. we'll be right back with more with the readout. i'm charles coleman junior. stay tuned. junior stay tuned stay tuned >> there is a lot of information out there. hamas slaughtered more than 1200 innocent people, holds innocent hostages, and raped countless innocent women. and now hamas is trying to hide sexual violence against women.

they don't want those women to be able to talk about what happened to them stand with palestinians and israelis for basic human rights. stand for all women. >> before we go tonight, head

over to check out the readout blog, witchhunts foresees danger ahead in the state of texas due to their new anti-immigration laws. uses plastics experience to predict the social nightmare that could soon unfold in the most lone star state. all that much more at msnbc.com slash readout blog. and that's it for tonight's read out. i'm charles coleman junior in for joy reid. she'll be back here on tuesday at seven pm eastern. i want to thank both her and her entire team for allowing me to sit in the chair for the past few days. happy new year to all the readers out there. we will see you on the other side of 2024. all in with my friend dr. jason johnson starts right now. johnson starts right now >> good evening from los angeles. i'm jason johnson in for chris hayes. as we apoa