tv Deadline White House MSNBC December 2, 2021 1:00pm-3:00pm PST
>> ben collins, we will talk you on nbc news now at 5:00 at a different angle. that's it for hallie jackson reports. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. ♪♪ hi there, everyone, it's 4:00 in new york. just in this moment we are in the greatest threat to american democracy is homegrown the author of trump's big lie be that met by the steeliness of the 1/6 committee the moment has been met by a number of federal judge who is see clearly that the insurrection was an attack on the precedent of the u.s. f t.
politico writes, judge jackson quote described the actions of donald trump and others as a key driver of what would ultimately become the violent assault that left 140 police officers injured and four members of the mob dead adding quote jackson termly referred to trch's remarks when she described the goal of those leading the january 6th rally. she said their efforts deliberately stoked the flames of fear and discontent and explicitly encouraged attendees to go to the capitol to fight for one reason and one reason only, to make sure the certification of the election did not happen. her remarks follow commentary from a different federal judge last month who described one january 6th offender as, quote, a pawn in a game directed and played by people who should know better, the president and his allies in government. together, those rebukes ramp up calls for justice and accountability at this point seem to only be delivered by the january 6th committee.
in the wake of significant developments overnight in their probe inside the inner sanctum of ump from's campaign to overturn the january 6th results, the committee voting to recommend contempt charges again jeffrey clark involved in a pressure campaign to oust his boss jeffrey rosen that was part of a bid to overturn georgia's election results. as questions were circulating when a contempt vote might be put before the house a last-minute offer from clark came to the committee. it is an offer members of the committee are approaching with a degree of skepticism, adam schiff said last night this move could merely amount to more obstruction. he said this, quote, at the 1th hour, clark has agreed to appear before our committee once again, this time to assert a fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. if clark makes the assertion that answering particular questions about the scheme to overturn the election would tend to incriminate him that is a
weighty matter and the committee will soberly assess whether that privilege has been properly invoked. but clark may not make that assertion as a generic matter committee vice chair liz cheney added this on the committee's commitment to pierce the obstructionist blockade by the expresident and his allies. >> mr. character is not excused from testifying simply because president trump is trying to hide behind inapplicable claims of executive privilege. president trump continues to make the same false claims about a solen election with which he has misled millions of americans. these are the same claims he knows provoked violence in the past. he has recently suggested that he wants to debate members of
this committee. this committee's investigation into the violent assault on our capitol on january 6th is not a game. any communications mr. trump has with this committee will be under oath. and if he persists in lying then, he will be accountable under the laws of this great nation and subject to criminal penalties for every false word he speaks. >> she is not messing around. those efforts to hold the disgraced expresident and his team accountable for the january 6th insurrection is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. luke broad butter is back, "new york times" congressional reporter, also msnbc contributor and former congress woman cona edwards is here. and harry litman former u.s. attorney joins us. harry, let me start with you on what jeffrey clark is doing.
on the precipice of being referred for criminal referral he says i will come but i am going to take the fifth. >> give me another chance to make a record so i don't get indicted for criminal contempt. instead of all the half baked privilege claims i am going to take the fifth amendment. adam schiff says, he's a former prosecutor, well and good, but you have to do it question by question. they will sit him down, he will raise his hand, were you working a the department of justice in december of 2020. on advice of counsel, i respectfully decline to answer that question. >> schiff will then try to probe other questions say to him you can't do it in a wholesale way. but the ultimate audience here, nicolle s merrick garland. if he continues to do it generically, schiff and the committee will be apoplectic, but will that make it harder to have a referral and make it look
like he acted with criminal intent? i think it will. i think this is kind of a game, unpleasant for both, but especially for clark. they will play it out saturday behind closed doors. he will generically assert the fifth to every question. and then the full congress will have the hard issue, do we now refer him on a not very good case, because he's invoked fifth rather than crazy claims of privilege. >> can i ask you a question, harry, about what they need clark for? i mean -- because it seems to have narrowed significantly since they have spent hours with then acting ag rosen. they know everything clark did. they have the letter he wanted them to send. it seems that clark is a witness against president trump and that's why they are pursuing him. is that a reasonable analysis? >> exactly. they have everything else, as you say, from donahue and from rosen. they know what he did except there is a big part of the story
where he is first introduced to trump by a pennsylvania member of congress, and then takes all of these phone calls, and they essentially plot this scheme where he's going to take over and he's going to put a gun at the head of jeffrey rosen, which fails miserably. that's the part they can't fill in without either him or trump, that's what they want. >> luke broad water, liz cheney, i understand, and it has been made public, she's done it in full view, is not messing around. she has made her choice. she has chosen to tell the truth about not just what donald trump did on january 6th, but about what donald trump has done every day since then. he is spreading a lie that is, in her view, connected to violence that has taken place and a threat of violence that continues. i want to -- i want to press you on sort of her role. but i also want to play some of
this conversation from the rules committee where congressman raskin was questioning chair monday thompson and vice chair cheney about sort of where they are on the path forward. let's listen to that. >> how many witnesses have been interviewed by the january 6th committee and its staff lawyers? how many have come before it? >> at this point, about 250. >> 250 people have voluntarily come before the committee or answered affirm definitely to a subpoena; is that right? >> that's correct. >> okay. so all the attention is going to a handful of cases of people who are in absolute glorious violation of the law according to the committee, like steve bannon or in this case, jeffrey clark, but the vast majority of the people are cooperating; is that right? >> that's correct stho we anticipate next year we will be ukt canning multiple weeks of
public hearings setting out for the american people in vivid color exactly what happened, every minute of the day, on january 6th, here at the capitol and at the white house and what led to that violent attack. >> so, luke, 250 people have voluntarily come before the committee. we keep pretty close tabs on the deadlines. so we can make some assumptions about who that includes. only people who were super close to the president and his campaign and the events of 1/6 have been subpoenaed. so you have to assume some very inside players already testified. what is your sense of that exchange? and why did it take place? >> yes, so i think that one thing that congressman raskin was trying to do with that conversation is to illustrate how out of step jeffrey clark is with so many other witnesses who were connected to the entire january 6th operation. for instance, we know that
multiple white house officials have come in and testified. would know that even some of the rioters themselves have testified. we know that state officials have testified. so people on different ends of the equation here are all coming in, some voluntarily, some even surprising the committee by reaching out to them to give their witness statements. so they are trying to show that jeff lee clark here -- that they are not on some sort of crazy partisan mission, that they are not just trying to throw people in jail. they are really trying to get to the facts of what happened. so jeffrey clark's obstructionism is more on line with one other person, steve bannon, this is the argument from raskin, that's what they are trying to show there, they are not being unreasonable, they are trying to show how seriously and soberly they are conducting this investigation. >> a, i am still sort of carrying around my baggage from the last four years. i was listening for what the
expresident might have heard in there. i think it's this part. we anticipate next year we will be conducting multiple weeks of public hearings, setting out for the american people in vivid color exactly what happened every minute of the day on january 6th here at the capitol and at the white house and what led to that violent attack. that's going to take place you know where -- on live tv. that's going to take place in roadblock coverage, the kind thing that triggers the expresident like nothing else. >> well, that's right. i think that what you heard from the committee is that they have been pursuing their work very aggressively and vigorously. and i think that they have a lot of the pieces. i mean 250 witnesses, thousands of pages of document. they are putting this puzzle together, and the american people are going to hear everything that the committee has been engaged in over these
last several -- several weeks. and i think that that's really important, because i think that the outliers who refused their testimony -- some of those dots will be put together by the committee in those public hearings. and they really -- these individuals really are outliers in the process as we exchange between jimmy raskin and liz cheney and the chairman show. and i think this is going to be an important moment for the american people to hear about the depth and the breadth of the activities of the former president as he was engaged in what led to january 6th. and it is going to be damning. and yes, it will throw him into an outrage. but maybe that's what we need to see. >> you know, harry, i -- we have -- all four of us have sort of seen the expresident impeached twice. it was a similar thing that liz
is describing here. weeks of public hearings setting out for the american people in vivid color exactly what happened, insert impeach men one, insert impeachment two, now insert the january 6th insurrection on the capitol. i guess what appears to be different here is that mccarthy and mcconnell made this. it is their fault. it is their doing that this is about to happen. and i wonder if you think -- i know trump doesn't really remember farther back than eight minutes. but when you get ready to see this play out on a national stage -- it didn't have to be this way. i mean, there was a bipartisan outside special commission where each party would have subpoena power. it turns out each power does but the only ones representing republicans are liz cheney and adam kinzinger. what do you make of how far they have come over all the obstacles
thrown their way by the two republican leaders in congress? >> they have come a long way, they have done a ton of work. they have a ton of investigators behind the scenes. we hit the colleague light moment, john dean, oliver north. everyone is going to be riveted and watching. sure the republicans at that point will say it is a phony baloney commission, et cetera. but that will be the eighth paragraph of the story. the riveting part will be the actual testimony. and i think at that point, they will be -- they will have considered they made a miscalculation in not playing along and leaving it completely for the democrats -- who, by the way, because of cheney and kinzinger, can say it is bipartisan, et cetera. it is going to be equally
captivating for the american people. >> luke, you will write the stories, you will decide which paragraph goes where. maybe i am hung up on this because we have seen it before. the difference, again, though, is they have interviewed 250 people. they didn't subpoena people from the biden administration, they didn't subpoena anyone from the "new york times" or msnbc. they subpoenaed trump's white house staff, trump's senior campaign staff, they subpoenaed trump's rally organizers, they subpoenaed trump's chiefs of disinformation who spread the word that it is going to be lit or whatever the loons said about coming to washington on 1/6. they have also subpoenaed some of the rioters whose mission same was to hang mike pence. there is no way that when this production plays out on tv it will look like anything other than team trump telling the story. >> right. you mentioned organizers have come in. we know that mark meadows is now engaging with the committee. we know -- you know, and that's
perhaps the highest ranking person in the trump white house other than the president himself. that sends also a message to anyone else who is thinking about standing in defiance of the committee that there is another way, and there is an example of not doing that. we know dan scavino's schedule, cache patel's schedule to come in. they are getting many of their most soughtafter witnesses to come in and testify. i think the reason they want jeffrey clark so badly is because he was so intimately involved in spreading some of these false claims, including -- he made an inquiry into this weather china could hack voting machines through thermometers. he wanted a letter to georgia state officials to encourage them to put forward an alternative slate of electors to elect president trump instead of president biden, who won the state. and i think they are interested in whether he knew and whether
trump knew that these statements were false and chose to perpetrate them anyway or whether they really believed them. i think they really want to try to understand his inner mindset as he was doing the things he was doing. >> and i think, donna, the smoking gun that certainly signals that they already know that trump knew it was all b.s. is the physical notes taken by mr. donahue from the rosen/trump conversation where trump says according to the verbate notes, just declare the election corrupt, me and my allies will do the rest. they just wanted a designation. they new the d.o.j. wouldn't couldn't announce fraud and get evidence. because they knew they couldn't find any. rudy giuliani was getting laughed out of every court he
walked into. he was "snl." "snl" was the reality. what do you think about where they are and what they will be able to do when as liz cheney said they have weeks and weeks of public hearings? >> i think that we haven't been able to see -- and it's really different from the impeachment hearings is that here you have a set of real insiders in that white house. and we don't know what snippets of conversations people heard. we don't know how they were engaged in the -- around the white house. and all of that is going to come out in these public hearings. so this is why i think it's really important. and i view this as very different. although i thought the impeachment hearings were serious and important, this is different because we have insiders like we did not have for those hearings. and we will be able to hear firsthand from people who are -- as you said, they are trump people. that is -- you know, those are
the witnesses. that will be the testimony. and i don't think that that's something that the american people have heard before. and it will be really important to getting to the truth. >> yeah. harry, i mean, you think of the damage that don mcgahn did to donald trump in volume two of the muller report. that was one witness, one witness telling the story. he became the single narrator, i think one of the most quoted people in the two volume report. you have got 250 potential don mcgahns. i do though want to get your thoughts on when we started with, judge amy berman jackson, the rebukes from the federal judges. the cases aren't as well-known so we don't always shine a light on them. but in terms of the echo of what you hear coming from the congressional committee with their eyes on the evidence, and congressional committee with their eyes on the perpetrators and the evidence, it is almost identical. >> on your first point, 250 witnesses, all on paper, lawyers
standing up, from a prosecutor or lawyer's point of view having the people stands up and swear. you can feel their reluctance. you can see them sweat. see people being truthful and others grudging. that's night and day. amy berman jackson, she's doing this because she wants to meet out fair justice to the participants. it obviously hits home and she has a secondary audience here, not the committee, but merrick garld. she's saying all right i will give this guy his 30 days but it would be unfair if you didn't take it all the way to the top try the figure out the guilt of the actual organizers here. you can bet they are not going to roll over on it but make sure that message is heard very clearly especially at the department of justice. >> donna will stick around. when we come back, the white house is today saying that
nothing is off the table when it comes to fighting and controlling the spread of the coronavirus and the new variant that emerged this week. the president today outlining what is next in the fight against the pandemic. we will bring you that plus the upcoming senate primary in ohio. you haven't seen much of it. it is a battle as to who is the most trumpy in that field. and a new and trying way to make the points that gotten under donald trump's very, very thin skin. we will show it to you. later on in the show the potential of overturning of roe versus weighed and how it could put an end to the perception of the supreme court as independent and apolitical body. it could reshape the approach of the country's highest court and midterm elections. all of that and more coming up after the break of don't go anywhere. anywhere
okay, we're not gonna ask for discounts on floor models, demos or displays. shopping malls can be a big trigger for young homeowners turning into their parents. you ever think about the storage operation a place like this must rely on? -no. they just sell candles, and they're making overhead? you know what kind of fish those are? -no. -eh, don't be coy. [ laughs ] [ sniffs, clears throat ] koi fish. it can be overwhelming. think a second. have we seen this shirt before? progressive can't save you from becoming your parents. but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto with us. but you know what? i'm still gonna get it. ♪ ♪
there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. - san francisco can have criminal justice reform and public safety. but district attorney chesa boudin is failing on both. - the safety of san francisco is dependent upon chesa being recalled as soon as possible. - i didn't support the newsom recall but this is different. - chesa takes a very radical perspective and approach to criminal justice reform, which is having a negative impact on communities of color. - i never in a million years thought that my son, let alone any six-year-old, would be gunned down in the streets of san francisco and not get any justice. - chesa's failure has resulted in increase in crime against asian americans. - the da's office is in complete turmoil at this point.
- for chesa boudin to intervene in so many cases is both bad management and dangerous for the city of san francisco. - we are for criminal justice reform. chesa's not it. i'm 77 years young, still going strong. recall chesa boudin now. diabetes is not going to slow me down, thanks to my dexcom g6. this little wearable sends my glucose numbers right to my phone or receiver. and the arrow tells me which way i'm heading and how fast. so it's easier for me to keep my glucose in range. and the more time i spend in range, the more i can do. if you're on medicare, learn more at dexcom.com.
my plan i am announcing today pulls no punches in the fight against covid-19. it is a plan i think should unite us. we knew there would be cases of this omicron here in the united states. and it's here. but we have the best tools, the best vaccines in the world, and the best medicine and the best scientists in the world. and we are going to fight this variant with science and speed, not chaos and confusion. >> the biden administration saying it is pulling out all the stops with the new plan today to battle covid with maximum protection for americans ahead of what is expected to be a surge in cases this winter, potentially exacerbated by a new variant. the governor of colorado just announced the third confirmed
u.s. case of omicron. that's hours after the second was reported in minnesota. president biden's plan includes a nationwide campaign for booster shots by expanding pharmacy available, launching outreach campaigns to seniors, opening hundreds of clinics for families to get their shots together. the plan also aims to further avoid school closures with new testing policies, vaccine encourage member and a timely process for vaccines for kids under 5. ever ring up procedures making at home kidd tests free for private americans and at health centers and conclusion. tightening requirements for incoming travelers and extanneding mask wearing on public transportation. joining our analysis, dr. redler. also joining us, jonathan lemere, the host of msnbc's "way too early" and also an msnbc
political analyst. donna is still with news take me inside this speech by this president who has done more to fight covid, done more to protect people, done more get vaccines into people's arms but whose approval ratings i am sure are disheartening to him and his inner circle. >> yeah, nicolle there is no question about that. this is a president who was elected -- he knows this, he talks about it. the central charge of his presidency was to fight the pandemic. and by any measure he is signature tantly more successful than his predecessor. the vaccine rollout earlier this year was an unqualified success. cases really fell into the spring and early summer. it is and something that the white house, you know, has put a lot of time, energy, and money into. but things did change. the delta variant -- us what officials i talk to all time acknowledge it took them by surprise a little bit. they regret that fourth of july
ceremony when the president said that the nation was declaring its independence from the virus. the delta cases are still surging throughout the country. not as bad as the peak but it is ticking up in recent week. in fact this covid winter strategy the president unveiled today was in the works before this omicron variant showed up in the united states. it emphasizes testing, travel regulations, puts more of an emphasis on vaccines and getting your booster. that anyone six months from their second shot should do so. aides recognize this won't be easy. there are huge buckets of the country that are unvaccinated. the new variant is believed to be very transmissible. they recognized that indeed his approval rating is directly linked to how he is perceived to be managing the virus. the president himself said look the buck stops with me. they recognize that will be the case. they believe this could be a
couple of difficult months ahead before things start to improve and they are asking all americans to do their part. >> i want to get to the policies. and i want to get to the science. i am stuck on this thing, donna, as a former staffer. president biden has done more not just than his predecessor, but he has done more than most people thought was possible, in surging supply. i think everything in this country can get a shot within five miles of where they live. there is a, you know, a vaccine tracker, i got my son who is newly eligible his second shot on the cdc website. the answer may not lie in more announcements. it may lie in sitting with people who have despair, anxiety, who are worried, who don't know if it will ever end, don't know they are going back to the office, who don't know if their parents are safe in a nursing home? is there a part of this that doesn't require a policy solution but joe biden being joe biden and sitting with people in
all of their angst? >> we do have to get to a circumstance -- i think and the president acknowledged this in his remarks today where we have to break that barrier of people who are not getting vaccinated. i mean we have been pretty much stuck at the same percentage for several weeks now. and the real key to getting out of this, and the president is expressing this to the american people. and he has to probable pea keep doing it over and over again. is to get vaccinated. what i was struck by today is that we saw a president that is really in command of what is happening in the country around covid and people's access to what they need. i saw a real commander there. and i think that that was important, especially given that at this time last year we were watching basically flailing from the former president of the united states when it came to a covid response. so i look from january until
now, where president biden, over and over again, has done the things that it takes for us to be able to get out of this. but the american people, that 40% who are stuck not vaccinated, simply have to get the vaccine. and we have got to figure out who the right mess i thinkers are. maybe it is the president and i don't know who else, to make sure that those americans get vaccinated. >> dr. redlener, i want to ask you about the plan but i want to understand your assessment of where we are right now. i have got sort of this snapshot but i am not sure what kind of picture it paints, cases are pretty flat. we are about 96,000 new cases a day, which is much higher than who dr. fauci said was a sustainable level for the country. hospitalizes are up 16%. it may be known as our preomicron baseline if we head in that direction. testing is up.
i would love to understand what that is about. deaths are down 10%. but we are at the precipice of an unknown, a new variant. tell me how you see this. >> absolutely, nicolle. we are dealing with an incredibly uncertain situation. yes deaths have been slightly down. but yesterday there were almost 2,000 people in america that died of covid. you know, this is a classic case of, you know, half empty or half full glass. i don't think we can tell much where we are going to be two to four weeks from now. we have to wait and see. and omicron adds a whole new dimension to this with two new cases announced today. one of the cases, the person who lives in minnesota, had just attended a massive exhibition in new york city, where there were 53,000 people there. the other thing is, the guy in minnesota was fully vaccinated and had the booster shot.
so we are going to see some breakthrough cases. we don't know a lot about the behavior of omicron, will it be more contagious? it might well be. will it be more deadly? we don't know yet. will it be resistant to the vaccines that are out there. they might be. that we will know some the next ten days or so when the laboratory tests are concluded. unfortunately, you know, those who are wishing, myself included, for a soon ending to this catastrophic pandemic -- i am afraid we are just going to have to be waiting a while. i don't see that this is going to go away this the next two to three years. we are going to have to just prepare ourselves for the long haul. and there is more stuff that can be done. i was impressed with what the president announced today. i am impressed with how the president speaks to the american people. we needed that honesty and transparency. but what the president cannot totally control is, of course, the biology, the behavior of a
very wiley and dangerous virus. there are more tools in our quiver here which include something i have been advocating for. i don't think anyone should be allowed an an airplane domestic or international, or a train, without being able to prove they have been vaccinated. to me, that's really the only way, in addition to testing, that we are going to get better control over the situation we currently have. nicolle. >> dr. redlener, can i ask a stupid question. how do we know -- we know there are three cases of the new variant, omicron. is every test analyzed in a way that determines what variant the infection comes. >> no. >> is it responsible to say we have three and that's it? how do we know? >> yeah, we don't know. the test that you take to see if
you have covid don't tell you if you have a variant or not if you are positive. that information comes from sequencing. people have to, in a special laboratory, look carefully at the particular case, analyze it, and see whether it actually fits the genetic criteria for being this new variant with the incumbent mutations. so, yeah, there is a lot of information that we need, and a lot of it is being assessed as we speak here. but we are still in the beginning of this, nicolle, in this period of uncertainty for the foreseeable future. >> what is your sense about the white house sort of not just still back to dealing with the unknown and back to dealing with a new variant that has people, even the experts, the smartest people we get to talk to ask sort the same questions we have been asking the whole time. what is the level of
determination to really do what donna described, get to the holdouts and get everyone at a minimum vaccinated and or boosted? >> first, i willic approximate -- i will pick up on the doctor's point there. the white house has more tools in the quiver. they didn't expand vaccine mandates. he left the door open for that. i pushed jeffrey designs earlier today, i asked him whether there would be a requirement for vaccination for domestic travel, airplanes trains and such. he side stepped it. that's something else they haven't taken off the table. there is a sense of determination. also frustration. we have seen that from the president. less today. he was trying to project a sense of calm, reassuring the nation. but we have seen the anger slip through several times, he is dumb founded that people refuse to get the shot. that is part of this, too. again, they are trying to unleash a full-court press here for people to get their first shots, boosters, to try to
console them. some top-down messaging, and much more on the community level, doctors, public figures, trusted community leaders telling people you need to get this shot for the safety of yourself, your loved ones, otherwise. today there were more vaccinationed in arms since may, the white house reported. they think fears of the new variant are driving that. >> amazing. jonathan and doctor, thank you for spending time with us on this story. trump meddling in the 2022 primary fight. turning a crowded ohio race into some sort of sycophantic loyalty test to him, making it about him. is he helping though? or is he helping the democrats? next. elping the democrats next of snowcovered peaks. but the thing they'll remember forever? grandpa coming out of retirement to give a few ski lessons. the time for getting back together is now.
find it on vrbo. bye mom. my helpers abound, i'll need you today. our sleigh is now ready, let's get on our way. a mountain of toys to fulfill many wishes. must be carried across all roads and all bridges. and when everyone is smiling and having their fun i can turn my sleigh north because my job here is done. it's not magic that makes more holiday deliveries to homes in the us than anyone else, it's the hardworking people of the united states postal service. do you take aspirin? plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. new vazalore is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers
than plain aspirin. vazalore is designed to help protect... releasing aspirin after it leaves your stomach... where it is absorbed to give you the benefits of life saving aspirin... to help prevent another heart attack or stroke. heart protection with your stomach in mind. try new liquid-filled vazalore. aspirin made amazing! wayfair's cyber monday sale is on now! try new liquid-filled score unbelievable savings with our biggest sale ever! like ge appliances up to 40% off rugs up to 80% off and lighting up to 65% off. plus get bonus savings with a wayfair credit card and free shipping on thousands of products. don't miss our cyber monday happening now through november 29th. only at wayfair.com.
so we are about to play you something that donald trump really really does not want you to see. it is a campaign ad attacking ohio senate candidate a man named jd vance for his position on trump. >> jd vansz in his own words. >> i am a never trump guy. i never liked him. as somebody who doesn't like trump, i might have to hold my nose and vote for hillary clinton. i didn't vote for trump because i can't stomach trump. i think he's obnoxious. outrageous and offensive. >> on twitter vance called trump
quote reprehensible, an idiot, and vaps loves mitt romney. >> i am a never trump guy. >> that ad was made by the right wing group club for growth. it's an attack ad out obviously -- maybe not obviously, but that's what it is. hitting vance for his past anti-trump comments. politico is reporting that the club called for growth and tried to get them to talk down the ad. trump is worried it could hurt him if he i think withed a 2024 comeback bid. the message to designed to hurt vance. trump told the club for growth the commercials could have the effect of driving down his popularity in ohio. prior to the call, trump had been stewing over the ads and campaign to those in his circle. maybe we will play it every day.
joining our conversation, former obama campaign manager and msnbc analyst david plet plouffe. donna is still here. >> this has to do with donald trump not liking anybody to say anything bad about donald trump. it also happens to probably not be great for jd vance for the republicans in quoio to be reminded at his core he was repelled, revolted by donald trump when he first saw him and that anything he says now is a lie. usually doesn't help but maybe it does now in this gop. what do you make of trump's involvement as it pertains just to him? >> nicolle, nobody watches more political ads in the history of the country than donald trump. it's amazing to me. he's so easy to trigger and to reach. yeah, i -- first of all, i think
a big part of '22 will be -- my hope is the political environment is the democrat improves, i think it might. we have a long 11 months between now and then. but if the wrong people come up off the these primaries, the rumpiest people -- we this a year ago republicans should have easily taken over the senate. but they had people who couldn't win elections. what is amazing is you have seen an entire party bow down to this person who doesn't care a single bit about any of them. it is a remarkable thing, it is all about him. the other thing i would say is i am curious to see how democrats utilize and weaponize this. basically, donald trump is attacking mechb mccarthy, mcconnell -- you can't trust him. but republicans need him to turn out and pacifically put them into power. i think the trump thing is super
complicated. but listen, every day he proves to us. yesterday was worse on the narcissism scale, basically exposing joe biden in the debate. this is a big senate race. i am interested to see -- tim ryan could be a strong democratic candidate. can we put ohio back at least within shouting distance towards becoming a state that's kettive. >> i admired hill billy he willgy. i read it. it is one of the sort of overeducated republicans who is playing a trump act light to win this primary. what do you make of the combination of cynicism and -- i don't know. just cynicism? >> well, it is going to be another test of whether the truth matters at all. you see mark meadows basically writing in his book that trump tested positive. now he's saying my own book is not true. jd vance is in a long line. there are dozens of them unaring
this time who are claiming they were always for trump despite their own words saying others. whether there will be accountability, i have questions about that, whether there will be accountability. but i think it is a fascinating test. i think that probably -- if there is real money behind it is a very effective ad in the republican primary. >> donna, i want your thoughts on this not as a phenomenon because i think david is right, it is what it is. but is it right for the democrats to point out the things like this, where jd vance said he hated trump over and over again? >> the voters hare going to make the most difference are going to be the independent voters. i think any time democrats are able to highlight the contrasts and hypocrisy of some of these folks who actually will survive those primaries is going to be a
feather in the cap for democratic. i think what probably doesn't surprise me but it's laughable is that most politicians who are thin skinned don't actually show the public their thin skin except donald trump. i mean he puts it on full display. any time that they can get under the skin of donald trump, custom apparently is not very he had -- -- very difficult to do, democrats are going to be able to score points perhaps with independent voters going into a general election. >> weep keep of watching. great points from both of you, david, donna, thank you for spending time with us today. the grift was always part of his plan. the expresident fought tooth and nail to hang on to his d.c. hotel. there may have been 100 million reasons why that was the case. "washington post" with look at how the sale could turn out financially for donald trump. that's next.
the disgraced ex-president is unloading that d.c. hotel that became synonymous with his eagerness to exploit his office for personal and financial gain. it's becoming millions of dollars richer in the process of doing so. "the washington post" is reporting that he will be selling the lease of the old post office pavilion, which houses the trump hotel, for a record $375 million, despite the fact that the hotel amassed millions in losses over the
years, leaves more than $100 million in potential profits for the ex-president when he signs away the property, one that came to symbolize his willingness to mix politics with business in ways no other president has. leading to numerous legal and ethical brawls with democrats and government watchdogs, profiting off his elected office is nothing new for the former president, whose business reportedly made $2.4 billion while he was in office. he even joked about it earlier in his career. here he is in a 1980 interview. >> if you lost your fortune today, what would you do tomorrow? >> maybe i'd run for president. i don't know. >> one way or another, he admits to everything. let's bring in one of the reporters on that "washington post" story, david, it's an incredible piece. take me through your reporting. >> well, we know this bid exists. the trump organization has signed a bid to sell their hotel for $375 million to a
miami-based investment company. deal isn't closed yet. it could still fall apart but we wanted to figure out, okay, what's trump's profit out of this? what does he actually walk away with and our best guess is about $100 million. that's remarkable because the hotel has been losing money hand over fist, millions and millions of dollars, since it opened but we figured out a lot of other people think they can make money where trump failed and they're willing to pay top dollar for that building and that location. >> the story talks about this, all the legal challenges, all the failures, really, of ethics groups and watchdogs and congressional oversight, the emoluments cases, what is sort of the takeaway here? i mean, norms were not enough to hold donald trump in, and you know, it turns out everything seedy that happened, most of the planning meetings took place at this hotel. >> yeah. the one thing i've always said about trump is that he exploits honor systems. he finds a place where people respect the rules or follow the rules, not because they're going
to be punished if they step out of line but because everybody does it and you all follow the rules together and he breaks the rules and he gets a huge advantage because no one can comprehend anybody doing that. owning his hotel in washington, doing business with the people he was also interacting with as president, that, you know, there was no law in place that said he couldn't do that, and so he did it, and he waited for the system to catch up, and frankly, it never did. there were all these lawsuits about the emoluments clause where the constitution said you couldn't do business with foreign governments. basically, the courts took four years to even figure out if those lawsuits could exist and they didn't even get to the phase of trying to figure out if they could tell him to stop and then he left office and it all went away so to me, it's one of the best examples of trump's time as president, that he just violates these rules, these norms that everybody else followed, and says, okay, stop me. and nobody could. >> what is the -- and i want to put some more sort of numbers up here. we're covering the grift.
jared and ivanka made hundreds of millions of dollars while trump was in office. to your point, there are, i think, half a dozen hatch act violations that have been chronicled after they left office. what -- as someone who sort of covers this intersection of ethical exploits and trump's willingness to trample norms, what does it say about the structure of our laws? are you surprised there isn't more attention paid to reforming them with trump chomping at the bit to run again? >> i am a little bit. there were things, you know, very big things like keeping the hotel and doing business with foreign governments while he was president and there were really small things like trump charging the secret service to guard him at his own hotels, like trump awarding the -- briefly awarding the g7 summit to his own golf resort. that were not technically illegal because people thought, well, a president would never do that and i thought maybe the rules would change, but obviously, they haven't. so, i don't think if trump is re-elected in 2024, i don't see there being a legal bar to him doing the same things again.
>> do you think that in sort of covering this and revealing all of the ways that he exploited and profited from the presidency that there is any sort of failure at the congressional level to hold him to account? you talked about the court cases taking a long time. in some ways, a congressional investigations were stymied just as successfully by the trump family. >> yeah, and i think congress -- that was a really remarkable thing for me, honestly. i thought when the democrats won congress in 2018, i thought, we're going to see some documents. remember, the old post office where trump has his hotel, that's a federally-owned property. you and i, the taxpayers, own it and so trump has to provide all kinds of documents to the federal government about it. i thought, well, at least we'll see that. but the way congress handled it was so typical. i feel like everybody has to learn the lesson about trump for themselves, and so for them, it was like, well, we're going to write him a letter. we'll write the trump general services administration, write them a letter and when they
didn't respond to the letter, we'll write him another letter and we were like, what will you do if they don't ever respond to your letters? what's the hammer that brings them into line? and the answer was, nothing. some hard questions at a hearing where they may not even show up. so, congress -- at least the people who oversaw that hotel were completely toothless. >> it's amazing. it's an incredible body of reporting. this just adds to it. david, thank you so much for spending time with us to talk about it. the next hour of "deadline white house" starts after a very short break. adline white house" stas rtafter a very short break. tta take off. you downloaded the td ameritrade mobile app? yeah, actually i'm taking one last look at my dashboard before we board... and you have thinkorswim mobile- -so i can finish analyzing the risk on this position. you two are all set. choose the app that fits your investing style. ♪♪ as i observe investors balance risk and reward, i see one element securing portfolios, time after time. gold. your strategic advantage.
like many people with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's disease, i was there. be right back. but my symptoms were keeping me from where i needed to be. so i talked to my doctor and learned humira is the #1 prescribed biologic for people with uc or crohn's disease. and humira helps people achieve remission that can last, so you can experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. learn how abbvie could help you save on humira.
earn about covid-19, with humira, remission is possible. the more questions we have. the biggest question now, what's next? what will covid bring in six months, a year? if you're feeling anxious about the future, you're not alone. calhope offers free covid-19 emotional support. call 833-317-4673, or live chat at calhope.org today.
thing about all this is the solution is at the ballot box, and this issue, the ability to make your own decision about your pregnancy, is igniting women around this country, and not just democratic women. republican women, independent women, 80% of people in this country believe these decisions should be made by women, not by politicians, and this is an issue, i believe and certainly hope, is going to energize voters in the midterm elections so we can begin to right the course. >> hi again, everyone, it's 5:00 in new york. the absolutely is at the ballot box. that attitude by abortion rights advocates like cecile richards in the wake of the supreme court signaling that it may very well be on the verge of overturning roe vs. wade is now poised to potentially upend the entire american political landscape. from the "washington post," quote, the volatile issue of abortion catapulted to the center of the political debate wednesday. after the supreme court signalled it would uphold a law
undermining roe vs. wade, creating the potential for the polarizing matter to reshape the electoral battlefield. democrats immediately signalled they would aim to make abortion rights a central focus in next year's midterm elections, where their prospects have been viewed as dim. the central question now, according to the "post," would wednesday's bombshell supreme court argument where it indicated it was prepared to sharply cut abortion rights energized democrats after decades when the issue has been a more powerful motivator for the right. republicans fear that the achievement of a decades-long goal of their base will spark a backlash that stops their momentum heading into the midterms. as one gop operative put it, it's one big flare-up that could derail what could be a 2010 level victory next year for the party in the movement. quote, republicans and
operatives in the party, i don't think they're ready. they better get ready before this decision comes out, that operative said. republicans have good reason to worry. poll after poll after poll, for years and years, showed that the gop's anti-abortion position now is out of step with voters, including their own. the quinnipiac poll from november shows 63% of americans agree with the 1973 roe vs. wade decision. that 63% includes more than a third of republicans. and as for the supreme court, a decision to uphold the mississippi law and overturn roe vs. wade could very well represent the death knell of the perception that the court is some sort of apolitical body. it could reshape the democrats' entire approach around the country's high court. it is what justice sonia sotomayor warned about. >> this newest ban that mississippi has put in place, the six-week ban, the senate sponsor said, we're doing it
because we have new justices on the supreme court. will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the constitution and its reading are just political acts? i don't see how it is possible. >> i don't see how it is possible. dana millbank in the "washington post" puts it like this. quote, public opinion has not changed. the science has not fundamentally changed. no new legal theory has been promulgated. the only difference is the court now has a majority hell bent on settling scores in the culture wars, a looming post-roe political backlash is where we start this hour. congresswoman madeleine dean of pennsylvania is here. she's a member of the judiciary committee. also joining us, brian fallon, executive director of the
progressive court group demand justice, and erin carmen is here, senior correspondent for "new york" magazine and coauthor of "notorious rbg." i want to start with you. this is not an original point, it's one made by my friend, john heilemann, yesterday but it's so striking and it's such a proof point of what justice sotomayor was getting at yesterday. when roe vs. wade was decided in 1973, it was a 7-2 decision. at the time, six justices were nominated by republicans. rehnquist, berger, brennan, stewart, black burn, and powell. three by democrats. in the decision of 7-2, it included the republicans. this court, there is no analysis, there is no court watcher, there isn't anybody, anybody, who thinks that any of the justices appointed by republicans are going to oppose the mississippi law. what does that say to you about this supreme court? >> well, it's sad for me.
as somebody who is a student of the law and somebody who upholds the supreme court as the highest law, of course, of our nation, but really, it should be the most fundamental set of constitutional scholars here above politics, above the stench, as justice sotomayor so wisely said. it's a very depressing day when i heard some of the arguments around the fundamental right to abortion care. let's remember what we're talking about. we're talking about healthcare, and i speak not as a politician, but as a human being, as a woman. abortion services are serious -- a serious part of our healthcare. i remind people of a day that my mother-in-law suffered. my mother-in-law was a little girl in scranton in 1932. she was the sixth child. her mother became pregnant in the '30s in scranton, catholic scranton, with a seventh child. the doctors knew the child would be stillborn and they warned
that the mother could die in childbirth. that mother and that family had no choice and you can imagine what the sad result was. the baby was stillborn. and the mother died. orphaning six children. we will return to those days. texas is likely to return to those days with a six-week abortion ban. the mississippi law is unconstitutional. that's what i say. it is unconstitutional, and these justices know it. >> erin, the comments by the liberal justices were so haunting, because they acknowledge what the congresswoman is talking about. they acknowledge their defeat on this right. but it was so fascinating to hear justice sotomayor say, what if we started looking at other rights, first amendment rights, second amendment rights? no one thinks that would ever happen. what does yesterday's performance by the justices say to you?
>> so, i think justice sotomayor did what she could to both make a moral, constitutional, medical, social case for abortion rights, but it had the feeling of futility. you had the feeling that you were listening to an incredible dissent get crafted. instead, the argument was dominated by kavanaugh and barrett making it clear that they were prepared to do precisely what they were put on the court to do, which is to undermine women's fundamental rights, the rights of pregnant people, and i think that there was some question about how we would get here. there was never any question that this was the goal, but i think it took a lot of people by surprise just how quickly we got here, so i think there was a feeling among the liberal justices, i have never heard stephen breyer that angry. there was this feeling of despair, and they were kind of throwing any argument that they could against the wall, but as you say, there was this feeling of inevitability that an incremental attack on abortion
rights that has -- that began the day after roe v. wade and has been a political motivator for so many republicans and the idea that there would be also this purity test, this litmus test, is what led us to the kavanaughs and the barretts of the world so we had this feeling of suddenly this incremental approach has given way to the mask slipping and the justices are hardly even pretending that their goal is anything but to undermine abortion rights and make it illegal in at least half of the states as a starting point. and it may not end there. >> yeah, it's a starting point. i mean, i think that's what's so grim, if you view reproductive freedoms as justice sotomayor described them as a right. which i think polls bear out, a vast majority of americans, including a plurality of republican women, do as well. i want to -- i want to talk about the politics, but i don't want to move away from what
happens next. congresswoman, you made that clear and i want to show this is, i think, what most court watchers thinking the best case scenario might be, that roe vs. wade is simply overturned in the 26 states that have declared their intent to do so. if you live in louisiana, you'll drive 666 miles to receive reproductive healthcare. you live in florida, you'll drive 575 miles. in texas, you'll drive 542 miles and in mississippi, you'll drive 495 miles, and access to reproductive healthcare is a -- not something that people with a ton of privilege have to worry about so much, but traveling those distances disproportionately impacts women with less access to healthcare to begin with, often women of color. what do you make of that new normal in the united states of america? >> i'm sorry, was that for me? >> yes, congresswoman. >> yeah, thank you. that's exactly right. some of the obstacles that you
point out, whether it's a waiting period or a distance that you would have to travel, permission slips, things like that, or forcing a woman to go through different procedures, but the distance to travel, we know exactly what that's about. that is making the disadvantaged more disadvantaged. making healthcare services really the right of the government to decide. it's their choice to decide whether or not people of less means, women of fewer means, will have full healthcare protection. it's unconscionable, and it will be such a patchwork. my own state of pennsylvania, year after year, in session after session, has brought forward restricting bills on abortion. i'm sure they'd be delighted, the republican majority, would be delighted to bring forward another bill sponsored by a woman, no less, to restrict the rights to abortion, especially for people who are poor or women of color. it's unconscionable. we should be so far beyond this. one of the things that struck me
yesterday was justice amy coney barrett's set of comments about safe haven, and i think some of your authors on this panel wrote about that. oh, it's safe haven. if the woman or the child doesn't want the pregnancy, safe haven will allow her to just relinquish maternal rights and be on with it. what a cavalier and really irresponsible, unconscionable thing to say, and this is from a justice sitting on the supreme court. we should be well beyond this at this point. this is politics. these justices are acting as pawns of the former president and what a sad day it will be for all of us if somehow they overturn roe v. wade. >> brian, the plot twist here is that the politics stink for the right. i mean, bloomberg is reporting that a recent survey by the dccc found that the message that republican candidates would seek to ban abortion was the strongest line of attack against
republican candidates. the worst thing you can say about a republican right now in 2021 is that they'll ban abortion. amy walter is a wise political voice. i want to play her comments on the bulwark podcast about just how motivating this issue could be. >> if ultimately what we get to is a situation where there is no constitutional right, and each and every state, then, makes its own rules on this, every single governor's race in the country is going to be a referendum on this issue. as well as the debates in congress. we are going to get an entire community of voters, most of whom -- that's not fair, not most of whom, but many of whom have never lived in a world without roe v. wade, to become engaged on this. and i do think it is going to be a -- an incredible motivating tool, not just for democrats
writ large but in terms of voters who may not even be particularly engaged in politics. >> brian fallon, what do you think? >> i agree with amy. i think there's sort of two categories of people on the right that are making a judgment about the potential for a backlash here if they do overturn roe or even if they just simply leave roe in tatters but uphold the mississippi ban. i think one group of people, and i would include in it certain justices like justice clarence thomas, justice alito, i think they're almost licking their chops, hoping there's a backlash. they're so convinced and self-righteous about this issue, and there's a desire to sort of troll the left and relish the backlash that might happen, that there's a group of people that i think genuinely are looking at it that way. then there's a group of people, i think, the political operatives in the republican party, that think this might be -- that the backlash is unlikely to be as severe as people like amy are predicting, and you have heard some of that
in the last 24 hours. you've heard people say, well, in 2016, you didn't see the supreme court be a motivating issue for democratic voters and all really on the line then because donald trump was able to end up picking three justices in his four-year term, so if they weren't motivated then, what's going to motivate them now? and i think that's foolish. the idea of the hypothetical of roe being taken away versus the reality of it being taken away, i think, is going to provide sea change. we've seen polling. when we did polling during kavanaugh and amy coney barrett, you found a majority of voters supported roe v. wade but they were skeptical that the worst case scenario would happen. if the supreme court pulls the rug out from under those people that are somewhat complacent about the status of roe and they provide that banner headline that roe's been overturned, i think you're going to see an awakening that people in the republican party are not braced for. >> you and i worked on opposite sides of the partisan divide, brian, on campaigns, and i know that what is a giant loser on
abortion politics is the extreme. and there is nothing more extreme -- i mean, overturning roe vs. wade is so extreme that i played it yesterday, five of the conservatives on the court said they would never do it. they testified in their confirmation hearings that it was settled law, that it shouldn't be overturned. what are your thoughts about -- and i'll put it up. the gallup has been asking about the approval of the court for over 20 years. 62% in 2001 approved of the court. anyone who follows politics knows what that climate was. it's dropped in 2021. 40% of americans approve of the united states supreme court. >> yeah, the downward trend for polling of the supreme court predates the oral arguments in this case. it even predates the texas women from september. we were seeing that trend earlier this year just based on the scalding experience for a lot of the public when it came
to the brett kavanaugh hearings and the amy coney barrett process surrounding her confirmation. the jurisprudence around the abortion issue is going to completely contribute to an erosion of support for the court as an constitution. we poll all the time on ideas like adding seats to the supreme court and we consistently find by a margin of 2-1, members of the public are telling us that the overturning of roe would be a very strong reason to get on board with the idea of expanding the court and you're seeing lawmakers on capitol hill, many of them very strong champions on abortion rights, people like judy chu in the house, who's the main sponsor of the bill to codify roe, people like tina smith in the senate that are saying that we should be talking about adding seats because that's what it's going to take, i think, and the salience of this issue depending on the ruling that we get out of mississippi, i don't think should be underestimated because you're going see copy cat laws, nicole, not just in deeply red states. we're talking about mississippi
and texas right now, but if the supreme court says, okay to these types of laws, we're going to see state legislatures that are so gerrymandered in favor of republicans in states that joe biden won in 2020 taking up these bills, making these relevant issues in states like wisconsin, michigan, across the midwest. so, i think that the salience of this issue is only going to increase after june if the supreme court goes in this direction and federal lawmakers, democrats -- democratic lawmakers take position on this issue. >> erin, i want to come back to you on this question that justice sotomayor put front and center about the impact on the court and how it -- and its standing and how it's perceived. we cover this as much as we do because it is so clearly on the minds of the justices themselves. john roberts said, we don't have obama judges or trump judges, bush judges or clinton judges. what we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges. amy coney barrett said the court is not comprised of a bunch of
partisan hacks. stephen breyer, it is a judge's solemn duty to be impartial, and there are more. and they are recent. this court is made up of people who are very aware of what is said about them and the standing in which they are held by the public. how much do you think that weighs on all of them, and not -- it's clear that it won't affect the decision, but how do you think that affects sort of the role of the court in american life? >> so, i think it only weighs on maybe one of the republican appointees, and that is john roberts, and i think yesterday showed just how little justices kavanaugh and barrett care about the political backlash and i wonder why that is the case. i want to push back a little bit on the assumption that this will necessarily turn out democrats. i think that's very much in the hands of democrats and what they do right now, because as you mentioned, brian, 2016, the candidate that you worked for, hillary clinton, made a robust case that the courts were on the line, that roe was on the line and for whatever reason,
democratic voters just by tiny margins, including representative dean's state, didn't turn out and so yes, it is easier -- it's easier to do what republicans have done, which is to attack something. it is harder, i think, to defend something, so that position will be different. but i will also say there are lots of times in which democrats have actually allowed this instance to take place by neglecting state legislatures, by de-emphasizing the courts, you know, democrats could abolish the filibuster, and the women's health protection act might actually happen, so there also needs to be political will on the democrats' side to show they're serious about this, not just as an election issue in terms of digging out of the damage that's been done, because republicans are single-mindedly pursuing this and they have been since 1973, and yesterday, you heard that the -- these pleas to legitimacy, frankly, they're for suckers, because it was justice barrett and justice kavanaugh who are ready to do the right's bidding and it was justice breyer who was sputtering about
legitimacy, and it was justice roberts who sounded like a man of the past, and unless the predictions are very wrong, they are going to give the right what it wants, and so the question is, will democrats deliver to that pro-choice majority meaningful abortion access that undoes all the damage that i laid out? >> i'm going to let brian and the congresswoman respond to that. brian, you first. >> well, i agree with the point that democrats can't just go and tell their voters, hey, we should mobilize and elect more democrats as a response to this. you saw the party committee for the campaign arm for the senate democrats tweet something out to that effect yesterday and it did not go over well because it's true. i mean, we have the senate and house right now. why aren't we getting rid of the filibuster to pass the women's health protection act? but even beyond that, if we pass the women's health protection act, does anyone think that wouldn't meet its demise in front of this supreme court? we need a proposal that deals with the judicial problem we
have and the composition of the supreme court itself so we're going to need to create a consensus in the democratic party to deal with that issue. >> congresswoman, i'll give you the last word to take on this question of will. of will to fight, not just the process arguments but the moral arguments about what kind of country we want to be. >> well, exactly right, and everything that your panelists have been talking about reminds me of my district, suburban philadelphia. we've all watched pennsylvania as a pivotal state in elections. next year, we will be pivotal again. i call us the keystone state for another reason. but here we are, suburban voters and suburban women will be galvanized, so i think brian is right. this is different from 2016, because roe is now on the chopping block. it seemed like it was under threat, but with trump's appointments and the willingness of these three justices to act as a pawn for the destruction of roe by passing or allowing to go into effect the texas law, what
i think will happen -- sadly, i hope it never gets to this, but politically, what i believe will happen if they overturn roe, it won't just be democrats. this will galvanize suburban women, republicans and democrats, as well as many men. my district will be very telling of this, but suburban women, republicans and democrats, will be up in arms, and they'll be sure to search out and find people to elect who want to protect the fundamental right to abortion services. >> from your lips, congresswoman madeleine dean, brian fallon and erin, thank you so much for starting us off. when we come back, two election workers in georgia faced with what they called a deluge of intimidation are fighting back, suing a right-wing media platform and hoping to hold the spreaders of the disgraced ex-president's big lie accountable. that brand-new reporting is next. plus, the father of parkland shooting victim jamie guttenberg
calls out the right. frank will join us later in the hour. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. eadline whis after a quick break. your plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. vazalore... is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers than plain aspirin. try new vazalore. aspirin made amazing! ("this little light of mine") - [narrator] in the world's poorest places, children with cleft conditions live in darkness and shame.
they're shunned, outcast, living in pain. you can reach out and change the life of a suffering child right now. a surgery that takes as little as 45 minutes and your act of love can change a child's life forever. please call or visit operationsmile.org now. thousands of children are waiting. this is the greatest idea you'll ever hear. okay, it's an app that compares hundreds of travel sites for hotels and cars and vacation rentals like kayak does for flights. so it's kayak. yeah, like kayak. why don't you just call it kayak. i'm calling it... canoe. compare hundreds of travel sites for thousands of trips. kayak. search one and done. - grammarly business turned my marketing team into rock stars. (diana strums guitar) maya swears by grammarly business because it keeps her work on brand and error-free.
two election workers in georgia today are joining the fight to hold accountable the big lie that made them targets in conspiracy attacks in the months after the 2020 election, including attacks from the ex-president himself. ruby freeman and her daughter are suing a far-right website for publishing what they describe as a campaign of lies, that they pulled fake ballots from suitcases while working at
a voting center. they allege that false articles by the gateway pundit instigated a deluge of intimidation, harassment, and threats that has forced them to change their phone numbers, delete their online accounts and fear for their physical safety. the ex-president later mentioned freeman by name 18 times in that call with georgia's secretary of state, who had already debunked this conspiracy theory publicly along with the state's bureau of investigation. nbc's ben collins reports on this. he writes, quote, at the height of the harassment, ruby freeman said strangers 2019 attempted to push into her home and make a citizen's arrest. freeman was eventually forced to shutter her business and flee her home for two months at the recommendation of the fbi, the suit says. joining us now is nbc news senior reporter ben collins and sam stein is back. ben, this is the nightmare scenario that a normal person targeted by donald trump's lies has her life and her daughter's
life upended. take us through your reporting. >> yeah, you know, ruby freeman was a private figure when this happened. she was captured on security camera in atlanta in a voting center and what was her crime here? she took ballots from underneath a desk, placed them on a desk and started counting them again as per the instructions from inside of the room. that's what was going on there. but to them, to the trump administration that was trying to find anything at that moment to say that there was fraud in this election, you know, they used the security camera footage to say that she was somehow cheating in the election, this was a suitcase that she had, you know, brought with her or something. and then the gateway pundit said that she was a corrupt democratic operative. within hours, they identified her. within hours. and they made her life hell. there's no other way to put this. on january 6th, as some trump supporters were storming the capitol, some of them were outside of her house. she fled her home at the advice
of the fbi, didn't receive a lot of help from local police, but trump supporters were outside her house with bull horns trying to get her to come out. her life was in tatters and she was a private citizen. that's how quickly things can change for election workers right now. >> i want to read what her life became from your piece. people have said the most vile and violent and racist things about me and my family on the phone, on my social media accounts, through email and in-person. freeman, who is black, said in a statement, the toll of all this on your life, day in and day out, it wears on you. when i'm out in public and i hear someone call my name, i jump. just hearing my name scares me. she says she can't imagine going back to election work. the times when i have decided to work for the county, i did so because i thought i could help and i knew i could do the job well. what i didn't know was that it would you were the out like this. how many people, even if they weren't targeted and threatened and had their lives turned
upside down, does she talk about how many people might make the same decision about helping with our elections? >> i'm sure people are really thinking about it. look, it didn't just affect her. it affected her entire family. her grandson had to turn off the family's phone because her grandson was getting so many death threats. her grandson couldn't do schoolwork because he used his phone as a hot spot, you know, this is covid, so it profoundly impacted their life in ways that, you know, have nothing to do with this ridiculous smear campaign. it profoundly impacted the lives of everyone around them. and that's the worry here. there's -- there's no compensation for this that the state can pay. there's no $15 an hour or whatever that can make it worth it for election workers. who are targeted by this sort of thing. she was just a grainy figure on security camera, and her life got turned upside down here. >> grainy figure on security camera doing nothing wrong.
but donald trump became obsessed with her. this didn't happen in a vacuum. sam stein, and just like 1/6 doesn't happen without one donald trump, targeting of her doesn't happen without comments like this. this is donald trump talking about her 18 times on that now-famous call on january 2nd with brad raffensperger. >> she's a vote scammer, a professional vote scammer and hustler. ruby freeman. you know what was trending on the internet? where's ruby? because they thought she'd be in jail. where's ruby? it's -- it's crazy. it's crazy. that was -- the minimum number is 18,000 for ruby, but they think it's probably about 56,000. but the minimum number is 18,000. on the ruby freeman night when she ran back in there. she stuffed the ballot boxes. >> so sam, this is about so many things that are quintessential trump, right?
no one is spared. >> right. >> no one's safety is spared. no one's child or grandchild is spared, and his maniacal desire to push a fraud. now, 18,000 is significant. we heard him throwing around all sorts of numbers on that call, but she wasn't guilty of anything he accused her of. what do you make of this new reporting? i see you juggling in the background. that's all fine. everybody's welcome. bring him in. hello. hi. >> say hi. all right. now you got to go, buddy, because we're talking about donald trump, okay? let me just -- why don't you come back to me in one second? ben can take this question. i'll clear the guy from the room. >> ben, is that tape part of her lawsuit? >> it's in the lawsuit. in fact, mentions very consistently all throughout how this was sort of geared towards getting president trump's attention, and it did, by the way. you know, hours after that story printed, oan did a segment
calling it an investigation by gateway pundit, and then donald trump tweeted that investigation that oan piece as well. and that's when it really kicked off. remember, like a month went by where this woman's name was not part of the conversation. it really kicked off when donald trump pushed this out into the open, because it was easy to create a pariah here based on this grainy footage. >> i want to ask about the -- i think there's a feeling that donald trump's never held accountable for anything he does, but some of these lawsuits against news organizations have had traction. sam, are you ready? you ready for one? >> i'm ready. i'm ready. >> i want to put up some of these -- that was the highlight of my two hours, so don't send any kiddos away. >> it was definitely a highlight. >> you always mix things up here. so, there's a dominion lawsuit against fox news, the dominion
lawsuits against newsmax and one america, the smartmatic lawsuits against many of the same targets that they're still making their way through the legal process, but they have elicited nearly unprecedented mea culpas and reversals on the big lie. this is sort of a person, an individual, an election worker whose life was turned upside down, not an election equipment company. >> i mean, the thing here is, like, yes, if you can afford a lawyer to bring a lawsuit for defamation, then you can probably get results. i mean, that's what happened with the voting company. it could happen here with gateway pundit. but not everyone has the resources to launch this type of counteraction. and if you just look at the sheer numb of people who are being targeted by this -- by these smear campaigns and this disinformation campaign, it's unlikely that we'll ever get some sort of remuneration, for instance, for the pain that's
been caused. but i just want to go back to the -- what we were talking about before my kid rudely interrupted. love him to death. but he rudely interrupted. what ends up happening here is, it's going to dissuade a whole host of people who are normal human beings just trying to help out with the civic responsibility of holding an election. it's going to completely dissuade them from being part of the process. and in that vacuum, the only type of people who are going to want to do these type of things, risk the type of backlash, the scrutiny, risk being targeted by a president like trump are really, truly insane people, people who love politics as a blood sport, and you know, this is the real problem, is that you end up just inviting the people who are completely either radicalized or way too into politics to take over our election systems, and you end up just absolutely politicizing them even more. and i think that's the most pernicious thing that's happening here. i feel horrible for the
individuals who are targeted but if you look, systematically, what's going to happen to our elections, that's really bad. >> well, and that's the intent, right? i mean, all of the intimidation plans have and for a guy not really known for being strategic, this is the strategy of bullying and targeting individuals trying to go about their lives. ben, it's an incredible piece of reporting. i trust you're going to stay on it. please come back and let us know how it goes. thank you for spending time with us to talk about it and for jumping in when we were graced by sam stein's son. sam sticks around. when we come back, could a prosecutor's decision on whether to charge the parents of the michigan high school gunman help slow down the tragic epidemic of school shootings in this country? i certainly hope so. fred guttenberg, whose daughter was killed at margery stoneman douglas high school in florida will be our next guest. s high sa will be our next guest
hi, my name is cherrie. i'm 76 and i live on the oregon coast. my husband, sam, we've been married 53 years. we love to walk on the beach. i have two daughters and then two granddaughters. i noticed that memories were not there like they were when i was much younger. since taking prevagen, my memory has gotten better and it's like the puzzle pieces have all been [click] put together. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. ♪
we have really important updates in the tragic school shooting this week in michigan that has taken the life of four students and injured several more. the prosecutor in charge of the investigation has signalled that she will charge the teenage suspect's parents in addition to the shooter for not properly securing the weapon. when asked, oakland county prosecutor karen mcdonald said this, quote, those who do not do that should and will be held accountable. we have to do better. gun rights advocates say this unusual move is essential in stopping the nation's epidemic
of mass shootings. those advocates are also speaking out against members of the gop who as we reported yesterday spoke on the senate floor about the sanctity of life in the context of the abortion debate but failed to mention the victims in michigan or their lives. fred guttenberg, whose daughter, jamie, was shot and killed in the parkland shooting in 2018 took to twitter to say this. quote, tell that to my daughter, you despicable f'ing liars, this is the last picture i took of jamie before the gun violence. the facts are that life continues after birth and you refuse to protect living children. four more dead yesterday. what do you want to say about that? joining our conversation is fred guttenberg. he is the author of the book, "find the helpers." sam stein is still here. fred, i just need you to talk. i read your tweets and i wanted to talk to you today. >> you know, i'm going to go back to your last segment with sam stein's son, because i love
that, and the truth is, sam, your son doesn't yet understand the fear of an active shooter drill. you son doesn't yet understand the fear of going to school. and nicole, i was on your show about three weeks ago, the day of the second amendment supreme court hearing. a day where they were literally arguing against the sanctity of life, and then yesterday, kind of like bookends, they were arguing for it. i am done with this b.s., i'll clean it up from what i want to say, from these people, okay? who sit there and play these games that only result in more dead kids. they don't care about life after birth. you know, we do actually go on from the day that we're born. we parents, we fall in love with our kids on that day and we would do anything, and that's when the politicians on the side
that talk sanctity of life yesterday, they stop caring. well, you know what? we have to be better than that. because it is not okay that we are going to raise a generation of kids who expect to be shot. >> fred, every kid in every school in america goes through active school drills pretty little, i don't know if sam does it yet but my son did it by that age. he didn't know what it was but he knew to stay away from the windows and be really quiet. why doesn't that move politicians on the other side of the aisle? >> it moves people. it does move voters. i think there's a reason why we have a democratic president, a democratic house, and a senate that teeters. and yet, we have a side of our government that is despicable, that actually does not care.
they do not govern. they do not care when we talk about kids in coffins. they do not care. and so, the only option, because americans across this country, i believe, do care. i believe they care about the fact that the kid who did the michigan shooting had easier access to a gun than he did to his dad's car. i think americans do care about that. and i think americans, in spite of what a lot of pundits are saying, in 2022, are going to continue to show up and vote as if their lives depend upon it, because they do. >> fred, i want to ask you about one of the victims, oxford high school shooting star athlete at a time tate myre was willing to sacrifice for others. i went down and read everything i could find in the detroit free press and the local tv websites and there's some other sports reporting about him.
there are four beautiful souls whose lives were cut short. what do you have to say to their families today? >> my heart breaks with yours. i do know what you're going through. i'm not going to tell you today how to feel, because none of this is going to make sense today, but i want you to know that when you are ready to speak and you want to know how to start putting one foot in front of the other again, that i am here for you. i will always be here for you. you have joined a miserable club that you should have never been part of. nicole, it breaks my heart that i have failed now almost four years to protect kids in school shootings. because they keep on happening.
and i don't even want to refer to it in years, because since my daughter was shot, it's over 150,000 people have been killed due to gun violence. that's the reality in america. and so i want to tell those parents, when you're ready to put one foot in front of the other, find a way to reach out to me. i will find a way to reach out to you, but i am here for you. >> sam, chris murphy is singular in his eloquence and his passion on these issues. i played it already. you know, i'm going to play it again. this is him tuesday night on the floor of the senate. >> this only happens in the united states of america. there's no other nation in the high-income world in which kids worry about being shot when they go to school. it happens here in america because we choose to let it happen. we're not unlucky. this is purposeful.
this is a choice made by the united states senate to sit on our hands and do nothing. while kids die. >> i saw that you tweeted about that, we're down to chris and fred and a handful of others that don't accept that we do nothing. do you think there is any kaleidoscope in which the reality reorders the political reality in washington? >> unfortunately, i don't. i wish i could say something different, and let me just say, fred, you're right, i haven't -- my kid has not gone through these trainings, but i've thought about it. i've thought about how he will, a lot. but to be honest, there's not much political will in washington anymore to do stuff about this. i talked to senator murphy extensively about this, and he feels the same way fred does. a sense of deep sort of moral failure because he took it upon himself that this was going to
be his cause. sandy hook was his state. and it was a wake-up call for him about the epidemic of gun violence, especially in schools. but we moved on from there, if we're going to be honest about it. fred hasn't. senator murphy hasn't. a lot of other people haven't, but i think as a body politic, we've come to some sort of acceptance, a dark, cynical acceptance that this is a way of life, and all i can think about when i was reading about the shooting in the detroit suburbs a couple days ago was how livid we've all been at school closures for good reason. we want our kids to be in schools, and covid has disrupted that, and we've -- we just went through an election in virginia where the defining issue was, we have to reopen our schools, and how could you not reopen our schools? and today, in michigan, schools are closed because there are social media threats that there will be violence in their halls. if we care so much about school
openings for a pandemic, we should also care about school openings for a public health epidemic, and i just couldn't -- you know, the contrast just really struck me hard today as i was reading up on this stuff. >> fred, i'll give you the last word. the last word. >> you know, you brought up virginia. the idea that the defining issue of that race became something that isn't taught, crt, and that nobody could pivot to the reality of active shooter drills and what actually affects our kids is a failure of those who should have been delivering the countermessage. we can't keep failing at this, because if we do, tim, i agree with you. there are too many in the body of politics that don't give a crap. they just don't. but there are enough of us who will keep fighting, and 2022,
closer than we've ever been to deliver gun legislation, we're as close as we've ever been to losing the chance of ever doing so, and we better not fail. ztz i just want to update that chris murphy sound with a tweet from today. he writes, i'm past my breaking point. so are millions of other moms and dads whose kids go to school every day fearful they will be shot. i'm going to congress with this bill. wish me luck. you both moved me to tears. i'm going to sneak in a break before i lose it. thank you for spending time with us. a quick break. we'll be right back. ick break. we'll be right back.
mm. [ clicks tongue ] i don't know. i think they look good, man. mm, smooth. uh, they are a little tight. like, too tight? might just need to break 'em in a little bit. you don't want 'em too loose. for those who were born to ride there's progressive. with 24/7 roadside assistance. -okay. think i'm gonna wear these home. -excellent choice. dad are you sure you're up to host? yeah! we want to keep it thee. way it always was, right? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
that's your grandma. she was the best at the holidays. first psoriasis, then psoriatic arthritis. even walking was tough. i had to do something. i started cosentyx®. cosentyx can help you move, look, and feel better... by treating the multiple symptoms of psoriatic arthritis. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting...get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections some serious... and the lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms... or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms... develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. watch me. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.
i can turn my sleigh north because my job here is done. it's not magic that makes more holiday deliveries to homes in the us than anyone else, it's the hardworking people of the united states postal service. for the first time in 25 years, america's pastime has come to a grinding halt after the agreement between the major league baseball association expires. the two sides could not come to an agreement for a new deal. mlbpa made a statement saying, regardless of the timing, it is not required by law or any other reason. it was the owner's choice, plain and simple, specifically
calculated to relinquish players of rights and bonuses. the last time they locked out players was in 1990 where the lockout eliminated the majority of spring training, but the full season was played. host of the sportscast, david, we need baseball. i need baseball. will there be baseball? >> yeah, there will, short answer. when pitchers and catchers come back in february, there will be baseball, because baseball cannot afford -- we've just gone through a pandemic. they lost a lot of money. so there will be baseball. they will find a way. baseball has one of the strongest, maybe the strongest, players association in organized team sports. i think what this is going to do is reinforce the notion, and i think these billionaires have got to be reminded that players
control this, but you win because of your players. people don't come to see owners play baseball. so players, whether it's mlb, nba, major league baseball, players are the key to all of this. it was nice to see mike sherzer come out and say, this is the deal we're waiting for. we will come out of this. they will play if the owners have to be dragged kicking and screaming. the players want to -- right now there is an exploited system where a young player won't get to get the fruits of his talents
until he's like 29, 30 years old. i think what players want to do is reduce that time. they want to reduce the time it takes you to get to free agency. i think that -- and both sides want that comparative balance, but they both have drastically different ways of how to get there. but it gets around economics. you know, the owners are a funny group of people, that when it comes to their franchises, they're capitalists. they want to capitalize their own, which these teams have come through the roof. but they become socialists. they want to have it both ways. i think what players want is just a fairer slice of this tremendously expanded pie. >> are the owners sort of cognizant of how -- and i think this is true of a lot of sports fans, probably, not just baseball.
it plays an outsize role. when sports came back in the first year of the pandemic, it was this outlet, it was an escape from worrying about if it was pre-vaccine, from worrying about getting sick, from worrying about your parents in a nursing home, from worrying about your kids. most people did have the luxury of work from home. does it weigh too much on these owners? are they in too much of a private jet, give a hoot about their fans? >> i think they do at some kind of level, but at the end of the day, this is still a business. it's a business. a lot of people who run these teams want to win. what they understand in this particular business that you can't buy a championship. they do understand at a certain level this is for the fans, but they also understand that
probably more so than some players, it runs on muscle, it runs on players. i think they have to be reminded that you are nothing -- nothing -- without players. and i think that hopefully tony clark will mobilize the players from top to bottom if we just stick together. if we just stick together, we can get what we want, because without us there is no gain. >> and they sound like that is the plan. bill rhoden, thank you for spending time with us. it's so nice to see you. and thank you to all of you for letting us in your homes in these extraordinary times. "the beat with mari elber" starts right now. >> i owe you 18 seconds.