here, and that's what we saw today when we were flying with cal fire, of how hard this community has been hit. we talked so much in numbers, right. 12,000 over 12,000 structures have been destroyed, mostly in the eaton and palisades fire and structures. >> sounds so bland. >> but when you go and look in these communities, when you fly above them, you are reminded that we are talking about homes, we are talking about businesses, we are talking about familiar sites that have been integral parts of these communities for years, decades, generations even now, entirely gone. and for so many people, alex, they're trying to get through tonight worried about what could happen in other parts of los angeles and the los angeles county region, and also trying to just process how they pick up their lives because they have nothing left here. >> alex. just a staggering amount of destruction. that video footage from the helicopter gives you a sense of those wind gusts. nbc news correspondent ellison barber doing some real essential

reporting on the ground. thank you for hanging late tonight. i appreciate it. that is our show for tonight. now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening lawrence. >> good evening. alex. >> we have andrew weissman and neal katyal joining us to talk about the jack smith report. >> but before that, we're going to be joined by a couple of the tough questioners in today's hearing, senator elizabeth warren, senator mark kelly. >> and thank you, alex, for your coverage of the hearing, because your description of the way republican senator joni ernst finally got to yes, tonight is absolutely critical to understanding where this nomination stands. her vote was not known until tonight. >> and the way you tracked it through that incredible pressure campaign on her big money coming at her over the course of the last several weeks to force her, in effect, to voting for this nomination. >> just a stunning chain of events leading us to where we are tonight. i'm eager to hear other perspectives. lawrence, i will be watching you tonight. >> thanks, alex. thank you. >> have a great show. >> thank you. well, it wasn't

always this way. back when i was the staff director of the senate finance committee, i helped that committee run several confirmation hearings, dozens of them for treasury department nominations, health and human services department nominations and others. >> and at every one of those hearings, both sides always asked serious questions. always. in fact, each senator on both sides in those days asked serious questions. some were better questions than others, but they were all serious. that was the minimum standard, serious in the 21st century. trump republican party in the united states senate. >> serious questions are disappearing. >> how many push ups can you do? >> i did five sets of 47 this morning. >> the top democrat on the armed services committee today, jack reed of rhode island, the former chairman of that committee,

began the hearing on the democratic side of the panel by telling pete hegseth he is the first nominee for secretary of defense who he cannot vote for, including both of donald trump's previous nominees for secretary of defense, who jack reed supported. >> mr. heggs, that you are the ninth nominee for secretary of defense that i've had the honor to consider as a member of the senate armed services committee, i have voted in favor of all your predecessors, including those in the first trump administration. unfortunately, you lack the character and composure and competence to hold the position of secretary of defense. thank you. >> and then it got worse for pete hegseth. >> i want to return to the incident that you referenced a minute ago that occurred in monterey, california, in october 2017. at that time, you were still married to your second wife, correct? i believe so. and you had just fathered a child by a woman who would later become your third wife. correct?

>> senator, i was falsely charged. i fully investigated and completely cleared. >> so you think you were completely cleared because you committed no crime? that's your definition of cleared. you had just fathered a child two months before by a woman that was not your wife. i am shocked that you would stand here and say you're completely cleared. can you so casually cheat on a second wife and cheat on the mother of a child that had been born two months before? and you tell us you were completely cleared? how was that? a complete, clear senator. >> her child's name is gwendolyn hope hegseth, and she's a child of god. and she's seven years old. and she was. >> and you cheated on the mother of that child. less than two months after that daughter was born, didn't you? >> those were false charges. well, not fully investigated. and i was completely cleared. and i'm so grateful for the marriage i have to this. you've admitted me. >> you've admitted that you had sex at that hotel on october 2017. you said it was consensual. isn't that correct?

anything. you've admitted that it was consensual and you were still married and you just had a child by another woman? again, how do you explain your judgment? >> these false charges against me? you know, i investigated, and i was completely clear. >> you have admitted that you had sex while you were married to wife two, after you just had fathered a child by wife three you've admitted that now, if it had been a sexual assault that would be disqualifying to be secretary of defense, wouldn't it? >> it was a false claim then, and a false claim now. >> if it had been a sexual assault, that would be disqualifying to be a secretary of defense, wouldn't it? >> that was a false claim. so you're talking about a hypothetical, so you can't tell me whether someone who has committed a sexual assault is disqualified from being secretary of defense? senator, i know in my instance, and i'm talking about my instance only it was a false claim. >> but you acknowledged that it was, but you acknowledged that you cheated on your wife and that you cheated on the woman

who by whom you had just fathered a child. you have admitted that. >> i will allow your words to speak for them. >> you're not retracting that today. that's good. i assume that in each of your weddings, you've pledged to be faithful to your wife. you've taken an oath to do that, haven't you? >> senator, as i've acknowledged to everyone in this committee, not a perfect person i'm not claiming to be, but i just asked a simple question. >> you've taken an oath like you would take an oath to be secretary of defense and all of your weddings, to be faithful to your wife, is that correct? >> i have failed in things in my life, and thankfully i'm redeemed by my lord and savior jesus christ. >> the incident in monterey led to a criminal charge, a criminal investigation, a private settlement, and a cash payment to the woman who filed the complaint. and there was also a nondisclosure agreement. correct? >> it was a confidential, confidential settlement agreement off of a nuisance lawsuit. right. >> during an interview, you claimed that you settled the matter because you were worried that if it became public, it might hurt your career. do you maintain that you were blackmailed?

>> senator, i maintain that false claims were made against me and ultimately your attorney. >> false claims. >> you have the opportunity to attest my innocence in those false claims. >> but you didn't reveal any of this to president trump or the transition team as they were considering you to be nominated for secretary of defense. you didn't. you didn't reveal the action. you didn't reveal the criminal complaint. you didn't reveal the criminal investigation. you didn't reveal the settlement. you didn't reveal the cash payment. why didn't you inform the commander in chief of the transition team of this very relevant event? >> senator, i've appreciated every part of the process with the transition team. they have been open and honest with me. we've had great conversations between the two of us, and i appreciate the opportunity that president elect trump. >> but you chose not to reveal this, right, because you knew it would hurt your chances. so you chose not to reveal this really important thing to the commander in chief of the transition team, because you were worried about

your chances, rather than trying to be candid with the future president of the united states, are there any other important facts that you chose not to reveal to the president elect and his team, as they were considering you to be secretary of defense? >> senator, i sit here before you, an open book, as everyone who's watched this process with with multiple nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements tying the hands of many people who would like to comment to us, one of your colleagues said that you got drunk at an event at a bar and chanted, kill all muslims. >> another colleague, not anonymous. we have this said that you took coworkers to a strip club. you were drunk, you tried to dance with strippers. you had to be held off the stage and one of your employees in that event filed a sexual harassment charge as a result of it. now, i know you denied these things, but isn't that the kind of behavior that, if true, would be disqualifying for somebody to be secretary of defense? >> senator. anonymous.

>> false charges, they're not anonymous. and i'll just conclude and say this to the chairman. you claim that this was all anonymous. we have seen records with names attached to all of these, including the name of your own mother. so don't make this into some anonymous press thing. >> the new york times headline on the hearing said hegseth won't say whether sexual assault, drinking, or adultery is disqualifying. decorated combat veteran tammy duckworth, who lost both of her legs in combat as a helicopter pilot, said this how can we ask these warriors to train and perform the absolute highest standards? >> when you are asking us to lower the standards to make you the secretary of defense, simply because you are buddies with our president elect. >> lower the standards. >> that is what donald trump has done every day of his political life. that is what republican senators did today for the job of secretary of defense of the united states of america. >> lower the standards.

>> the vote in the senate on the hegseth nomination is going to be a vote to lower the standards, yes or no. >> and republicans who are constantly claiming to believe in nothing but meritocracy will vote to lower the standards, and democrats will vote to preserve the standards. >> let me make it clear. you can't seem to grasp that there is no us military as we know it without the incredible women that we serve, women who've earned their place in their units. you have not earned your place as secretary of defense. >> senator elizabeth warren easily exposed the naked hypocrisy of pete hegseth, plans for the american military, and what appear to possibly be his own plan to get as rich as possible from defense contractors for years from now. >> if he gets the big job.

>> now, mr. hegseth, you have written that after they retire, general should be banned from working for the defense industry for ten years. you and i agree on the corrosive effects of the revolving door between the pentagon and defense contractors. it's something i would have liked to talk to you about if you'd come and been willing to visit with me. but the question i have for you on this is, will you put your money where your mouth is and agree that when you leave this job, you will not work for the defense industry for ten years? >> senator, it's not even a question i've thought about, because it's not about right now. it's not one. my motivation for this job. >> i understand that i just need a yes or no here. next time is short. i just need a yes or no. >> i would consult with the president about what the policy. >> in other words, you're quite sure that every general who serves should not go directly into the defense industry for ten years? you're not willing to

make that same pledge. >> i'm not a general, senator. >> you'll be the one. let us just be clear. in charge of the generals. so you're saying sauce for the goose, but certainly not sauce for the gander. >> i would want to see what? the policy. oh, i'll bet you would. >> thank you, senator warren. >> leading off our discussion tonight is democratic senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts. she's a member of the senate armed services committee and the senate finance committee and others. senator, i want to begin exactly where you left off there. and by the way, let me start with a question you maybe haven't thought of. will you go to work for a defense contractor when you leave the senate? and if you haven't thought about it, take your time and think about it. >> i haven't thought about it, and the answer is no. >> seems pretty easy. >> yeah, it seems pretty easy. and that's the whole point. he has thought about this. he has thought about the corrosive effect of the revolving door. and i agree it is a corrosive effect. we really need to slow that down. and that's why i was

so glad that our current secretary of defense, lloyd austin, four years ago, when he sat in that very same chair, made the commitment that he would not go into the defense industry. you know, that is the point lloyd austin wanted to make clear. he is here to serve the american people. pete hegseth makes clear he is here to serve pete hegseth. >> this is entirely about lowering standards more more so than any senate confirmation hearing i've ever seen. this is a direct request. lower the standards below anything you've ever dreamed of, right? >> you know what's really remarkable about this? we sit on senate armed services, and as you know, we have to vote on everybody who hits levels of general in the in the military and the kinds of things that pete hegseth had that have been documented. these were not just kind of rumors floating out there about taking people to

strip clubs and getting so drunk at work, then climbing up on stage to dance with the strippers about having to be carried up to his room because he was so drunk at a work event. sexual harassment claims against him. frankly, that would have stopped the career of anyone in the military from making it to those higher echelons. and yet, the united states senate is being asked, and evidently republicans are responding to say that's the person who will be in charge of america's military. >> yeah. i just want to underline this point for the audience might not know that the high level officials in the military are their promotions at the general level, are confirmed by the united states senate, by your committee. you have committee votes. they go to the senate floor. they sometimes take a long time, actually, but there's a lot of them, and none of them would survive any of these accusations. >> none would survive. and i really want to say here we vote them en masse, but we really do

the investigations or the staff does the investigation. you know, i am still right now the. well, no, i guess not. we've changed congresses that i was the chair of the subcommittee on personnel, and when there was even a little ink blot on someone's record, any kind of allegation not reaching anything close to the pete hegseth allegations, that was enough that we had to have a meeting. we had to go over the records. we had to talk through what had happened, and nobody went forward unless we had sign off from the chairman of the committee, from the ranking member of the committee, from the chair of the subcommittee, the ranking member of the committee, the chair of the committee, all four on the senate side. before we could send anyone forward, we looked at it in detail because we understand the importance of this particular job interview.

when people are responsible for our national defense, we ask something extraordinary of them. we ask them to put their lives on the line. we also ask them to live their lives in ways that inspire confidence, both in those they lead and those in the public generally. you know, all three of my brothers served in the military. my oldest brother was career military. and the importance of internalizing those standards of honesty and integrity, and that really does exclude things like taking your work group to a strip club and getting so drunk you try to dance with the strippers. >> there wouldn't have been one republican vote in the senate on the committee or the floor for this nomination. >> before donald trump. i think this is what donald trump has done to standards. >> yeah, i think that's exactly a fair description of what's

happening here. you know, partly. and part of the problem today is there wasn't just one thing that we could talk about that would have been disqualifying. i'm not just talking about scratching through for maybe is there a problem here or a question? there it was. it's just over and over and over. so we have the problem that he has said that women should not serve in combat. in fact, he says they shouldn't serve in the military. moms, he says in his book, just shouldn't be in the military at all. so we've got that problem when we count on a quarter of a million active duty military women. right now, we have the problem of the sexual assaults, and no one knows how many. we simply know it is a multiple nondisclosure agreements on allegations that have been hushed up and pushed under the rug. we have the problem of

drunk at work events. that's and that's a that's really serious, particularly in the case of the secretary of defense, who can be called any time, day or night and is going to have to make split second decisions. we need somebody who's going to be sober and someone who has had two previous management experiences. neither one had more than 50 employees. by the way, department of defense is 3.5 million. but in both of those earlier encounters where he's run an organization, he ran both of them into the ground financially and was asked to leave. so any one of those would have been enough to say no. and then, you know, if you watch the rest of it, when you listen to someone like elissa, slotkin asked him very reasonable questions about the oath to the constitution. and if donald trump asked you, any president

asked the secretary of defense to do something that is unlawful, like use military force against a civilian population, would you say no? the right answer here is really clear. you would say no. he couldn't say no when he was asked about the geneva convention by senator angus king, he couldn't say that he actually supports america's full participation and support for the geneva convention. i mean, so substantively, he would be disqualified, but item by item by item in how he has lived his life. but right now, donald trump and the republicans are pushing him through as fast as they can. they don't want details. they don't want to hear about this. they just want everybody on the republican side to vote yes and move on. >> senator, i can't thank you

enough for joining us after this first confirmation hearing in the senate. there will be more and you're on other committees. there will be more there. thank you very much for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> and up next, senator mark kelly offered pete hegseth multiple chances to deny descriptions of his drunken conduct, and he did not actually deny those descriptions. we'll show you that next. when senator show you that next. when senator mark kelly joins us. with cascade platinum plus, i have upped my dish game auntie, in that dishwasher? watch me platinum plus gives you the highest standard of clean, even in your machine. clean enough for you? yeah! scrape. load. done. cascade platinum plus. for the facts. sure, it looks safe, but like nearly half of all used cars, it's been in an accident with carfax. com, you see how accidents impact price so you don't have to overpay.

>> unpause on accidents. you were space. >> you're going to need it. wait. twins? >> no. oh, that was too long of a pause. >> shop with the facts at the all new carfax.com to avoid digital threats, just turn on nordvpn, improve your protection against trackers, malicious against trackers, malicious websites and malware dupixent can help people with asthma breathe better in as little as 2 weeks. so this is better. and this. dupixent is an add-on treatment for specific types of moderate-to-severe asthma. it's not for sudden breathing problems and doesn't replace a rescue inhaler. it's proven to help prevent asthma attacks. severe allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for face, mouth, tongue or throat swelling, wheezing or trouble breathing. tell your doctor right away of signs of inflamed blood vessels like rash, chest pain, worsening shortness of breath, tingling or numbness in limbs. tell your doctor of new or worsening

joint aches and pain, or a parasitic infection. don't change or stop steroid, asthma, or other treatments without talking to your doctor. ask your specialist about dupixent. 10% loyalty program discount. >> that's $225 for the night. >> not bad. >> $155 for the night. >> hold up. how? >> it's easy when you know where to look. trivago compares hotel prices from hundreds of sites so you can save up to 40%. you can save up to 40%. >> trivago is my secret tactic. prilosec knows, for a fire... one fire extinguisher beats 10 buckets of water, and for zero heartburn 1 prilosec a day... beats taking up to 10 antacids a day. it's that simple, for 24 hour heartburn relief... one beats ten. prilosec otc.

mess, and barely lift a finger. mess, and barely lift a finger. easy. hellofresh psoriatic arthritis symptoms can be unpredictable. one day, your joints hurt. next, it's on your skin. i got cosentyx. feels good to move. feel less joint pain, swelling and tenderness, back pain, and clearer skin, and help stop further joint damage with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections, and lowered ability to fight them may occur, like tuberculosis or other serious bacterial, fungal, or viral infections. some were fatal. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough, had a vaccine or plan to, or if inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions and severe eczema-like skin reactions may occur. ♪♪ ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.

♪ ♪ with so much great entertainment out there... wouldn't it be easier if you could find what you want, all in one place? my favorites. get xfinity streamsaver with netflix, apple tv+, and peacock included, for only $15 a month. >> physicians mutual, physicians

mutual. >> pete hegseth was not testifying under oath, but it is still against the law to lie to congress. and so he was careful not to deny most of the damning accusations against him. >> i just want you to tell me if these are true or false. very simple. on memorial day 2014, at a cva event in virginia, you needed to be carried out of the event for being intoxicated. >> senator. anonymous smears. >> just true or false? very simple. summer of 2014. in cleveland. drunk in public with the cva team. >> anonymous smears. >> i'm just asking for true or false questions. true or false answers. an event in north carolina. drunk in front of three young female staff members. after you had instituted a no alcohol policy

and then reversed it. true or false? >> anonymous smears. >> he could have said false, but his lawyer no doubt told him that lying to the committee is against the law. >> december of 2014 at the cva christmas party at the grand hyatt at washington, d.c, you were noticeably intoxicated and had to be carried up to your room. is that true or false? >> anonymous smears. >> another time, a cva staffer stated that you passed out in the back of a party bus. is that true or false? >> anonymous smears. >> joining our discussion now is democratic senator mark kelly of arizona, a member of the senate armed services committee. and, senator, i know this is not what you came to the senate to do. you are not a trained prosecutor, cross-examiner, but no prosecutor could have done it better. the true or false construction couldn't have been more simple, and he couldn't handle it. >> yeah, he had a challenging time with that line of

questioning. that's not what i went in there planning to ask him. i wanted to ask him questions more about his management experience at cva, at the vets for freedom organization. but after we got through a couple senators, it was clear that he was being very evasive about this. and these are serious accusations that it's multiple accusations. and this job is just so critical for our national security. this isn't a job that you do eight hours a day, five days a week. this is 24 over seven, 365 days out of the year. so i have serious concerns. i did during the committee hearing, and i still do. about his readiness, i mean, he talked in his books about drinking heavily. he talks about overcoming personal problems. he says these are smears, but he won't address what the personal problems are. it can't be both. i mean, it has to be one or the other. and what i, i thought when i started asking him these questions, i thought he was going to say, hey, these these things are false, you know, because he's

denied these, he's publicly denied it. but, you know, as you say, he just couldn't get there. and he talks about these smears. so i still have concerns and i hope to meet with him to go over these further. >> and he refused to admit this is, again, a stunning thing that i've never heard of. >> in the confirmation process, he refused to meet with democratic members of the committee. >> yeah, we provided a lot of opportunities, a lot of days, a lot of different hours in my schedule, a very busy schedule, but we made a lot of time available. he would not meet with us before the hearing. i did have a scheduled meeting with him tomorrow. they've now come back to us and say they have to reschedule it, and i think it's for actually a legitimate cause. he says there's some kind of transition team tabletop thing he's got to go to, so i take him at his word. hopefully i'll meet with him this week before we get into next week when we have to start voting on on this nominee. >> but i just want to stress this point for the audience. >> nominees meet with every member of the committee. that's how they begin. they do.

>> traditionally, my understanding, i've only been there for four years, and i didn't do this through every time. secretary austin. >> but yes, procedural thing, hugely important. not not noticed. probably by most people in the audience. one round of questioning per senator. i have never seen that limitation imposed in a situation like this. and jack reed asked for a second round. you picked up that objection. i know all the democrats objected. so you were limited to only seven minutes of questioning. and what was normal in all these hearings in the past is if you had more and sometimes you don't have more, but if you have more, you'll get you'll get a second round if you if you stick around and wait for it. >> yeah. and i had a bunch of very relevant questions about policy, about weapons systems that dod is currently trying to acquire. sentinel, you know, program being one system, the nuclear version of that and some controversy around it to see where he stands on these really important things. but with the personal issues that he has and the accusations out there, i

mean, we had to address those things first. and you very quickly run out of seven minutes. i mean, it's it goes by really fast. yeah. >> going forward, what are you looking for? if this is the secretary of defense, if he makes it. and with joni ernst both announced tonight, he's a lot closer to making it. how do you oversee this department? >> well, i mean, i think we've got a, you know, hold you know, him accountable to doing the best job he possibly can. and i will do whatever i can to help him. i mean, assuming that he gets confirmed and we haven't had the votes yet and we haven't counted. but i think with her announcement, i think it's rather likely that he gets confirmed. we need him to be successful. i don't want to see, you know, anybody in congress trying to trip the guy up. i mean, we our national security is, you know, is there's nothing more important. so i'll do my best to be as supportive, but also, you know, hold them

accountable for when they're, you know, making what i view as poor decisions that are not in the best interest of the american people and my constituents. >> when your own experience in the military, what does a nomination like this say to the people out there serving in our military? >> i spent 25 years on active duty in the united states navy. i flew in combat in the first gulf war off of an aircraft carrier. i was a test pilot. i was at nasa for 15 years as a navy astronaut. you know, i think, you know, any president is going to pick somebody he's going to be comfortable with. you know, my hope is that all presidents look at how competent the person is. are they ready to do this job on day one? do they have issues in their background that would make you question, especially the people in in the military, you know, women, minorities in the military? are they going to look at this secdef and wonder, is he really representing them? you know, what is what does he think of them? you know, that concerns

me. obviously, the president elect, you know, wanted this individual. i don't think they did a very thorough job, you know, looking, you know, at his background. and because of that, we found, you know, where we where we had today. and we had to ask him a lot of very uncomfortable questions. not ideal. i would have expected with a different nominee, somebody else sitting at the, you know, in that seat in that room, questions i would have been asking would have been much different and would not have required a lowering of the standards for a vote in the senate, and wouldn't require me going through a list of things and just saying, is this true or false? and i'm still troubled by the fact that he could not answer that question. it's very it's pretty simple thing to do. >> senator mark kelly, thank you very much for joining our discussion. thank you. coming up, special prosecutor jack smith's report released overnight, says donald trump is guilty. andrew weissmann and

guilty. andrew weissmann and neal katyal join our my moderate to severe crohn's symptoms kept me out of the picture. with skyrizi, feel symptom relief at 4 weeks. many people were in remission at 12 weeks, at 1 year, and even at 3 years. don't use if allergic. serious allergic reactions, increased infections, or lower ability to fight them may occur. before treatment, get checked for infections and tb. tell your doctor about any flu-like symptoms or vaccines. liver problems leading to hospitalization may occur when treated for crohn's. ♪ control is everything to me. ♪ ask your gastroenterologist about skyrizi. alice loves the scent of gain so much, she wished there was a way to make it last longer. say hello to your fairy godmother alice, and long-lasting gain scent beads. part of the irresistible scent collection from gain. got eyelid itching, crusties and swelling that won't go away? it could be... demodex blepharitis! and we're demodex mites. we're very common and super irritating to your eyelids...

but we love making ourselves comfortable here! oh, yeah...steam time! if demodex mites are partying it up on your eyelids... it's time to eliminate the root of the problem with xdemvy. with one drop in each eye twice a day... you can kill the mites in just six weeks. xdemvy is the first and only fda-approved treatment that kills the mites that cause demodex blepharitis, a common eyelid disease. avoid touching the tip of the bottle to your eye or other surfaces to minimize contamination. wait 15 minutes before inserting contact lenses. in clinical trials, the most common side effects were stinging and burning in one out of ten patients. party's over folks.... it's not you, it's demodex mites. talk to your eye doctor today. when i was diagnosed with h-i-v, i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... ...being me. keep being you... ...and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment

used for h-i-v in many people—whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. don't take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding or have kidney or liver problems. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. nice to meet ya. my name is david. i've been a pharmacist for 44 years and i'm from flowery branch, georgia. when i have customers come in i recommend prevagen. number one, because it's effective.

does not require a prescription. and i've been taking it quite a while myself and i know it works. and i love it when the customers come back in and tell me, "david, that really works so good for me." makes my day. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. (sneeze) (hooves approaching) not again. your cold is coming! your cold is coming! thanks...revere. we really need to keep zicam in the house. only if you want to shorten your cold! when you feel a cold coming, shorten it with zicam (revere: hyah)

nine tablets for just $7 is try friday plans.com. >> jack smith says he found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that donald trump is guilty. quote indeed. but for mr. trump's election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial. that is, from jack smith's report made

public just after midnight last night of his investigation of donald trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election. leading up to and on january 6th. jack smith says there is a through line to his 137 page report, quote, the through line of all of mr. trump's criminal efforts was deceit, knowingly false claims of election fraud. and the evidence shows that mr. trump used these lies as a weapon to defeat a federal government function foundational to the united states democratic process. the report describes donald trump as the head of the criminal conspiracies and their intended beneficiary. in a four page letter to attorney general merrick garland accompanying his report, jack smith says that the investigative and prosecutorial teams he assembled, quote, are people of great decency and the highest personal integrity. the intense public scrutiny of our

office, threats to their safety, and relentless, unfounded attacks on their character and integrity did not deter them from fulfilling their oaths and professional obligations. these are intensely good people who did hard things well. i will not forget the sacrifices they made and the personal resilience they and their families have shown over the last two years. our country owes them a debt of gratitude for their unwavering service and dedication to the rule of law. my office had one north star to follow the facts and law wherever they led. nothing more and nothing less. while i relied greatly on the counsel, judgment and advice of our team, i want it to be clear that the ultimate decision to bring charges against mr. trump was mine. it is a decision i stand behind fully to have done otherwise on the facts developed during our work would have been to shirk my duties as a prosecutor and a public servant.

after nearly 30 years of public service. that is a choice i could not abide. jack smith added a personal note about donald trump's attacks on him. to all who know me well, the claim that mr. from mr. trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable. joining us now is neal katyal, former acting u.s. solicitor general and professor at georgetown law. also with us, andrew weissmann, former fbi general counsel and former chief of the criminal division in the eastern district of new york. he's an nyu law professor. they are both msnbc legal analysts. andrew, you have participated in writing such reports. what is your assessment of this one? >> in terms of the substance? it is a sober, dispassionate recitation of the facts and the law. it is now public. it is

something that everyone can read and i commend everyone to do that. i did want to focus, as you have lawrence, on the four page letter. that's an easy thing for people to read that it starts the report and it's beautifully written. it is personal in tone, and it talks about not just what you've outlined, but also sort of what the guiding principles were for jack smith and his team. and i think it's wonderful that he wrote that letter. the only thing and i'm old enough to remember this is i am a big fan of archibald cox. and that approach to thinking about different ways of communicating to the public and the written word is terrific, but i commend everyone also, if they want a great lesson in how a

responsible prosecutor can also use the media to, within the appropriate guidelines of not disparaging a defendant, but explaining what they're doing by going to a press conference, as archibald cox did, and laying it out. and it allows people not just to take in the information through the media, but it also allows to assess credibility and get a sense of the person. jack smith has been so characterized and caricatured and vilified by donald trump and his allies that i just think that's a missed opportunity, and he's so worthy of people listening to him and seeing him for what he is, which is a public servant at heart. >> neal katyal, what is your reading of this report? >> so my first tour of lawrence at the justice department back in 1999, i led a group of people to write the special counsel

regulations that jack smith is appointed under. and i can tell you that from reading the report today, it really does seem that jack smith was in the best traditions of the justice department. >> exactly what we had in mind back in 1999 when we wrote this, and in particular, a fearless, unflinching devotion to law enforcement, a nonpolitical view. >> and that's what the report goes on and on at length to really outline. >> and you know, what smith is saying in this report is, look, i followed the rules. >> it's other people who rewrote them, and in particular the united states supreme court. he says no court had ever found that presidents were immune from criminal responsibility. >> and we proceeded from the same premise. and even lawrence dropped some language from justice sotomayor's dissent. analogizing analogizing the trump immunity decision to korematsu the japanese internment case and saying it gives a license for presidents

to go and kill political opponents. and so you can see his frustration with the supreme court in the report, because they did change the rules in the middle of this investigation. >> so all of that, i think, is really important. i think one other thing that's really important, and you flashed this at the beginning of the segment is some language saying, you know, but for trump's return to the presidency, he would have been convicted. that's really important. >> and it was preceded by language that jack smith used that said, look, the reason there's no prosecution is because of a categorical rule that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted, and it doesn't turn on the gravity of the crimes charged or anything like that. and here's why that's so important. >> it's the opposite, as andrew knows better than anyone of what bill barr did in the mueller report, because what bill barr did is he took the mueller report, supposedly summarized it by saying, basically, trump did nothing wrong, but actually hiding for many weeks what the report actually said, which was

you can't indict a sitting president because of this legal rule. >> that is, you know, that distorted all of the public discourse. i'm glad to see jack smith trying to return to this and to say, look, the evidence is overwhelming. we could have sustained a conviction. it was just this technicality that prevented us from doing so. >> we're going to squeeze in a quick break here. when we come back, i want to go to the point that jack smith's report shows that some republicans in pennsylvania refused to participate in donald trump's lie about the 2020 presidential election, while pam bondi was publicly supporting that lie about pennsylvania, which is obviously why donald trump chose her as his next attorney general. we'll come back with that. work. play, blink. >> relief work, play. blink. relief. relief. >> the only after last month's massive solar flare

added a 25th hour to the day, businesses are wondering "what should we do with it?" i'm thinking company wide power nap. [ employees snoring ] anything can change the world of work. from hr to payroll, adp designs for the next anything. let's monopoly go! hehe. chris! keke! ready tycoons? it's go time! cash grab! keke, i won again? ow! daddy will be back soon. [cries] -ha ha! -boom! we're swimming in it now. -rent's due. -toodle-oo! busted! nothing beats playing with friends, except bankrupting friends. the itch and rash of moderate to severe eczema disrupts my skin, night and day. despite treatment, it's still not under control. 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. responsibly with factor all of the flavor, none of the guilt. the flavor, none of the guilt. ready in

life, diabetes, there's no slowing down. each day is a unique blend of people to see and things to do. that's why you choose glucerna to help manage blood sugar response. uniquely designed with carbsteady. glucerna. bring on the day. when we started feeding bogie the farmer's dog, he lost so much weight. pre-portioned packs makes it really easy to keep him lean and healthy. in the morning, he flies up the stairs and hops up on my bed. in the past, he would not have been able to do any of those things. i'm not a doctor. i'm not even in a doctor's office. i'm standing on the streets talking to real people about their heart. how's your heart? my heart's pretty good. —you sure? —i think so. how do you know? you're driving a car, you have the check engine light. but the heart doesn't have a hey, check heart sign. i want to show you something. put both fingers right on those pads. there you go. in 30 seconds we're going to have a medical-grade ekg reading. —there it is! —that is you. look at that. with kardiamobile, you can take a medical-grade ekg in just 30 seconds from anywhere.

kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. and it's the only personal ekg that's fda-cleared to detect normal heart rhythm, bradycardia and tachycardia. how much do you think this device costs? probably a thousand. $99! wow. that's impressive. checking your heart anytime, anywhere has never been easier. and kardiamobile is how hsa/fsa eligible. get kardiamobile today for just $79 at kardia.com or amazon. ♪♪ out and i'll show you a better way. well, show me carfax. knowing how a car's accident history impacts price means you don't have to overpay. no fear. just fox. say, show me a carfax. com. >> if your family is anything like mine. every day brings in dirt and messes. touchdown! just stop. stop. >> sit after last month's massive solar flare

added a 25th hour to the day, businesses are wondering "what should we do with it?" i'm thinking company wide power nap. [ employees snoring ] anything can change the world of work. from hr to payroll, adp designs for the next anything. to fix this. we need to remedy. remedy this now because we've won pennsylvania and we want every vote to be counted in a fair way. >> that is, former attorney general of florida pam bondi. jack smith's report cites another republican who saw the situation as a crime in progress in pennsylvania. one trump. the report says one trump elector nominee in pennsylvania recognized the plan as illegal and an attempt to overthrow the government, and he declined to participate. but pam bondi did participate in that plan to

overthrow the government for donald trump. and that is why her confirmation hearing for attorney general of the united states is scheduled for tomorrow morning. neal katyal and andrew weissman are back with us. and, andrew, you have this person in in pennsylvania who wasn't an attorney general of anything. figure out that what he was looking at was a crime. and pam bondi was right out there cheering for that criminal course of action. >> sure. well, for pam bondi, one of the questions for her is tell me what facts, what specific facts you're aware of that make you think that there was outcome determinative fraud? what you're referring to is the so-called fake elector scheme. and what happened is obviously there's some fake electors who are alleged and actually some who pleaded guilty to having participated in this fraudulent scheme. but there were others who thought what they were doing and being asked to do was just be an alternative slate of

electors if and only if the court system in that state said that that joe biden had not won and donald trump had won. and so they were just an alternative slate. and in pennsylvania, electors insisted on that language. and the trump campaign basically realized, oh, this is going to really hurt us because we, we, we need them to essentially be duped into thinking, oh, no, you're just going to be an alternative slate of electors, but they're going to use it as a fake slate. so that's why you have electors, some who are in on it, some who were they were trying to have be dupes. but no matter what, you shouldn't have pam bondi, who is now the nominee to be or the proposed nominee for the department of justice, to be advocating something that is to which there are no substantive facts to support. >> and neil, the report does say that donald trump knew jack

smith proved beyond a reasonable doubt as part of the elements of the evidence here, that donald trump knew that he lost the election, that everything he was saying about it was not true. >> yeah. >> i mean, and what did donald trump say in response today? he called it a political hit job. i think all that the report shows is that jack smith hit the nail on the head. lawrence. and, you know, i think the report in the end is going to be important. it's going to be important for victims because smith talks about like how the capitol police officers were in shell shock and all the harm that happened to them. i think it's going to be important for history and the eyes of the american people in the world over the decades to come about what happened on january 6th. i think it's important for the tradition of law enforcement as well. it does show, you know, that we are better than some other countries where there wouldn't have been any investigation at all into what happened. but at the end of the day, you have to be left with nothing but a sense of dismay, you know, and there's lots of

blame to go around about why donald trump wasn't brought to justice. it's not just the supreme court's fault, but at the end of the day, trump got away with it. the report makes clear he got away with it. he did it, and he got away with it. >> and andrew, the point about history, this this document is going to be very clear and very plain for historians 100 years from now, 200 years from now, looking at this period. and they will be writing books about this for the next couple of hundred years. this is more valuable in its way than the indictment, which has a more technical flow to it. this really is a document that is going to live a very long time. >> that is true. but that is also why the court that is not yet public, dealing with the classified documents, it's important that that be something that the public see. and it's also important that the underlying evidence remain intact, so that people who are conspiracy theorists and

obviously donald trump, who is he saying it's all a witch hunt and it's all fake? it's important for history that that material be intact. one way to do that is to make sure and for the department in these remaining days, to make sure that other parts of the government have that information, whether it's congress or the courts or the state system, so that for history there is a preserved record for everyone to be able to look at and debate what happened. >> andrew weissmann and neal katyal, thank you both very much for joining us tonight. >> thank you. you're welcome. >> thank you. you're welcome. >> we'll be right still congested? —nope! —uh oh. new mucinex 2-in-1 saline nasal spray. spray goodbye. aaaaaaahhhhh! new mucinex 2-in-1 saline nasal spray with a gentle mist and innovative power-jet. spray goodbye to congestion. it's comeback season! these sheets feel amazing! i added downy ultra soft to the wash! i wish we could get out of dinner with ben and kate. it's them... hi, oh you have to cancel!

downy ultra soft is not only luxuriously soft and fresh, it breathes life into your laundry. downy ultra soft is not only luxuriously soft and fresh, have you always had trouble with your weight? same. discover the power of wegovy®. with wegovy®, i lost 35 pounds. and some lost over 46 pounds. and i'm keeping the weight off. i'm reducing my risk. wegovy® is the only weight-management medicine proven to reduce risk of major cardiovascular events such as death, heart attack, or stroke in adults with known heart disease and obesity. don't use wegovy® with semaglutide or glp-1 medicines, or in children under 12. don't take if you or your family had mtc, men 2, or if allergic to it. tell your provider if you plan to have surgery or a procedure, are breastfeeding, pregnant, or plan to be. stop taking and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or any of these allergic reactions. serious side effects may include pancreas inflammation and gallbladder problems. call your prescriber if you have any of these symptoms.

wegovy® may cause low blood sugar in people with diabetes, especially if you take medicines to treat diabetes. call your prescriber about vision changes, if you feel your heart racing while at rest, or if you have mental changes. depression or thoughts of suicide may occur. common side effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, stomach pain, flu, or upset, headache, feeling tired, dizzy, or bloated, gas, and heartburn. some side effects lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. with wegovy®, i'm losing weight, i'm keeping it off, and i'm lowering my cv risk. ask your prescriber about wegovy®. me. but replacing your windshield doesn't have to be. go to safelite. com and we can come to you. sick. our highly trained techs can replace your windshield where you are, even if that's right in your driveway. have a good day, i

love you. safelite makes it easy. go to safelite.com and easy. go to safelite.com and schedule a replacement how are folks 60 and older having fun these days? family cookouts! ♪♪ playing games! ♪♪ dancing in the par... (high pitched sound) (high pitched sound) (high pitched sound)

they'll discuss his achievements, his legacy and what's ahead for the country. the last word thursday at ten on msnbc. when you need brutal honesty, when you need answers

first thing in the morning, when you need to go deep inside washington and hear from someone who's been there. you need your morning joe. weekdays at six. only on msnbc. >> donald trump plans to reshape the u.s. government. >> democrats have wasted no time in laying the groundwork to fight the incoming trump administration. >> donald trump wants a presidential cabinet full of loyalists. >> don't miss the weekend, saturday and sunday mornings at 8:00 on msnbc. >> programing note on thursday, i'll be interviewing president biden in the oval office for what will be his final interview. you'll see that interview on this program thursday night. that is tonight's last word. the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle starts now. >> tonight, trump's controversial pick to run the pentagon is now on track for likely confirmation after being grilled at a senate hearing, then los angeles on edge as dangerous winds fuel fears of new wildfires. the