son: i said i'm fine. ♪ dad: you can talk to me. son: it's been really, really hard for me.

good to be with you. i'm katie tur. donald trump's team recognizes that getting matt gaetz confirmed as ag might not happen, but donald trump himself is still personally lobbying republican senators to get in line, according to nbc news. it is the first big loyalty test for those republicans, and some, like lindsey graham, are already ready to toe the line. >> nobody should be disqualified because of a media report. >> it's more like an investigation, a bipartisan effort. >> and they didn't proceed forward. >> but nbc news reports others aren't so sure. that privately, more than half of senate republicans say that

they would not support him. why? well, it's not just the allegations of sex with a minor, which he's denied, it's the way he's acted as a member of congress, allegedly showing videos of the girls he's slept with and bragging about the drugs he did to last all night, as mark wade mullen put it. and then threatening to burn it all down. case in point, the motion to vacate kevin mccarthy. just listen to how his own gop colleagues described him in the aftermath of that vote. carlos gimenez said, quote, gaetz has very few friends in the conference. mike lawler, mike gaetz is frankly a vile person. i think he's a petulant child. don bacon, he shouldn't be in the republican party. i would love to have him out of the conference. mike garcia, he's a republican running with scissors. dusty johnson, i think it's time

to take sharp knives away from children. and garrett graves, he just called him a con. clearly, matt gaetz is not well loved. . eyeing or at the very least questioning the results of the 2020 election. will they fold again in the same way, this time with matt gaetz? joining us now from west palm beach, near the president-elect's florida home, vaughn hillyard, nbc news capitol hill correspondent, ryan nobles joins us as well, as does "washington post" senior national political correspondent and msnbc political analyst, ashley parker. vaughn, i will begin with you. what do we know about these calls that donald trump is making is personally?

>> we know that donald trump and his transition team are acknowledge thought matt gaetz confirmation process is going to be an uphill battle and that on the front end of this, more than two months from when these confirmation hearings are set to actually proceed, that they on the front end are working the phones to try to shore up support for matt gaetz. you heard lindsey graham there. we have heard from the likes of kevin cramer, folks that are receiving these phone calls. we know that j.d. vance intends to go up to capitol hill to try to get support for the matt gaetz confirmation. that's where donald trump has shown an eagerness over the last nine years to take on these controversial-type picks and nominations, and he intends to go through with it. >> ryan, vaughn just mentioned senator cramer. he said he got one of these calls. he called president trump persuasive. what are you hearing? >> you said that matt gaetz was

not well liked on capitol hill, and i think that's probably accurate. the problem for senate republicans that may be uncomfortable with this vote is that he's really liked by one person, and that one person is donald trump. and donald trump seems willing to do whatever he can to push whatever political capital he has down the throat of senate republicans to get matt gaetz confirmed. and we're already starting to see many of these senate republicans who initially provided some level of concern or question about gaetz about the nominee starting to soft. their stance. mark wayne mullen who you talked about earlier, being the best example. saying that he deserves the opportunity to go through the confirmation process. even senator cramer has softened his tone. senator cramer will be with president trump today and get the full court press. it's one thing for the senate republicans to talk a big game behind closed doors, but when donald trump looks at them or talks to them on the phone, or has a meeting with them face-to-face and says, you need to vote for my guy, well, that's a much-different conversation. and that's why i still say that

up until we see differently, every single one of these nominees has a path to confirmation. >> i think i would agree with that. ashley, what does donald trump get, exactly, out of forcing republicans to swallow matt gaetz? >> well, he gets another loyalty test. in certain ways, this seems counterintuitive, because he's making his own party take a potentially tough votes on gaetz, but it's like a schoolyard bully, seeing just how far they can push their victim or their target. you've done this for me, now will you do this next thing? will you go even a step further? you mentioned just then, the claiming -- the number of republicans who have claimed, even though a lot of them know better and will privately admit that the 2020 election was not stolen, as a litmus test to show their loyalty and devotion to trump, they have claimed that. this is sort of another red line or marker in just how far

they're willing to go to show their devotion to kiss the ring of president-elect trump. >> i wonder if this is a test of how far they're willing to go, i wonder if republicans on the hill may be see this as a rubicon moment. much like the night the 2020 election pushed them forward. if they allow someone like matt gaetz to become ag, is there talk of what they would then be allowing donald trump to do? what this is a gateway to? >> i think most senate republicans would tell you that each individual confrontation that they have with donald trump should be viewed independently. and maybe they let matt gaetz through, but maybe they'll stand up to him at another point in time during his administration. i don't know if we can take that position at face value. because each and every time, senate republicans have even modestly challenged donald trump, at the end of the day, they've almost always caved. so i think if you're an outside observer and you've watched what happened in the past and watch this situation play out. and if they're unwilling to

stand up to donald trump in this particular situation, especially with a nominee that many people perceive to be as flawed as matt gaetz, then you have to assume that that sets the stage for donald trump being able to push through whatever he wants through the congress. because if they're not willing to stand up to him now, what's going to happen when he asks for budget cuts or tax cuts or you name in terms of enacting his agenda? if their argument is, he won the election, he gets what he wants, why would it be any different after this stage. >> but also, what indirectly will they be saying less to. if they allow donald trump to be matt gaetz' ag, what are they essentially saying matt gaetz could do? what would donald trump want matt gaetz to do? is he someone ashley who's out for the public good? is he a civil service warrior who's going to be looking for public law breaking in order to protect the american public? >> matt gaetz as attorney general has one client in mind. and that is donald trump.

he is there to do exactly what donald trump wants him to do. he will serve the role that his previous attorney general did not serve. donald trump has made clear that he does want an independent department of justice, an independent attorney general. he wants someone who will be his roy cohn or until recently, his michael cohen, who will be a fixer and an intimidator, and someone who does his bidding and is loyal, whether or not it pushes the bounds of acceptable behavior. >> yeah, so i guess that's -- that brings me to the question i was asking you, ryan. do they see this as an indirect acquiescence to whatever might come next? whatever political prosecutions might come out of a doj? one, by the way, that donald trump would be immune from questioning on, because the supreme court has ruled that any interactions between donald trump or a president and their attorney general, that's out of bounds. nobody can question it.

nobody can investigate it? >> i think if they don't, they're being naive, katie. but i do think that most senate republicans believe that the department of justice is in need of reform. they did not agree with the prosecutions of donald trump, the criminal prosecutions of donald trump, the investigation into donald trump, whether it be through the classified documents case or the prosecution around january 6th. so they, in large part, agree with donald trump that the department of justice needs an overhaul. whether or not they would be willing to take that next step of saying that they would agree with using the department of justice as an arm for retribution, which donald trump has suggested he would do once he takes office, i think that puts the conversation in a completely different atmosphere. but the point being here, katie, you're tacitly saying "yes" to that if you say "yes" to matt gaetz as attorney general. he has said as much in speeches

that he wants to go in and clean house and do donald trump's bidding. you can't say, yes, i'm voting for this separately, but i'm not voting for what could potentially happen after the fact. the two are inextricably linked and i think that senate republicans have to understand that as they go through this process. >> i wonder if donald trump finds at some point that he cannot get matt gaetz through and that still is a very big maybe at this point. i wonder if there are any other names that are floating around in the trump ecosphere right now, vaughn? is it a todd blanche? because todd blanche and matt gaetz are not the same. at least not, at least from the experience that we've so far had with todd blanche. >> and todd blanche and emil bove, let's be very clear, before they defended donald trump, they both did work as top prosecutors in the southern district of new york's district attorney's office. these men both have experience in the top attorney's office of the doj. and so both of these men, if they were to get confirmed by the senate for todd blanche,

that would be in the number two role as deputy attorney general, he would all but be in a position, in short order, in a week's time, to serve in the role of acting attorney general. and acting attorney general has just as much power as the attorney general, but depending on where these republican senators indicate that they're willing to go on this matt gaetz vote, you very well could see a confirmation process for attorney general for todd blanche instead of deputy attorney general. and these are two individuals who, i think, have less of a public record, let's be very clear, unlike matt gaetz, who has campaigned around the country over the last four years about clearinghouse at the doj. and so there is a much many more questions about the exact capacities in which they'd serve. one thing that we do know is that by donald trump losing on those 34 felony counts in new york, he still had built up a relationship and one in which he had confidence, in large part due to todd blanche, day in and day out, standing by the side of

donald trump, oftentimes echoing or going on the attack against the judge on behalf of his witnesses and clients. it was notable that donald trump had found someone he had confidence in, which is different than so many of the attorneys we had previously seen him work with over the last eight years. >> joining us now, former republican congressman and our republican legacy senior adviser, charlie dent. he chaired the house ethics committee. speaker johnson has been calling folks on the ethics committee. here's how one of them described the conversation. i was going to play a spot from the ethics chair on the report. we're going to play it right now. >> he just wanted to let me know that he made a statement publicly. and he wanted me to be aware of that. and he reiterated that he believed that the report should not be released. mike has not tried to weigh in one way or the other. he's not tried to influence the committee. >> for those out there, sot

means sound on tape from the house ethics chair on the report. so what do you make of this situation, this ethics report into matt gaetz is said to be pretty scathing. >> well, first, let me say that i don't think it's appropriate for the speaker to contact the committee about a matter that they're dealing with currently. michael guess is a very good man, he's a friend, and i know he's obviously in a tough spot. but right now, this report is completed. and it's clearly what's happening. matt gaetz resigned in an attempt to prevent the report from becoming public. that said, the investigation was complete. and there's plenty of precedent for releasing reports after a member has resigned from congress. there is no house rule that prohibits the release of a report. it has been a custom or a tradition or a courtesy not to

release reports or make statements after the member has departed. but there is a big difference in this case. most members, once they resign after scandal, they basically, they leave quietly, they go about rebuilding their lives, their relationships, and their reputations. they don't get nominated to be the top cop of the country. the u.s. attorney general! so that's what's different here. and you have a united states senate on a bipartisan basis asking for this report to inform their decision as they have to deal with the confirmation process. they want this report as part of the official record. and so you have that out there as well. and frankly, maybe the american people would like to know what's in this report since this man is being asked to be the chief law enforcement officer of the country. so there are different circumstances. by the way, there was a case in 1990 where a member of congress, where a report was released after he left for having apparently had a relationship with a 16-year-old girl or a woman.

that was the case. there was another case in 1987, where a member was -- where there was a member who had problems with bribery and misuse of campaign funds. a report was released after that. i can go into mark foley's case, members were -- sitting members were deposed after foley resigned after sending inappropriate text messages to pages. and blake farenthold in 2018, the committee made a public statement after he resigned regarding a matter that dealt with sexual harassment in a settlement. >> so it's taking allegations of sexual misconduct pretty seriously, the ethics committee has. the argument that we're hearing from republicans, and we heard it from lindsey graham there, i've heard it from ana polina luna today, is that the doj didn't bring any charges against matt gaetz. he's not been legally charged with any of this. so whatever the house ethics committee has found, it doesn't really matter because he's

facing no legal consequence for the allegations that he had sex with a 17-year-old girl. >> that's a pretty low bar. he hasn't been charged with a crime. that's a very low bar. i mean, look, this committee report, i know how these reports are written. they're probably recommending some kind of a sanction, a reprimand, a censure, in the worst case, an expulsion. sometimes, during the course of an ethics investigation, they find potential criminal conduct or misconduct. and these reports or these individuals are sometimes referred to the department of justice for further review or consideration. but one thing's for sure that this report is going to say, that matt gaetz brought this credit upon the house, at the very least. so they will make statements about his character and his bayer, that it was conduct unbecoming a member of congress, at the very least. just to say he hasn't been convicted, that's -- we're talking about the top cop for the united states. he was the head law enforcement

officer. if the standard is he hasn't been charged with a crime, they didn't exonerate him either. they just didn't bring charges. >> there's an argument that if you're going to have a bar for anybody, it's got to be pretty high for ag. i wonder about what republicans might face if they say "no" to this. you have donald trump going out, individually pressuring or trying to convince republicans to say "yes" to matt gaetz. you also have other republicans who are going on tv and being not so subtle about their threats if somebody were to go against donald trump. you have tommy tubberville on fox saying, if they want to get in the way, fine, but we'll try to get you out of the senate, if you try to do that. primary them if they don't give donald trump what he wants. marjorie taylor greene is talking about releasing ethics reports about other people. of course, those have to be actually begun and investigations have to be begun. you have an a polina luna, who

mentioned a moment ago, saying that john cornyn maybe hasn't been maga enough, loyal enough. these aren't so-subtle threats about what might happen to them. you have elon musk saying, he's willing to put up money to primary anybody that goes up against donald trump, too. and elon musk has a whole lot of money to throw behind somebody else, if he so chooses. so if you're facing that sort of pressure, how likely are you to say "no" to trump? >> well, all of these people making big threats are also the ones, you know, who don't have to run in general elections in competitive districts. and i can tell you, i don't think this election is -- i mean, this nomination is ever going to be voted on in the senate floor. there are too many problems. i bet there are at least four republicans opposed to this. you know, what are they going to do to mitch mcconnell? what are they going to do to lisa murkowski? i mean, obviously, you're going to have other members who are up in 2026, who are in competitive situations. the at least of their problems

is going to be a primary. it's going to be a general election. and if some of these republicans want to go out and take down, you know, viable republican senators and take them down in their primaries, only to lose the general election, what have they accomplished? this is almost -- it's absurd. and for people to threaten the investigations against members because of the release of a report, i mean, i just think that's completely out of bounds and uncalled for and we should take it seriously. but at the end of the day, we'll see if this ever gets to a vote. put me down as very skeptical. >> i've got my eyes on thom tillis to see what he says about this and where he might be going. he's a good indicator of somebody who's up in 2026. charlie dent, good to have you. thanks for joining us. >> thanks, katy, great to be with you. still ahead, not so fast. what manhattan d.a. alvin bragg is asking for now that donald trump is heading back to the white house. and what fema's administer is telling lawmakers about allegations an employee was told to skip homes with trump signs

during the aftermath of helene. plus, what could be cut to pay for a tax break to the wealthy? the safety net programs that could change come january. we're back in 90 seconds. change. we're back in 90 seconds it doesn't overwhelm like: it's campfire leather musk overload. because downy light is gentle and balanced. it's a nature spired scent, to breathe life into your laundry. honey... but the gains are pumping! the market's closed. futures don't sleep in the after hours, bro. dad, is mommy a “finance bro?” she switched careers to make money for your weddings. ooh! penny stocks are blowing up. sweetie, grab your piggy bank, we're going all in. let me ask you. for your wedding, do you want a gazebo and a river? uh, i don't... what's a gazebo? something that your mother always wanted and never got. or...you could give these different investment options a shot. the right money moves aren't as aggressive as you think. i'm keeping the vest.

♪ ♪ (vo) with verizon, trade in any phone, any condition, and get iphone 16 pro with apple intelligence, on us. for everyone in the family. only on verizon. in a brand-new court filing that just dropped this afternoon, manhattan d.a. alvin bragg says he's willing to agree to a delay in trump's hush money

sentencing, but not a dismissal now that donald trump is president-elect. so what will judge marchon, who ultimately has the authority here, decide? joining us now, msnbc legal correspondent, lisa ruben. am i right to say that alvin bragg is finally saying, fine, delay it, until 2029. >> he is saying that wouldn't have been his preference and he notes that he doesn't think there's a basis for doing so. but pragmatically, he's willing to stay the case because he understands that donald trump would run to an appeals court, either state or federal, to try to get a stay at this point. and to your point, he's willing to wait until 2029. he's a patient man, apparently. >> if donald trump is sentenced, what is the likelihood that if that sentence included jail, that he would go to jail, or even if it included being on probation, that that would work? the guy's about to go to the white house. >> let's take a step back. i think the likelihood that donald trump would get sentences prior to being inaugurated is now very, very low.

and that's because in this letter that alvin bragg is sending today to juan marchon, he's saying, look, they want to move to dismiss the entire indictment. i mean, the trump lawyers want to move to dismiss the entire indictment and we're willing to stay any and all other proceedings so they can do so. if an opposition brief is due december 9th, the trump lawyers would still get an opportunity to reply. marchon would still get some amount of time to decide. you can see how i'm playing out the calendar. there's no way that this all gets resolved in time for donald trump to be inaugurated, much less have him sentenced before he's inaugurated. >> so marchon is basically deciding whether to delay the sentencing or dismiss the case entirely? >> i think that's right, although he wouldn't make the decision to dismiss the case immediately. theoretically, what everybody wants to happen is that they want donald trump's lawyers to move to dismiss to have to explain in a legal filing what would be the basis for that.

they say there isn't any law right now that would establish that trump should be immune from prosecution for unofficial conduct and where there already was a trial during a period of time where he wasn't president. so on both of those basis, they're saying, there's basis for dismissing this case, at least in the law. but i'll also tell you, at the time we were going to trial. there was no bases for thinking that anyone court would mourn the presidential immunity argument that they were making. it has been rejected by two courts already, first, by judge chutkan, then a three-judge panel holding there was no basis for that argument. yet we saw what the supreme court did. if i'm donald trump's team, even if there is no current law that would preclude him being sentenced at this stage, they may be willing to take the flyer on that, because they know the composition of the court that they would ultimately meet.

>> which is the supreme court? >> that's correct. i mean, ultimately, it would get there. >> how long do you think marchon is going to take to make this decision? >> i have no idea and marchon has a bunch of options. he already has a motion that's been fully briefed and on the table, by donald trump's lawyers saying, you should set aside the trial verdict for a very different reason. you should set aside the trial verdict because the evidence presented at trial includes that i think so derive from his time as president, and include conversations that he had at the white house, or tweets that he issued while he was president. >> yeah, they're talking about some issues on immunity that they -- with the evidence. >> with the evidence. that was already an argument that they made. but if they were to win that motion, all it would do is essentially clear aside the verdict and set us back to a place where donald trump could be tried again. that's why this time, they're saying, on the basis of his soon-to-be inauguration, you should dismiss the case entirely. >> is there a world where marchon sentences him while he's president of the united states? >> i can't see a world -- >> can he do that, legally? >> legally, there is nothing

that would stop him from doing so donald trump's lawyers are very fond of citing a bunch of constitutional concerns that underline the olc, the office of legal counsel, at the department of justice. but that policy is not binding law on anyone. and it's a policy that the department of justice that has no application to a d.a.'s office. will there be pressure on somebody like an alvin bragg? yes. but would he have to? no. >> all right, lisa ruben, i mostly followed that. >> you always follow it. >> i mostly followed that. always good to have you. thank you very much. coming up, what government aid program republican leaders are considering scaling back to pay for donald trump's tax cuts and who could get less help. but first, what a former fema worker claims she was told to do in the aftermath of hurricane helene and what fema's administrator is saying about it on the hill today. 's administrator is saying about it on the hill today. but now, i have rinvoq. rinvoq is a once-daily pill...

that reduces the itch... and helps clear the rash of eczema— ...fast. some taking rinvoq felt significant itch relief as early as 2 days. and some achieved dramatic skin clearance... as early as 2 weeks. many saw clear or almost-clear skin. rinvoq can lower ability to fight infections. before treatment, test for tb and do bloodwork. serious infections, blood clots, some fatal... cancers, including lymphoma and skin; serious allergic reactions; gi tears; death; heart attack; and stroke occurred. cv event risk increases in age 50 plus with a heart disease risk factor. tell your doctor if you've had these events, infection, hep b or c, smoked, are pregnant or planning. don't take if allergic or have an infection. ♪♪ disrupt the itch & rash of eczema. talk to your dermatologist about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save.

we all need fiber for our digestive health, but less than 10% of us get enough each day. good thing metamucil gummies are an easy way to get prebiotic, plant-based fiber. with the same amount of fiber as 2 cups of broccoli. metamucil gummies the easy way to get your daily fiber.

enamel and gums first.es but as a person who loves coffee, i want white teeth. after 30 years of practicing dentistry, i couldn't find a product that was clinically proven to deliver on health and whitening. so i made one. lumineux whitening strips and toothpaste can give you long lasting whitening results without the sensitivity, because they are proven to be enamel safe. you can find lumineux at walmart and target. lumineux is a healthier way to whiten.

kriswell is on the hill today. right now, she is facing questions from house oversight on the agency's response to hurricane helene and milton, specifically an accusation from a now-fired fema employee, who says supervisors told her to skip homes with trump signs as a way to avoid conflict while offering door-to-door assistance. joining us now, nbc news capitol hill correspondent, ali vitali.

for a little context, at the time, there were a lot of reports out there that there has aggression towards and antagonism towards fema because of conspiracy theories being floated online that fema was right to take control and this idea that the government also controls the weather and was purposefully not stopping the hurricane from making landfall. >> right, exactly. and so mis and disinformation is really wrapped up in all of this. and that has certainly come up in addition to these other claims from now-fired or anonymous staffers at fema, saying that if their words, it was an open secret to skip these kinds of pro-trump houses that might have had flags or signs or think other kind of insignia on them. in part, the explanation might be what you're talking about. which is that it was the result of mis and disinformation and fema employees were trying to be more expeditious in trying to get more help to people. the other explanation, and the one that republicans are

bouncing on here, both in the hearing this morning and this afternoon that's going on right now is a more nefarious one, that it has a political bent to it. in either case, the fema administrator responded to those claims. this is what she said this morning, though she has had to make these similar kind of responses in the hearing that's going on right now this afternoon. watch. >> there is nothing in our policies, in our procedureses, in our training that would direct any employee to bypass anybody's home, sed on their political party. >> the actions that this party took are unacceptable. >> i know that and you know that. and wee agree on that. >> and i would welcome an investigation by the ig. >> but you haven't requested one. will you request one? >> i will request one. >> reporter: so when we look at where this might go next, off the hill and back to the agency, there you see the fema administrator saying she would support opening an investigation from the inspector general. that's now something that we'll wait to see if she requests.

but there you see the chairman of that committee, scott perry, urging her to request that kind of investigation, though congress will continue to do its oversight on this as well. >> the other thing that's happening on capitol hill today is nancy mays, representative from south carolina, trying to introduce a bathroom bill, basically saying you can only use the bathroom associated with your gender at birth. and the timing of this is really interesting and suspect, because there is a, the first transgender lawmaker coming to serve in congress come january, from delaware. congresswoman mcbride. this feels particularly targeted to her directly. rep elect sarah mcbride. here's what ncy mace said about the accusation that she's directly trying to target mcbride. let's listen. >> is this effort in respondent to congresswoman mcbride's coming to congress? >> yes and absolutely. the house rules package would be

fine, but we can't stop there. i'm working on legislation that would ban it on federal property, i'm working on legislation, if you are a school that is funded by the federal government, this shouldn't go on. and if mcbride wants to go to the gym, she can go to planet fitness, where they allow biological men to be around and in a room in a private space with underaged girls. no, thank you. it's not going to happen. not on my watch. >> i get that a lot of people are saying that the election turned -- partially turned on the issue of transgender rights, but what is happening here? this seems really mean. >> reporter: i think there is certainly a thread of that that i'm picking up as i talk with lawmakers here in the halls, because mace is saying, it's not subtle, she is saying directly, this is targeted to one newly elected member of congress. you saw what mcbride herself is saying about this in a statement or in a tweet. we're probably not going to hear more from her on this unless and

until it actually ends up in the rules package for this congress. now, if you listen to the speaker, and he's been asked about this several times today, katy, he actually made a point of coming out and making this statement to reporters about questions that he'd been asked earlier this morning, where he talked about the fact that this is a place that is designed to make sure that everyone can come and do their jobs and that you should be able to treat people with dignity. but listen to what the speaker told us, he made sure to say this. and i'll paraphrase it for you. he said, a man cannot become a woman. and he went on to say, this has always been his record on this. the open question is, yes, this is targeted rule making, but does it actually end up making it into the rules. it's not clear. >> yeah, he also went on to say, after he says, a man is a man and a woman is a woman and a woman cannot become a woman, he said, i also believe that's what scripture teaches, but i also believe that we teach everyone

with dignity so we can do and believe everything at the same time. i wanted to make that clear for everybody. i've stood there my whole life and those are facts. still not clear what it means to treat someone with dignity and whether that means that he would support a bill like this. ali vitali, thank you very much. still ahead, the aclu sues ice. what plans they need to see right now before donald trump implements mass deportations. but first, what federal aid programs the president-elect and his advisers are considering to roll -- are considering rolling back to pay for tax cuts. for tas six digestive symptoms to help you feel better. six digestive symptoms. the power of nature. iberogast.

donald trump wants to extend his 2017 tax cuts and now his team is looking for ways to pay for them, according to reporting from "the washington post." it could mean significant changes to medicaid, food stamps, and other federal safety net programs, changes which could impact 70 million low-income americans. joining us now, nbc news senior business correspondent, christine romans, and senior national correspondent for "the huffington post," jonathan cohn. cohn is the author of "the ten-year war: obamacare and the unfinished crew usade for univel coverage." so what does the trump team want to do to taxes come january? >> they want to extend all those tax cuts they gave to individuals, lower the corporate tax rate further, and the

president-elect on the campaign trail made a lot of other extra promises, which means, you're talking $4 trillion plus that they're talking about in terms of paying for all of those goodies that he promised. >> how do you pay for all of those things? and if you're going to get all of those tax cuts, what federal programs are potentially going to be on the chopping block, jonathan? >> so when you look at the federal budget, where all the money goes, a huge amount of it is tied up in these big entitlement programs. social security, medicare, make, food assistance. they've said already, they don't want to touch social security, they don't want to touch medicare. well, if those two are off the table, especially, there aren't a lot of other places to go for big money. that has brought two very big targets, medicaid, the program that provides health insurance for more than 70 million low-income americans, and then snap, what we used to call food stamps, which is food assistance for low-income people, that

don't have enough money to pay to feed themselves and their families. there are various kinds of changes there. they can get hundreds of billions of dollars in savings there if they are willing to cut. but every dollar they take out of those programs is going to mean taking away services or benefits from people who are getting them now. >> work requirements. that was something they talked about a lot during the first trump administration. what would work requirements look like for medicaid and for food stamps? >> so, typically, the way this works, you know, both food stamps and medicaid, the federal government is providing most or all of the funding, but states are in charge of managing it. so states would go and say, hey, we are going to, you know, we are administering this program. you have to establish that you are working. now, there's a philosophical question there, obviously, do you want to make it conditional on work? but even if you think you do and we should condition these on work, the two things to keep in mind is number one, most people on these programs are already working or can't work because of

a disability. and what happens in practice is, satisfying these requirements to verify if the systems are complex, lots of people get caught up in the wash, and lots of people end up losing benefits, even though they're entitled. and we've seen this happen over and over again. it actually costs a lot of money, just to kind of go through the eligibility. so you're spending a lot of money to check eligible, who's working, who's not. the people on the program, it's difficult for them to establish it. and what ends up happening is al of people who really need the help desperately don't get it. >> just so we're clear, donald trump during the first term allowed 13 gop-led states to add work programs, and it resulted in 18,000 people who were dropped from the program. i want to ask you about the aca, obamacare, you wrote a whole book on it. they tried in 2017 to overturn it, the republicans along with donald trump failed. john mccain is the infamous

thumbs down. do they to go after it again? >> so, obviously, you never know with donald trump. he was all over the place in what he was posting on truth social, and he had that momentum in the debate where he said, i have concepts of a plan for replacing the aca. so anything is possible. yes, you know, they have corral of the house and the senate. maybe they will try to repeal it again. what most people think is more likely is that was a very politically damaging fight for the republicans. much more likely, they'll look for ways to cut the aca in ways that don't sound like repeal and won't be the entire -- won't be rolling back the entire program, but could take really big pieces out of it. for example, the expansion of medicare, which, you know, one thing that obamacare did was it expanded medicaid and provided states with the money to cover many more people. there are proposals on the table right now, and we've heard republicans in congress say, this is something to look at, where basically the federal government would take back that money. and what you would say is millions of people who now are eligible for medicaid in these

states would lose that coverage. again, a lot of these are working people, they're in low-paying service jobs, they have no way to get health insurance. you take away the make edicaid expansion, they're going to be uninsured. >> and donald trump has offered a whole lot to working class folks. in addition to the tax cuts for the wealthy, there's no taxes on tips, there's more child care money, all sorts of stuff that was targeted toward the working class and the lower-income americans that are out there. how does he accomplish all of it? i mean, if he goes in and totally guts medicaid, that's going to eat away at some of the support that he gained during -- the republicans gained during the last election. it doesn't matter to them, i guess? >> and republicans know how politically challenging it is to say, we're going to give big companies and the richest americans more tax breaks, but we're going to be getting rid of waste, fraud, and abuse in these popular other programs. that's the way they'll try to frame it. these are bloating programs that they're going to make more efficient and better, well-run,

of course. but they know that politically that can look really damaging to that base, that new base that they have in this new republican party. the old republican party really cared about debt and deficits and paying for stuff. that's not this party. >> and they were ready to go after entitlements, like social security. let me ask you quickly, treasury secretary? >> still up in the air, but it sounds like he's leaning toward a wall street veteran, maybe this scott besent, just not sure yet. >> potentially more -- >> let's have a flame thrower. >> it's a bouncing ball. a republican insider described it as a bouncing ball. >> an argument would be not to disrupt the markets too much. christine, thank you very much. jonathan cohn, thank you, as well. coming up, what the aclu wants to see from i.c.e. amid the president-elect's promise to deport millions. millions. everyday, more dog people are deciding it's time

to quit the kibble and feed their dogs fresh food from the farmer's dog. made by vets and delivered right to your door precisely portioned for your dog's needs. it's an idea whose time has come. ♪♪ have you compared your medicare plan recently? with ehealth, you can compare medicare plans side by side for free. so we invited people to give ehealth a try and discover how easy it can be to find your medicare match. this is pretty amazing. i can go on a vacation with this money. i have quite a few prescriptions. that's why people call us. we're going to compare plans, and i'm gonna try to get you as much bang for your buck as possible. that's great. this one here covers all your prescriptions, your doctors as well. oh, wonderful. i have a hard time with this. that's okay, that's what i'm here for. based on our conversation today, i would highly recommend this plan. you're so helpful. you know, you don't know. i'm excited for you, sir. again, my name is sham.

and if you have any other questions, give me a ring. thank you very much. oh, my god, that was super easy. uhhh! see how your medicare plan stacks up with the big changes for 2025. just call this number or get started at ehealth.com. compare plans that cover your doctor's prescriptions, pharmacy and budget, and compare plans from the nation's top insurance companies. they pay us to help you. how much do you think you'll be able to save using ehealth? at least $300 a month. would you say you found your medicare match? yes i did. what sham did she explain to me exactly what i needed to know? well, i have a surprise for you. sham, come on out. oh my goodness. it's a pleasure to meet you today, sir. what does it feel like to be face to face? you helped me out quite a bit. call to meet your advisor. they're paid the same. no matter which medicare advantage plan you choose. ask them about ehealth, live advice or get started on your own at ehealth.com. either way, it's always a free service. see if you could get more for less with ehealth, like these folks did. the savings are unbelievable. i could see the costs side by side.

ehealth is wonderful. $1,200 savings in my pocket. i was really pleasantly surprised with that. (♪♪) (♪♪) ehealth. your medicare matchmaker. you've got a pepto predicament, ace. you overdid it on the loaded fries and now your gut is in the gutter. undo it with pepto fast melts. so you can keep on rolling. [bowling pins knocked down] when you overdo it, undo it with pepto bismol. i won't let my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis symptoms define me... emerge as you, with clearer skin. with tremfya®, most people saw 100% clear skin... ...that stayed clear,

even at 5 years. serious allergic reactions and increased risk of infections may occur. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection, flu-like symptoms or if you need a vaccine. emerge with clear skin. ask your doctor about tremfya®. ♪♪ dexcom g7 is one of the easiest ways to take better control of your diabetes. this small wearable replaces fingersticks, lowers a1c, and it's covered by medicare. not managing your diabetes really affects your health for the future. the older you get, the more complications you're gonna see. i knew i couldn't ignore my diabetes anymore because it was causing my eyesight to go bad. for my patients, getting on dexcom g7 is the biggest eye opener they've ever had. i couldn't believe how easy it was. this small wearable sends my glucose numbers right to my phone or my receiver. with just a glance i can see if i'm going high, low, or steady. so, i can make quick decisions

in the moment. now, i'm a superstar. my a1c is 5.7. my a1c has never been lower. no other cgm system is more affordable for medicare patients than dexcom g7. don't wait! call now, and talk to a real person. here is what we know right now about donald trump's mass deportation plans. he wants to go around congress by declaring a national emergency. he wants to use the military, along with reassigned law enforcement officers and national guardsmen to get it going quickly. he wants to broaden expedited removal to anyone who cannot prove they've been in the u.s. for more than two years. his priority on who could be deported first could be chinese men of military age, living here

illegally. that a network of holding camps would be set up across the country to hold those who challenge their deportation. and trump promises to start doing all of this on day one. joining us now, nbc news homeland security correspondent, julia ainsley. because this is so sweeping, the aclu is now suing, asking for more information about the plans. and they're saying i.c.e. is stonewalling them. >> yeah, it's interesting, katie, how much is already playing out before trump even takes office. you mentioned all of those details of the plan. usually we would expect a lawsuit from the aclu after a policy has already taken place. they'll represent those who were affected in the class action lawsuit. this is a foia lawsuit, freedom of information act. they want information on anyone who will transport migrants, either those who are arrested and transported inside this country or those companies who are doing the charter flights to deport them. they say it's because american taxpayers need to know how their money is being spent on this operation. >> all right. so, if they -- >> -- operation, we will

prioritize public safety threats and national security threats, because they pose the biggest danger to the united states. and we're going to take the handcuffs off i.c.e. i.c.e. knows who they're looking for. secretary mayorkas has told them to tone down the arrests. >> so, katy, that's tom homan, as you know, trump has named him to be his border czar at the white house. what we have to point out here. i've been out with i.c.e. before. they are arresting fugitives. when i speak to the director of i.c.e., they say they need more money. that's something that could have come through that border security bill that we know that trump stymied earlier this year. all of this being said, they're talking about prioritizing criminals, but it's clear from the scale of these plans and the details that you laid out that there is going to be a much larger group of people affected, katy? >> julia ainsley, thank you very much. that's going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts after a quick break. house" star after a quick break. [coughing]

copd isn't pretty. i'm out of breath and often out of the picture. but this is my story. and with once-daily trelegy, it can still be beautiful. because with 3 medicines in 1 inhaler, trelegy keeps my airways open for a full 24 hours and prevents future flare-ups. trelegy also improves lung function, so i can breathe more freely all day and night. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ♪what a wonderful world♪ [woman soft laughing] ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for copd because breathing should be beautiful, all day and night.

you know what's brilliant? boring. think about it. boring is the unsung catalyst for bold. what straps bold to a rocket and hurtles it into space? boring does. boring makes vacations happen, early retirements possible, and startups start up. because it's smart, dependable, and steady. all words you want from your bank. for nearly 160 years, pnc bank has been brilliantly boring so you can be happily fulfilled... which is pretty un-boring if you think about it. (cough cough) (sneeze) (♪♪) new alka-seltzer plus cold or flu fizzy chews. chew. fizz. feel better fast. no water needed. new alka-seltzer plus fizzychews. at betmgm, everyone gets a welcome offer. no water needed. so whether you're courtside trying to hit the over... or up here trying to hit the under. whew! or, hitting that win with your crew. ohhh! yes, see defense! or way up here with a same game parlay. yaw!

betmgm's got your back. get your welcome offer. and play with the sportsbook born in vegas. all these seats. really? get up to a $1500 new customer offer in bonus bets when you sign up now. betmgm. download and bet today.

♪♪ 4:00 in new york. an alarming series