stick to that bullying harassment? >> -- if the speech becomes conduct, it can be harassment. >> stefanik and the chair of the house education committee have both applauded liz magill 's announcement -- and served as president until a replacement is found. liz magill's statement reading in part, it is been my privilege to serve as part of this remarkable institution. -- joins me now from philadelphia with the latest. george? >> yeah, alicia, the reaction here on campus is a mixed bag right now. some students are just getting word that liz magill has stepped down, and is also stepping down tonight, the chair of the board of trustees, and mind you, pressure has been growing here for the resignation, following that grilling on capitol hill, and liz magill putting out an apology of sorts, putting out -- where she clarified -- mainly her response to that question about genocide, saying it was time to review some of upenn's policies. unfortunately, -- rise of antisemitic activity and rhetoric on campus, even before the october 7th attacks. mind you, a lot of students here are also in the midst of their finals. so this, where it is spreading throughout campus here this evening. and as you mentioned, liz magill putting out a statement that says, in part, that she is thanking the alums, faculty, and community members to advance upenn's vital mission, and that she will continue to serve until that interim replacement is found, and she will remain a faculty member. -- all this comes as there was, as you know, financial pressure, with one donor -- they were supposed to be a board of trustees meeting tomorrow at five to further discuss your fate. but obviously, some of that pressure may have gotten to the border ahead of time as this resignation was announced today. alicia? >> george, congresswoman stefanik posted an online, one down, two to go. remind us who else is under pressure here. >> yeah, so, on the hill, you also heard from the presidents of m.i.t. and harvard. what we did see m.i.t.'s so far seemingly unscathed by some of the more severe backlash but dr. claudine gay of harvard, actually issued an apology in the crimson, saying she may have been caught off by the line of questioning -- saying that, of course, genocide is bad, and that is sort of some of the default rhetoric that a lot of students were hoping would come from these leaders of these prestigious institutions, basically answering yes or no to some of these questions that of relying on some of those more policy driven answers. but again, at this point, of assignation only seems to have come from the university here of pennsylvania. we are still awaiting word at what will happen with the leaders of m.i.t. and harvard. there is no word yet if they will consider or even made mention of resigning from their institutions, alicia. >> nbc's george soliz for us at the university of pennsylvania. george, thank you. with me now molly jong-fast, a vanity fair and host of fast politics. >> -- they wanted these professors to say, antisemitism, just like islamophobia, is wrong. period, paragraph. instead, you've got a lot of these legalized legalese. and i think there was a feeling that, certainly as i felt, as a jew myself, that these coach presidents were not taking antisemitism with the same kind of way that they were taking other forms of discrimination. -- i just would caution that i do not think of a least ivanka's a good faith actress. remember, she continues to go along with trumpism, and trump has continued to spew anti semitic rhetoric. and he has met with antisemites. so, i just have trouble believing that republicans are really that committed to protecting jews from antisemitism. but i do think the call for moral clarity and the decision to take a stand against discrimination is very good. >> molly, i do want to switch gears, get to what you and i were slated to talk about. because this hour on "american voices", we are diving into the dangers to our democracy if donald trump were to win a second term as president. scary thought, yes. but a possible reality americans need to prepare for. the consequences could be so dire, the atlantic published a special double issue carving out scenarios if trump wins. this hour, we are going to walk you through some of those scenarios, including the stakes for reproductive rights, our military and freedom of the press. it's looming threat of trumpism on steroids comes as gop rivals struggle to pull their party away from a man who continues to have a grip on republican voters. we are just five weeks away from the iowa caucuses, and three of trump's republican opponents are posting town halls across the state this weekend. all of this, a normal part of the democratic process. but this, of course, is not a normal election cycle. don't trump is splitting his time between the campaign trail and courtrooms, where he is answering for his behavior during his first term and beyond. on monday, trump returned to the witness stand in new york. he is the last witness for the defense, in a 250 million dollar civil fraud trial against his company. that civil case does not even scratch the surface when it comes to trump's legal jeopardy. just a quick reminder -- the gop front runner faces more than 90 felony counts in four different jurisdictions. on friday, a felony federal appeals court -- in his federal election subversion case. the ruling limits what trump can say publicly about witnesses and about prosecutors. for now, the court of law is serving as a guard rail against trump's wrecking ball tactics against our institutions. but what happens if trump further erodes there those guardrails? former congresswoman liz cheney offered this warning. >> i think that the challenge that we are facing now is very clearly understanding and recognizing that he means what he says, the people who invaded the capital, frankly, on january 6th -- you can look at scores of those defendants at what he said, we came because he told us to come, he told us to do this. he knows that people will follow his instructions. and if he is elected again, those guardrails, those individuals, for example, who stopped him, won't be there. and think about what it means to have a president who won't enforce the rulings of the courts. >> trump, as you well know, has already reshaped many of our federal courts. in his first term, he worked to push the federal judiciary for the right, appointing more judges than any first term president since jimmy carter. as the atlantic's adam serwer writes -- already -- resist just about any of trump's efforts to concentrate power in himself. they will no doubt invoke history, and tradition, to justify this project. but their eyes are ultimately on a future utopia where conservative political power cannot be meaningfully challenged at the ballot box, or in court. adam serwer joins us now, along with molly jong-fast. adam, i want to start with this notion of guardrails and trump's active bending institutions. what are we in for if trump can really just rely on his handpicked judges? >> i think the issue here is that people expect the judiciary to be a check on the executive branch. and because the conservative legal movement has been reshaped in trump's image, these judges are unlikely to resist that ideological project. and to some extent, much of that ideological project predates trump himself. he is simply a convenient vehicle for its use. >> right. and looking forward, you argue that this problem will compound in a second term, that he will appoint even more judges who can look favorably on his authoritarianism. what might that look like? >> to some extent, the conservative legal movement, like much of the country, it was taken by surprise by trump's victory in 2016. and so, they did not have all of their ducks in a row the way that they do now. the entire conservative movement, including the conservative legal movement, is now prepared to take full advantage of another 40 years of the trump white house. and that means a judiciary that is unlikely to check trump's efforts to concentrate power in himself, as i said. >> molly, you mentioned the gag order in trump's election interference case and its ruling, the federal appeals court, wrote, quote, the record shows that former president trump's world every world consequences. many of those on the receiving end of his attacks pertaining to the 2020 election have been subjected to a torrent of threats and intimidation from his supporters. molly, what do we need to understand about the scope of this threat, and those willing to tag along for a second trump term? >> yeah. i think it is pretty -- the idea of a second trump term is pretty bleak. and i think that there is just a lot of the things that trump did not know how to do the first time, he no now knows how to do. and we sort of see that he is kind of giving us clues, for example, that interview, during that cnn town call, when hannity was begging him to say he was not going to be an autocrat. and then, he said, except on day one. so, i do think we are really seeing in him a lot of the clues -- and he has sort of gotten better at being an autocrat. remember, he was originally a reality television host. and i do think that the stakes are much higher. and again, what liz cheney said is totally true. there are no adult in the room anymore. it is just stephen miller and a lot of people like that. >> adam, here's the thing. which is, we talk about the judiciary, and sometimes it is easy to imagine that it is somehow a separate and apart fr policy when they are very much intertwined on friday. a federal judge banned the trump-era practice of parating migrant families at the u.s. border for eight years. the ap reports, quote, under a settlement the type of zero tolerance policy under which the trump administration separated more than 5000 children from parents who were arrested for illegally entering the country would be prohibited until december 2031. adam, first, just your reaction to that settlement, just given the reporting that you have done on what happened under trump's immigration policies. and to bring us back to the point about the courts, your confidence that rulings like that one would stand in a potential second trump term. >> obviously, the family separation policy was adopted to inflict suffering on children, so that their parents would be less likely to try to bring them to the united states for a better life. and it did not work. because, you think about it. if you are a parent, you will do literally anything to give your child that chance. and so, even despite having a cruel policy in place like that, you are still going to attempt to do what you can to save your child's life and give them the best chance you possibly can. as far as -- you know, as far as trump obeying court rulings, trump flirted with defying the courts when he was president. he obviously try to overturn constitutional government by remaining in power after he lost an election. i think, should trump win a second term, they are going to be -- he and a lot of the people around him are going to advise him that he simply does not have to obey court orders that he disagrees with. >> adam, i always circle back to this, which is, what is the alternative reality? right? on the one hand, there are american voters who are going to come forward. and they are going to make the ultimate decision here. i am sure you saw there also a handful of conservative legal minds who have come forward and say, we as an institution, we need to rethink this. we need to see ourselves as a guardrail, as you have said. and to do that, we need to be honest about the sort of -- the landscape as it is now. right? the fact that you need to give people who might otherwise want to be part of a conservative legal movement an alternative to trumpism. you have to provide a path forward. and i wonder the extent to which you believe the answer to this question of a rejection to rebuilding the judiciary in trump's image -- does that lie in an alternative? or does that answer lie in this upcoming election? >> look, there are always going to be people with conservative views. conservatives will always be part of the american electorate. the question is whether or not america is going to give power to a man who has already shown himself completely unfit to wield it, and one who does not respect the fundamental right of the american people to govern themselves. >> adam serwer, who has absolutely written a searing piece for the atlantic, if you have not read it yet, please do. adam, thank you for taking the time to talk to. us molly jong-fast, you are sticking with us. coming up, the state supreme court stopped a texas woman from having an abortion, and the consequences for her -- well, they could be dire. plus, we will discuss the peril facing proponents of reproductive rights as we when the lands on the dangers of a possible trump presidency. but it is not all doom and gloom. joan walsh tells us why a trump presidency is not a sure thing, and what americans can do about it. stay with us. ugal with some help from j.p. morgan wealth plan. let's go whiskers. jen y is working with a banker to budget for her birthday. you only turn 30 once. and jen z? her credit's golden. hello new apartment. three jens getting ahead with chase. solutions that grow with you. one bank for now. for later. for life. chase. make more of what's yours. he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ sofia vergara: dwight was a 13-year-old kid with cancer, when he came to st. jude. dwight: this kid is now 73 years old. sofia vergara: that's what we do at st. jude. marlo thomas: give thanks for the healthy kids in your life, and give a gift that could last a lifetime. now you can enjoy the best eggs in so many delicious ways. eggland's best. the farm-fresh taste you love. plus, superior nutrition. only eggland's best. ♪♪ first time i connected with kim, she told me that only eggland's best. her husband had passed. and that he took care of all of the internet connected devices in the home. i told her, “i'm here to take care of you.” connecting with kim... made me reconnect with my mom. it's very important to keep loved ones close. we know that creating memories with loved ones brings so much joy to your life. a family trip to the team usa training facility. i don't know how to thank you. i'm here to thank you. i'm free to grow. i'm free to learn. i'm free to make the next big thing. contra costa college is free for full-time students, which makes you free to explore all the incredible opportunities unleashed by higher learning. >> justice and health care is start your future and apply today at contracosta.edu/free on pause in texas today. the state supreme court temporary halting an emergency order that would have allowed cade cox to receive an abortion. -- attorney molly dwayne says she fears justice delayed will be justice denied. she spoke with our colleague yasmin vossoughian earlier today. >> the reality is, when we are talking about life sensitive, time sensitive health care like an abortion, for caid, every minute, every hour counts, and so she's trying to remain hopeful. but it's been a very challenging few days for her and everyone on her team. >> cade cox is currently -- a puts cox's life at risk -- texas attorney general ken paxton is trying to force cox to carry the pregnancy to term. he appealed the lower courts ruling that granted cox the right to an abortion. as for the women at the center of this national story, here is what cade cox told nbc news is laura jarrett earlier this week. >> there's no outcome here that i take home my healthy baby girl. you know? >> so, it is hard. and just greece. but i think that joy and grief can coexist and so there is moments of joy. i'm really grateful for my wonderful to children that i have, and my wonderful family. >> to discuss, molly jong-fast is back with us, joined by reproductive freedom for all president mini timmaraju. mini, a reminder that some of the exceptions in some of the states are not exceptions at all. >> no. these exceptions, as we know, were designed to not work. attorney general ken paxton is really, frankly, just a terrible human being. he is extremist. he is antiabortion. he is questionable in his ethics. the fact that the state is pursuing these lengths to deny kate cox her fundamental right to her reproductive freedom, and care, it's just devastating. >> and mini, to later on to that, the fact that you have ken paxton threatening doctors who would otherwise provide care, who -- we have understood that there was always supposed to be a chilling effect. we are seeing that articulated so clearly. >> incredibly clearly, right? they named the doctor that was, by design. that was not by accident. they are trying to intimidate medical professionals. this is the same state that crafted sb8, the vigilante abortion ban. so, they are particularly used to, and expert at, the torturous nature of these bands bans. the fundamental thing we have to extend here is that this is a state that is not too extremes to block folks from care. they're going to extremes now. and this is the kind of country, to your earlier point, that donald trump has allowed through this supreme court. this is on donald trump. >> this is on donald trump, molly. when it happened -- were like, don't worry, if you were in a blue state, this isn't going to impact. we are seeing with that mifepristone ruling, that would -- longer wait times for women in blue states, to say nothing of the demand has spread, it has not decreased. so, let's talk, within this framework, about if trump should win another term. antiabortion activists, they are counting on him to revive the centuries old law that pribits the mailing of anything intended for producing an abortion. the lantic points out that, in addition, to -- the comstock act could be applied to prevent the transport of all supplies related to medical and surgical abortions, making it illegal to ship necsary tools and medications to hospitals and clinics, with no exceptions for other medical uses such as miscarriage care, conditions that are easily treatable with modern medicine could, without accessing the supplies, become life-threatening. i understand that there are threats trump makes that we hear take very seriously, and they're focused, no, he is just joking. no. i mean, we have proof positive that he is very serious about limiting reproductive care in this country, if not doing away with it entirely. >> yeah. what we see in this kate cox case is that abortion is health care. this is a woman -- she needs health care. she cannot have it because of republican politicians. period, paragraph. and now, we have seen, since the over turning of jobs, since the end of roe, that voters do not want republican politicians in the gynecologist chair with their -- they want doctors treating them. they do not want to feel their doctor is being bossed around by a republican politician. so, i do think that this happens to be a really terrible experience for her. i feel for her so much as a mother. i just can't even imagine how horrible this is. and remember, this is a woman who wants to have more children, who had little children of her own. and many of the women who need abortions are people who have little children, right? who have big responsibilities, and can't take days off work. and i think also bringing back the comstock act, which is this law that is 100 plus years old, and is really victorian, is really a sign of what they are going to do. they are going to go for a federal ban. we know this. the antichoice world desperately wants a federal ban. they are going to go after mifepristone. and you have seen already that the legal argument for removing mifepristone from the market is so thin, but it doesn't matter. because these republicans are such zealots that they are going to go for it. and it is going to be a dystopian health care nightmare for pregnant women and even for women who want to get pregnant. i mean, there is so many ripple effects to this, and so many different ways in which republicans are saying they are bringing religion into your doctors offices. and it is really scary. >> it is really scary. the -- supreme court currently -- determining the future of the abortion pill. i wonder what it is you are watching out for. >> we have had a national coalition working on educating the american people working on how safe an important mifepristone is. we are watching this case really closely. we are expecting, any day now -- we thought maybe yesterday the court would grant -- for this case to go to the supreme court next year. there is a lot of debate over whether the court wants to make a ruling on this case right before an election. either way, we are building support for mifepristone and making sure that big pharma and big sickness business understand this -- this case is actually about undermining fda authority to declare drugs safe and legal. >> mini timmaraju, i have less than a minute left, but to tie what we were just talking about with the course of this conversation on reproductive care, understanding that they have a lot of common through lines, this was an effort on the part of conservative legal minds to round and blue states legislatively, right? to say, we are going to go to a friendly court. we are going to bring a case that seems wackadoodles. but it is going to change the entire nature of care in this country. >> they have been trying this for years. and they got the opportunity with judge matthew kacsmaryk in the lower court. it raises a lot of questions about court ethics. but what's important to know is that this would be a nationwide backdoor abortion ban. this is a way to ban abortion. mifepristone is the most popular, safest, most effective way to get access to an abortion across the country. this would shut that down, and it could would be devastating. >> we have got to keep watching what is happening in texas. this kate cox texas. molly jong-fast and mini timmaraju, thank you so much for taking the time to be with us. still ahead, the free press grapples with how to cover trump in the 2024 election. consequences for journalism in america on the line. the atlantic's george packard joins delivers that warning. next, tom nichols -- and one of the most respected military force in the world. ned's plaque psoriasis. [camera shutter sfx] he thinks his flaky, red patches are all people see. otezla is the #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. [ned?] it can help you get clearer skin and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing it for nearly a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. [crowd gasp] ♪♪ with clearer skin, movie night is a groovy night. [ting] ♪♪ live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. ♪ unnecessary action hero! ♪ l-missing punches?. -unnecessary! -check reversals? -unnecessary! -time sheet corrections? -unnecessary! -unentered sick time? -unnecessary! -go! -unnecessary! -go! -unnecessary! -when you can take this phone, you'll be ready. -make the unnecessary, unnecessary. let your employees do their own payroll. when you have chronic kidney disease... ...there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure which can lead to dialysis. ♪far-xi-ga♪ farxiga can cause serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections, and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. when you have chronic kidney disease, it's time to ask your doctor for farxiga. because there are places you want to be. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. >> one of the bulwark against ♪far-xi-ga♪ donald trump's authoritarianism in his first term was the u.s military. should he n a second term in 2024, that might change. this week, tom nichols wrote in the atlantic, if donald trump wins the next election he will attempt to turn the men and women of the united states armed forces into praetorian's loyal not to the constitution, but only tim. this project will likely be among his administration's highest priorities. tom nichols joins us now, he is a staff writer at "the atlantic" and tom, always good to see you. talk me through this. how could donald trump turn the military into a political tool? >> the key is always to control the appointments at the very top of any organization. men and women of the united states armed forces are intelligent and loyal officers, and -- folks. but trump, i think, learned from the last time around that the goal here used to be in control of just a handful of positions at the top, and that those people will stop courting him and -- carry out the orders that other people wouldn't carry out. so, that's the first thing to look for, that this time there won't be a mark milley. there won't be a mark esper. there won't be people in the white house like john kelly, with that kind of experience who are loyal to the constitution. he will hand pick the people that will do his bidding. and i think, then, he will hope that the military's loyalty to the chain of command will do the rest of the job for him if he wants to do something unethical, unconstitutional, illegal, such as ordering troops to attack american citizens, which is something he wanted to do in his first term. >> when we talked, i'm sure you heard at the top of the hour, with your colleague at "the atlantic", adam serwer, about justice in this country, about the legal institutions that are meant to be a check on his worst impulses. talk to me about where the military, as you are speaking about it, and the american justice's system as a check on that power, begin to intertwine. >> the problem is that so much of our constitution operates on the assumption of basic decency in officeholders. so, the problem is, the courts are a check on the presidents powers. but what if we have a president who says, i don't care what the courts say. i'm just going to ignore them. and what if he has people under him to say, we are going to follow the presidents orders, and we don't care what a federal court or even the supreme court says. that is the problem we face. our system was never set up to handle a problem like donald trump. and the military in particular is not set up to handle somebody like donald trump. because we have a constitutional article, article two, section two. the president is a commander chief of the enforces. but we never -- i think the founders did never envision what happens if the president says, i just want to be decide to be a dictator, and the armed forces are going to decide to do what i tell them? i think it will be plenty of people who will not do the kind of things that donald trump wants done. but then that creates a separate problem of a schism within the pentagon, or within the armed forces. and i think trump will test all of those loyalties at some point, pretty early in his term, a future term of power. >> so, if that is all not devastating enough, there is also the danger a seco trump term poses to our allies abroad. he has threatened to withdraw from nato, just ease one example. talk about the impact, just that, would have on global security. >> imagine being an american ally and realizing that the commander-in-chief now is donald trump, this mercurial, unbelievable resolutely ignorant person who has denigrated our alliances, and has made it clear that he both fears and admires people like vladimir putin and xi jinping. that threat to our security is immense in that case. because our armed forces operate side by side with the armed forces of dozens of other countries around the world as part of the arrangements that keep americans safe, that keep their standard of living high, and that protect the transit of their goods and services and their personal safety when they leave the country and crossed the oceans. if donald trump is the commander-in-chief, all of those assumptions kind of go up in smoke, in part because of things he said. and i really want to emphasize this. that these are not hypotheticals. that any of us in this issue of "the atlantic" are talking about. we are basing these on things donald trump has said, done and tried to do that were prevented by sensible people that were around him. none of that will happen this time. he won't be prevented from doing things that he wants to do. he will make sure of that this time. >> the atlantic's tom nichols, as always, setting the states stakes for. us tom, thank you. next, is america ready for a second -- the atlantic's george packer is going to join us. later, what we all need to be doing right now to avoid a second trump term. stay with us. cribe treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today. there's something going around the gordon home. good thing gertrude found delsym. now what's going around is 12-hour cough relief. and the giggles. the family that takes delsym together, feels better together. liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. with the money i saved, i started a dog walking business. oh. [dog barks] no it's just a bunny! only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ (carolers) ♪ iphone 15 pro, your husband deserves it! ♪ only pay for what you need. (mom) carolers? to tell me you want a new iphone? a better plan is verizon. (vo) for a limited time, turn any iphone in any condition into a new iphone 15 pro with titanium and ipad and apple watch se - all on us. only on verizon. >> as donald trump and his allies i a second term in the white house, they are already promising to, quote, come after journalists. this week, trump ally kash patel floated the idea of punishing what he calls conspirators in the media, who he claims helped rig the 2020 election. of course, the 2020 election was not rigged. that's not stopping team trump from seeking revenge against those in the media who reported on actually luck shun results instead of made-up conspiracies. and before all the lies of a stolen election, trump made it his mission to sow doubt in -- reporting. a recent gallup poll found just 32% of americans say they trust the mass media a great deal. that match is an all-time low set during trump's 2016 presidential campaign. that was a time when trump made fake news a rallying cry for his base, a way to dismiss all unflattering or inconvenient facts. it was a tactic that work. george packer, a staff writer at "the atlantic" writes, quote, trump's purpose is to destroy the very notion of objective truth. the match was rigged in his favor, and being compelled to fight it has not been good for journalism. and george packer joins us now. george, it is always such a privilege to have you. thank you so much for being with us. here's the thing. -- sort of a key theme to his 2024 presidential campaign, i want to how you expect his relationship with the media to play out over the course of the next few months. >> i have no doubt that, if he is elected again, trump will try to punish the media for its perceived sins against him. he will quite likely sit in the fbi after journalists to be investigated. he might have the irs go after them. he will certainly rally his supporters to denounce them as enemies of the american people, as he did in his first term. and he will also use economic pressure, as he tried to do in his first term. he will try to break up media companies, prevent them from -- prevent owners of media, like jeff bezos, who owns the washington post, from getting government contracts, as he tried to do in his first term. all of that is almost certain to happen. but my biggest worry is that he will go on doing what he has done so successfully, which is to turn a large number of americans against the very idea of an independent media, that there is such a thing, that there is such a thing as facts and objective truth, that the media's job is to report them. instead, he convinces his followers that the media is just another special interest that deserves no special place in our democracy and, in fact, is a threat to it. and he will do everything in his wily powers to continue to antagonize his own followers against the media. and there is not a whole lot the media can do about that. that is a trap that the media is in. it is not all that different from what tom and adam said about the courts and the military. for the media to do its job, it depends on a certain atmosphere of fairness and objectivity, and following norms, that, if the most devastating investigative journalism and the most astonishing string of lies uncovered by the media does nothing to change anyone's mind, the really is not very much more that journalists can do to show the public that donald trump is a threat to democracy. >> especially when you can't hold him to account face to face. you argue, in a second trump term, he would snub major media outlets. he would reward -- >> sorry, i just lost your audio. >> oh. can you hear me now, george? do i have you, george? >> yeah, i just lost your audio -- >> you lost audio. sure. i was saying that part of holding him to account also requires being face to face with him. and you argue that, in a second trump term, he would do what we have seen him done in the past, which is he would snub reputable outlets. he would offer time to those who are friendly. and that allows this sort of alteration of the truth. >> i think we will see more of that. because, don't forget, in his first term, if it was his first term, trump was far more available to the press than, for example, president biden has been. because trump has an irresistible attraction to media attention. he can't help himself. and so, he had his favorite people, even at the enemy of the american people, like the new york times. he could not help talking to them. but i think, in his second term, a trump administration would be more disciplined about only giving its access to favorite outlets, to sycophantic supporters of the president, and not to independent journalists. and so, i think that we may well see the whole idea of a white house press corps kind of obviated. it might not be even able to function in the way it has always function for decades and decades. >> the inimitable george packer. george, thank you for taking the time to be with us. next, we close this hour with the right to argue a trump dictatorship is not inevitable. "the nation"'s joan walsh -- she is with us, after a quick break. stay with us. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today. why give your family just ordinary eggs when they can enjoy the best? eggland's best. the only eggs with more fresh and delicious taste. plus, superior nutrition. which matters now more than ever. because the way we care... is anything but ordinary. eggland's best. cage free and organic. ♪♪ dear wayfair. cage free and organic. this year i want... to say thanks. over the centuries i've become passionate about home decor. and my favorite homes are wayfair homes. i even stop by on my day off! i know what people want, and you've got just what they need. also, i love your ottomans. your number one fan, santa. ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need ♪ >> you will have an entire transition team of loyalists. he will also have members of the military sign a loyalty oath to who? to him. when donald has full authority and full power, you can't imagine the things that he is going to do. how far he is going to press the line. >> okay. so, we have spent the past hour explaining just how dangerous a second trump term would be for our institutions, from the courts to the mitary, to the media. but what can be done to stop trump two point oh? journalist joan walsh shares her plan in "the nation" writing, quote, we should not paralyzed ourselves with alarm, or divide into panicky factions searching for a political savior. with me now, joan walsh, national affairs correspondent for "the nation". all right, joan, i wanted to spend an hour sort of diving into the atlanta ex framework, which is, what if? what if he were to win a second term. what is all that mean for these institutions, predicated on things himself has said? i do, of course, come back to the question you are posing to us, which is, is that clarity around what that could look like causing a panic that destabilizes us? or is it causing a panic that springs into action? >> i think it was a little bit destabilizing earlier in the week. i just got so many people reaching out to me who were, basically -- i'm going to be honest, they are democrats. they are smart people, alicia. but they are not us, they are not politicos. they have not been paying attention. and god bless them. i mean, i wish i could go weeks and weeks without paying attention. but suddenly, they saw the stories, and robert kagan, also in the washington post. and they were like, a dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. this is horrible. what should we do? and i think the, what should we do part is the right answer. and i don't think it's inevitable. and i do think that we are in a period of time we are just saying, like, we are coming up to holidays, so a lot of people are checking out. and i'm hoping to check out in the next week or so. but people who care a lot about democracy, and people who give money to and sometimes work for a good progressive and democratic candidates, they have been sitting back for a while. and i think that i hope that this alarm has caused them to focus on january 2nd, and what am i going to do in terms of volunteering, sending money, funding different groups that i think are really playing a critical role. because that's what we did in 2017. and we beat him. we beat him. and we can beat him again. we just can't afford passive a t or complete hopelessness. and i was afraid i was seeing some of that earlier in this week. >> i think you can appreciate that the challenge is how you set the stakes without causing a panic that allows people to feel that there is an air of inevitability. >> right. and i think that the journalists who stepped up in the last week or two weeks, i appreciate them. and i think that they did the right thing. i think that there are also other people and other organizations that need to step up and say, okay. it would be really bad. but here is what we are doing. and i am hoping that that has been a little bit of the knock backlash, because i don't want to say it was negative. by the little bit of the response to, wow. maybe we have been chilling. and maybe we were ready to kick off in 2024. but we have really got to be ready. and there are amazing local groups, national groups. there are a feminist groups and thank you for covering this abortion nightmare so closely. there are so many groups that have gotten into the grassroots, and also gone up top since he became president. and i think that we have a whole different infrastructure of resistance and opposition. but it cannot be predicated on, oh my god. we can't win. or, it's over. clearly, i read this piece and says he is a dictator. it is inevitable. >> well, as you point out -- you point to a group, then the act -- i do want to ask you the democratic side of this. and the need to coalesce, sort of conclusively, behind president biden. >> i feel that we do have to. i really -- maybe a year ago was -- joe biden said he was running. he has been a great president, he was not my choice in 2020 and he has been way more progressive than i expected and i feel like people who are progressives ought to actually reward him for doing so much that we wanted. and i don't -- you know, i love gavin newsom. i -- california for 30 something years. i know him. he might be a great president. he is not battle-tested nationally, nor are any of the other people who folks throw up as a great governors. gretchen whitmer, love her. jb pritzker, love him. they are not tested. and it would be a complete debacle for there to be some weird primary at this point. so, i am hoping that people gather around joe biden. because i am going to. >> joan walsh, knowing that we were going to do almost an hour about what if, i needed to talk to you about what if not. thank you so much for taking the time to be with us. >> thank you. >> and for those of you who are watching, at the top of the hour "ayman", democratic congresswoman chantal brown shontel brown -- that is tonight 8:00 let me get the big one. nope. -this one? -nope. -this one? -yes. no. what? the big one. they're all the same size. wait! lemme get 'em all. i'm gonna get 'em all! earn big with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. i'm free to grow. i'm free to learn. i'm free to make the next big thing. contra costa college is free for full-time students, which makes you free to explore all the incredible opportunities unleashed by higher learning. >> i am alicia menendez, and i start your future and apply today at contracosta.edu/free will see you back here tomorrow at six pm eastern, four more "american voices". for now, i hold the over to my