obstruction charge against a january 6th rioter joseph fisher. >> i will yield to anyone who will tell me when you are bringing the impeachment vote. >> you got nothing. you guys got nothing because joe biden has been acquitted. >> the only person on the stage that is a convicted felon is the man i'm looking at right now. how many billions do you owe in civil penalties for molesting a woman in public, having sex with a porn star. >> i didn't have sex with a porn star. >> i don't speak as smoothly as i used to. i don't debate as well as i used to but i know how to do this job. i know how to get things done. and i know like millions of americans know, when you get knocked down, you get back up. >> on friday the supreme court handed down a decision to reduce the power of federal agencies by gutting a long standing legal precedent of chevron versus natural resources defense counsel. that gave federal agencies broad regulatory power. the justices may be driving key legal decisions in our country right now but there are subjects they probably don't know much about. to my knowledge, chief justice roberts is not a chemical engineer. brett kavanaugh is not a botanist and amy coney barrett is not a member of the federal reserve. but that is what this ruling implies, that the justices are experts in fields outside of the law and that they know better than the people who get paid to make these decisions in the federal government. justice kagen said it best. quote, a rule of judicial humility gives way to a rule of judicial hubris. joining me now is analyst and host of the amicus law podcast and an author of the best selling lady justice, women, the law and the battle to save america, dahlia ludwick. there have been a huge number of cases out of scotus in the last weeks but this hits all americans hard. not americans who are facing criminal charges. i'm talking all americans. chev ron has been on the books for 40 years. it has been precedent. but this court decided that precedent means something different than what we learned in law school. take us through a short description of what this decision means for americans. >> hi, katie. i think the easiest way to describe it is i think about how government works. we often make the mistake of thinking that joe biden and donald trump standing there talking about their climate policy or their veterans policy or their monetary policy, that that is a decision they make themselves at home at their desk. that is not how government works. that's not how government has worked for along time. government works because there are many, many federal agencies that decide policy. whether it is the atf, epa, whether it is the cdc, it is full of experts and scientists. if they make bad policy in four years you can vote for a different president and get a new head of the agency and new policies. the supreme court since chevron for 40 years said when a rule is ambiguous, we will refer to the agency and let them tell us what nitrogen oxide does as a pollutant. we will let the agencies decide whether mifepristone is a safe drug. we will let the agencies decide whether a bump stock is a machine gun. what the court has been doing for the last couple of years is undermining that one by one and case by case. two weeks ago, we had carance thomas telling us how knows how mushown guns work better than atf. and a judge told us he knows better than the fda how to regulate drugs. they arrogate this exertties to them self. but we are not going agency by agency. the court has said when there is a tie and an agency ruling is unclear, we will let the courts decide. we will take it out of the hands of agencies. as you have said, we have been seeing this all term. last year, we had sam alito explaining how swamp lands work. this year we have alito telling us how emergency medicine works. now justice gorsuch is telling us how air pollution works. and now in one case, it is not going to be a bunch of cases, judges across country are going to get to substitute their judgment about science, water we drink, drugs we take, about how to land an airplane. and the court says that's the way it is going to be. >> so dahlia, let's talk about the practical implications that you explained to our viewers. it is not just the supreme court and the nine justices that will be able to interpret the administrative agency's intent, purpose and law that congress passes, because the constitution says congress passes the law, right? there is a reason why we have the branches of government. are you saying then that a trial court judge in some court in some state can use his or her interpretation of a law to be able to now decide something that impacts the litigants there? and then are we going to expect more litigation wind its way back to the supreme court? >> yeah. you just described the mifepristone case. we had one judge in amarillo, texas who said he didn't like the way the fda regulated a drug that has been determined by scientists for many decades to be one of the safest drugs on the market. he was going to take it off the market. we had the case go all the way to the u.s. supreme court. and in this particular instance, the court thought his interpretation was wrong but also invited litigants to come back and try again next year who have standing. i think you are actually saying that any judge is in the country who wants to rewrite or rethink an agency rule can do that. the knock here is that congress has to write rules with more specificity. if they can get the 0.002% numbers right on carbon emissions, than that's fine. but that's not how congress writes statutes. congress can barely do anything. it can't write statutes with specificity that there is no ambiguity. then the question is who gets to determine in a case of an ambiguous or open ended statute, how we will interpret that. the court has decided the courts. >> you know, one of the things i hear often from conservative, i guess, groups. they scream about what they call judicial activism that comes from what they think are liberals. they talk about how judges need to be on the bench because they need to follow the laws. they need to respect precedent which is something that we have seen tested time and time again during confirmation hearings. this smacks of not only gross hubris on the part of the supreme court but it also smacks of selective judicial activism, doesn't it? it is the idea that when you whole sale get rid of chevron, you as a judge can be an activist as a judge in terms of how you want to see something turn out on a particular issue. >> you're right and the proof of that is the biggest fan of chevron was scalia. he was a ferocious opponent of justices putting their own ideas, often unstantiated ideas inpolicy. chevron was an effort to constrain judicial overreach. the fact that justice scalia would probably look at that decision and say this is insane. this is the antithesis of what i considered judicial humility shows you how far the conservative wing has moved away from justice an scalia who was considered very conservative. so justices get your hands off policy and let the agencies decide. that's way too moderate now for the court. >> i have like a second before i let you go but i want to know your call on the criminal immunity decision coming out on monday? >> i'm pretty worried. i think it means a lot that the court slow walked it into july. they usually end in june. i worry that some of the language in the fisher case opens the door for big claims about government overreach and the deep state and the fbi. i'm pretty worried. >> dahlia lithwick, thank you for making us smarter. i will leave our viewers and you with the following. there have been 30 nonunanimous rulings so far with the scotus. nine have been a split with republicans in majority and democrats in descent. judge aileen cannon continues to grind the classified documents case to a halt. and how special counsel jack smith is fighting back. l counsel jack smith is fighting back ng. since my fatigue and light-headedness would come and go, i figured it wasn't a big deal. then i saw my doctor and found out i have afib, and that means there's about a 5 times greater risk of stroke. symptoms like irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, or light- headedness can come and go. but if you have afib, the risk of stroke is always there. if you have one or more symptoms, get checked out. holding off on seeing a doctor won't change whether or not you have afib. but if you do, making that appointment can help you get ahead of stroke risk. contact a doctor and learn more at notimetowait.com when you smell the amazing scent of gain flings... time stops. (♪♪) and you realize you're in love... steve? with a laundry detergent. (♪♪) gain flings. seriously good scent. everybody wants super straight, super white teeth. they want that hollywood white smile. new sensodyne clinical white provides 2 shades whiter teeth and 24/7 sensitivity protection. i think it's a great product. it's going to help a lot of patients. trump appointed judge aileen cannon coins to slow walk the president's former classified documents case at a glassial pace. she denied an order for the franks hearing to look at the truth of the search warrant for mar-a-lago. she also called for another hearing regarding other challenges made by trump's lawyers regarding the fbi search warrant. in her 11 page order, she said that further factual development is warranted and trump's defense lawyers were entitled to the hearing on whether the prosecutors had misused statements by lawyers. that hearing has no date set like the trial itself which is indefinitely on hold. joining me is a fellow at the constitutional law center and the coauthor of how to steal a presidential election, matthew sell igman,. i hope you didn't give the blueprint to trump. let's start with fort pierce, one of my favorite haunts. you were in the courtroom arguing as a friend of the court on behalf of special counsel jack smith's position that he was properly appointed according to the appointments clause as special counsel. take us through what happened in court that day. >> thank you for having me. so it was extraordinarily unusual for a trial court to have an amicus like me argue at this case. even when there are sometimes dozens or hundreds, less than a quarter of a percent of the time does the court permit an argument in oral argument. but in early may as the amieke who filed, asked if they wanted to participate in the argument. the defense, trump said they did. we wanted to participate to give equal time to the position. it was a hearing that lasted almost five hours which is a lot of time to give to an issue that has been raised in many courts across the country in the last 50 years and rejected every time. >> let's switch gears because you are very busy. you wrote an amicus brief i guess you say amicus. you wrote a brief for fisher. you said that this is very porpt because there are some doom and gloom people who think that this decision will adversely impact special counsel jack smith's prosecution of donald trump in the various election interference cases that he is facing. you in your brief to the supreme court took a middle of the road proach, something that is not as far reaching as the government and nothing as narrow as what fisher was seeking. tell us why we should not have a chicken little the sky is falling reaction to what fisher said yesterday. >> what the court did in fisher is it adopted a moderate interpretation of this statute, section 1512c2 which makes it a crime to corrupt, influence or impede any official proceeding. the interpretation that was adopted was broader than what the defendant, the violent january 6th rioter had asked for. he wanted an interpretation that limited the statute only to the disruption of evidence. the reason he asked for that is this statute was passed in the aftermath of the enron scandal. and the government in contrast asked for an interpretation of any obstruction at all. the court adopted a position that is close for what we advocated for in the brief which takes a middle path. in this case, fisher won in a sense that the decision below is reversed and will have to go back down and ask whether fisher's violent conduct falls into the moderate interpretation of the statute. but in six months, a year, or two year, we will find out that it does because there is no question in my mind that the violent protesters on january 6th impeded the use of an object, the electoral certificates in an official proceeding. what we see here in fisher is part of a larger pattern where there is a little bit of a setback for the prosecution that takes a lot of time. ultimately, i don't think it will make a difference in the guilt or innocence under the statute of the violent january 6th rioters or of donald trump. but it will take months or years to find out if that is true. >> you also filed a brief in the criminal immunity case that ended up in front of scotus. we know that the chief justice announced yesterday that monday will be the last day that we will have opinions released. your thoughts about this criminal immunity decision that is imminently going to be coming out for americans on monday? >> well, it seems i'm the sunny optimist of the guest. i think we will see an opinion that looks good for the president. i think it is certain that the court will say that some presidential conduct is immune. you can't make it a crime to veto a bill. outside of that, there is a question about how far the court goes in establishing presidential immunity. even more than that, like with fisher, even if the court gives president trump everything he wants, if he is immune for every act that he took while he was president, he is still going to be subject to a trial as long as he doesn't drop the charges against himself next year. the reason is if you look at the indictment, the vast majority of the conduct that is alleged is clearly unofficial conduct. outside of trying to malignly influence the department of justice, the conduct was taken in an unofficial capacity as a candidate trying to up lawfully reverse the results of apelection. so the ultimate outcome i think will land against donald trump. we have now been seven months here waiting for the supreme court to tell us what the rule is when no matter what the rule is, donald trump is going to lose. so the ultimate upshot of this is that we have seen in every case we are talking about, an enormous amount of delay, the judicial epicycles where we ponder what the right rules should be when under any rule, donald trump should lose. it is the delay that risks so much. >> very quickly, before i let you go, i have been pushing the idea that what we will see is tonya chutkan get the case back from scotus and she conducts a hearing of sorts in which she parses out what constitutes official and unofficial acts to have what remains of the indictment. that is what scotus was asking on the issue. do you agree we could see something of that ilic? like a hearing where americans could see the sins of donald trump before november? >> i think that is quite likely in fact. if the court issues a rule where the district court has to decide what conduct is official and what's not, i think an eviden shear thaerg hearing is likely to happen. it will air the facts that many americans have dropped down the memory hole. so this fall for americans to see just how grave his crimes against democracy were in the 2020 election aftermath, i think that could serve an important public purpose. of course it would serve a judicial purpose but it would also inform the american public on who they are contemplating again. >> i appreciate your legal acumen. thank you for sharing with us today. when you get knocked down, you get back up, the candidates reacting after the debate and how former president obama is trying to calm the nerves of democrat voters by talking about his first presidential debate next. about his first presidential debat next why take 10 antacids throughout the day when you can take 1 prilosec. for easier heartburn relief, one beats ten. prilosec otc. one pill. 24 hours. zero heartburn. new centrum menopause supplements help unpause life when symptoms pause it. with a multivitamin plus hot flash support. (♪♪) daily zz for quality sleep. (♪♪) and enxtra for focus and clarity. centrum, powered by clinically studied ingredients. (vo) in the next 30 seconds, centrum, powered by clinically 250 couples will need to make room for a nursery. (man) ah ha! (vo) 26 people will go all-in. (woman) yes! (vo) this family will get two bathrooms. and finally, one vacationer will say... (man) yeah, woo, i'm going to live here... (vo) but as the euphoria subsides, the realization hits... (man) i've got to sell the house. (all) [screams] (vo) don't worry, just sell and buy in one move when you start with opendoor. (woman) oh wow. (vo) oh yes. start with an all-cash offer at opendoor.com. this summer. snacking. just. got. serious. introducing new $3 footlong dippers. the world might not be ready for them... ...but at $3 a pop? your wallet definitely is. every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans. and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood "the new york times" editorial board may be calling on president joe biden to drop out of the race but biden was back on the campaign trail in north carolina, trying to lock in voters after thursday's debate. so too was donald trump who lied about his pending criminal cases during a rally in virginia while biden defended his debate performance on friday. >> i don't walk as easy as i used to. i don't speak as smoothly as i used to. but i know what i do know, i know how to tell the truth. i know, i know, i know right from wrong. and i know how to do this job. >> biden is using the weaponization of his justice department, the fbi, local district attorneys and attorneys general to try to win an election against his political opponent, that happens to be me. you know who i am. >> fact check, that is not true. that is a lie. joining me now is the cofounder of the seneca project, and former republican columnist director and the former director of the democrat party and political analyst. thank you both for being here. look, i will speak frankly. i am -- i don't have -- i'm pro biden. i don't have a problem with what is going on right now. i find it to be absurd that people don't appreciate how extential threat donald trump is. it's a binary opinion. it's my show. it's my opinion. but basil, i will start with you. "the new york times" editorial board is calling on biden to leave the race after his debate performance on thursday saying he is not the man he was four years ago and the greatest public service he could do is to announce he would not run for reelection. but it goesoon to say that if the race goes down to biden or trump, they would pick biden. so should biden get out of the race? >> no. first of all, i strongly disagree with the opinion but i wonder if it is appropriate for them to do that. having said that, if joe biden stood on the debate stage and said nothing and let donald trump speak for 90 minutes based on donald trump's record and statements, i think joe biden still would have won the debate. but i understand the visual medium. there is so much riding on the outcome of the election and the stakes are so high and people's feelings and emotions are so strong around what happens in the race. i get why there is some consternation and disappointment perhaps. but as you said, if you really look at the choices that are being framed for the voter, you have a person in joe biden who has an outstanding record not just as president but also kamala harris, hakeem jeffries, uniting the party around a common vision versus trump who is suggesting that migrants should fight each other for residency in the country. when you put those things together, you think the calls to have some kind of confrontation where we make a change mid stream is premature. >> you know, tara, i want to stick with the idea that this was really not a debate. it is an opportunity for viewers to learn something about the candidates. and yes, maybe we have familiarity with donald trump and joe biden because we have seen them before but i don't think the onus should have been on biden to fact check trump in realtime. i had an issue of the strugsture of the debate. but there was a new poll taken after the debate and it finds that it is an unchanged presidential race with biden getting more support. 45% of registered voters, 44% for donald trump. this is something that takes some time for the effects of a big debate to be reflected in polls. but when you look at the numbers and that caveat in mind, how much of a difference do these debates really make for voters? >> well, so far we have seen they haven't really made that much of a difference. that is not just because of what i said, that's because of what we have seen so far and others have shown in the past. professor altman from american university who is the guy who predicted nine out of ten of the last elections accurately. he said listen, this is not going to make a difference and it is absurd for democrats to call for a change in the leadership because of the power of incumbency. the power of not having a contested primary. these are parts of the characteristics of the metrics of what makes for a successful candidacy. so i think that all of the consternation around what happened on thursday, i get it. it was jarring and it was not ideal. however, what we saw was president biden, the next day show up and demonstrate who he is and acknowledge that he had a bad debate, acknowledge his age, and promise the american people, look them in the eye and say i will never lie to them. he understands what the promise and resilience of the american spirit is. that is encompassed in joe biden. that is not the spirit that trump has. trump got away with lying for 90 minutes. people are complaining about how cnn hanled it. i think there are arguments on both sides, whether it was their job to fact check him or the candidates, we could argue that. but i don't think it is the end all or be all. it is joun. it is not november. people need to pay attention and stay focused on the prize of what we need to do here. we need to stand up and fight back against maga. donald trump is an extential threat to the country, period. joe biden is not. that's the bottom line. how dare "the new york times" come out prematurely and make a call as they did 24 hours after what happened the debate. that's it? one bad debate and now we are calling for joe biden to step aside? i must have missed the calls for trump to step aside after he was convicted of 34 felonies and still facing dozens more. i must have missed the time when they called for donald trump tostep aside when he incited an insurrection or when he was found guilty of civil penalties for rape. this country and the media need to stay focused on what is at stake here and what the difference truly is between the two candidates. i think they are doing a country a disservice. >> you know, both sides have agreed to go into a second debate on september 10th. i don't know what the merits are of t that. i'll be honest with you. if it is what what we saw, 90 minutes of trump lying about democrats ripping babies out of wombs and killing them and lying about immigrants and the dog whistles of people coming to this country seeking a better life, it is intolerable. the promises made by someone like donald trump saying he will settle the ukraine russian war as the president elect before he is sworn into office, i have a problem with the idea that it is going to be more of the same. is it worth it then for joe biden to go to that second debate? >> yeah, it is an interesting question. there were so many questions fr the last debate as to whether or not trump would agree to something because he felt he did enough in that debate to win. i think any time joe biden can go and show that split screen between competence and incompetence, i think is important for the voter. and i agree on the issue of fact checking. can you -- can the candidate joe biden really fact check in realtime his opponent who is benton lying but also trying to put out positive messages on what his administration has done and will do? you know, that's difficult. there is a guy in colorado who in realtime was fact checking lauren boebert in their debate and that is a master class on how to do it in realtime if you are a moderator. but if you are the candidate, i think any time that you can go and show that distinction and show the american public why you are different and how it will be vastly different from what donald trump can bring, i think that is a good thing, a good idea. >> let me be clear. joe biden fact checked to the extents that he called trump a liar on two occasions and he invoked malarky several times. so making donald trump answer the question that is posed would be a start. making the candt answer the question posed would be a start and making them use the time. because if not, that's what the mute button is for. thank you for being here, my friends. don't forget to tune into inside with jen psaki to catch the conversation with nancy pelosi here on msnbc. coming up next, killing the comstock act as republicans look to roll back women's healthcare using a 150-year-old zombie law. my next guest thinks she may have a way to stop them. how the proposed act will keep radical republicans out of women's reproductive health. keep it right here. women's reproductive health. keep it right here then i tried new zzzquil sleep nasal strips. their four—point lift design opens my nose for maximum air flow. so, i breathe better. and we both sleep better. and stay married. the cockroach. resilient creatures. true miracles of evolution. where there is one, others aren't far behind. always scavenging for food, the cockroach... well that's horrifying. ortho home defense max indoor insect barrier. one application kills and prevents bugs for 365 days. not in my house you don't. nature is wild. your home doesn't have to be. ok y'all we got ten orders coming in.. big orders! starting a business is never easy, but starting it eight months pregnant.. that's a different story. i couldn't slow down. we were starting a business from the ground up. people were showing up left and right. and so did our business needs. the chase ink card made it easy. when you go for something big like this, your kids see that. and they believe they can do the same. earn unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase with the chase ink business unlimited card from chase for business. make more of what's yours. an alternative to pills, voltaren is a clinically proven arthritis pain relief gel, which penetrates deep to target the source of pain with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicine directly at the source. voltaren, the joy of movement. (smelling) ew. gotta get rid of this. ♪tell me why♪ because it stinks. ♪have you tried downy rinse and refresh♪ it helps remove odors 3x better than detergent alone. it worked guys! ♪yeahhhh♪ downy rinse and refresh. with election day just a little over four months away, conservatives are preparing for a possible trump term with a manifest o that could strip citizens of their rights. the comstock act passed more than 150 years ago was the result of one man's crusaid against everything he deemed to be obseen including anything or article intended for the prevention of conception or procuring an abortion. republicans know that voters don't support a nationwide abortion ban so reviving this zombie law is the easiest to get a way. joaning me is becca vallen from the budget committee. congresswoman, a pleasure to have you on the show talk us through the zombie law and how dangerous it would be for women's rights? >> you had a man in the 1870s. he had a crusade against everything he deemed to be obseen, including any material used in abortion or contraception. this has not been a luthat has been enforced for a long time. you have in project 2025, the republican playbook for a second trump term which is -- they are not being secret about it. they are saying we are bringing back the law and we will use it to stop every single avenue for abortion and also for contraception. this is the playbook. it is happening in legislatures across the country, trying to restrict access from full reproductive healthcare. we have the man at the top of the ticket, this is the playbook he is intending to use. >> let's be clear. i'm not going to call it a decision that we got from the supreme court out of idaho. they punted it post november. but the heritage foundation's policy agenda pledges to reverse the biden administration's interpretation of imtala. when you look at that and the comstock act, no t matter what trump says on the debate stage that he will respect a decision when it comes to mifepristone, comstock act would not allow mifepristone to be delivered through the mail. you had something interesting, you also say through the plan there is a clear connection between guns, abortion, and domestic violence that would spike in our country. explain that to our viewers. >> you have a situation right now and i want to bring this more broadly out to how are we trying to control people's lives right now under the republican playbook. so whether it is reproductive rights, lgbtq rights, access to guns, you have this situation where trump and other republicans are not at all interested in protecting women. they are not at all interested in doing whatever they can to prevent domestic violence. so it is all part of this same playbook of trying to control our lives and making women second class citizens, absolutely. >> so congresswoman, i also wanted to ask you, there has been a lot of hand wringing and pearl clutching that came out of thursday's debate. i spoke with that with some of my friends on their thoughts of the debate. your take aways from thursday? and i will pose the question i posed to them which do you think there is a value in having a second debate? >> yeah, i was thinking about that. look, the president, he had what we call a moment of choking, right? we have all had it. i think he was overprepared, frankly and he didn't do his best. we all wanted him to have a much stronger performance but the stakes are as you said so eloquently in the last segment, the stakes are too high to not understand that he is not running against another same candidate. he is running against a demagogue. he is running against someone who wants to drag us back to the 1870s. he doesn't care about women or people of color. he doesn't care about my community. and frankly, donald trump spent 90 minutes lying and also trashing our country. he doesn't bet on america. he bets against america time and time again. for me, i don't know if there is value in a second debate. as you pointed out, i was screaming at the television the entire time, no fact checking. he was allowed to lie for 90 minutes. and does that serve for president? when he is not debating someone o there to talk about policy and not actually there to talk with value statements on how he will help real people. i came away so saddened by the whole experience, watching how we in this country are a hair's breath away from a demagogue coming into power, a convicted felon, who basically, any kind of restraint he had on him before is no longer there. the supreme court continues to rule in his favor on so many fronts. i think it is a lot of hand wringing. when you look at the initial polling now, we are seeing it is not making a lot of difference. people understand it was one night. they understand that trump is a congenital liar. he will not be held toaccount. >> yeah, i'm glad congresswoman, as i say goodbye, i'm glad you brought up the fact that donald trump is not for america. he called it a third world country which troubles me greatly but to your point, it really is a binary choice between good versus evil when it comes to november. thank you for being here. >> always happy to chat with you. coming up next, from the closet t to the spotlight, the first of its kind documentary tracing how queer comedians spent the last century fighting for their place on stage. comedy icon margaret choe is joining me on how she helped reshape an entire weekend as we celebrate the entire weekend of pride month 2024. don't go anywhere. o pride month 2024 don't go anywhere. dracula, let's fight back against discomfort. with new poligrip power max hold & comfort. it has superior hold plus keeps us comfy all day with it's pressure absording layer. time for a bite! if your mouth could talk it would ask for... poligrip. i thought i was sleeping ok... but i was waking up so tired. then i tried new zzzquil sleep nasal strips. their four—point lift design opens my nose for maximum air flow. so, i breathe better. and we both sleep better. and stay married. i don't think you understand the adversities they over came. >> when i started, there weren't really many queer comics. >> things have got to change. things have to evolve. >> if i never had sex with a woman again, i would still be a lesbian. >> it is very important that we should be seen and we can be funny. >> i would not be a happy lesbian. >> as lgbtq plus pride month comes to an end, a documentary is bringing together multiple generations of all-star talent in the comedy world to show how far the community has come. they also showcase new talent who are pushing the boundaries. joining me now is margaret kho, stand up comedian. it is so good to have a fellow korean on tv. you are a fantastic doggy mom so my thanks for being such an upstanding supporter of rescues and doggies. there you go. >> this is my baby girl, yes. >> i remember her. i met her before. so the documentary is outstanding. it centers around lily tomlin, rosy o'donnell and more. when you were coming up in comedy, could you have imagined that this kind of lineup would be possible? >> no. and it is incredible. it is so amazing that we have come so far to be able to have shows like this, to be able to have an experience like this for queer audiences and audiences everywhere. we are queer comedians but we are not just for queer audiences. we are for aefr wn. i love this film. page did a beautiful job directing it and i love everyone in it. >> the documentary traces lgbtq comedy history against the backdrop of the gay rights movement from stonewall to anita bryant to the aids epidemic. what role do you think comedy played in the larger fight for equality? >> i think comedy represents hope because laughter if you really break it down is the unexpected thought that forces you to take a breath which will ensure your life for the next few seconds. so laughter is hope, hope that we will make it. i think that is what it is. it is where all marginalized communities look to humor to have hope. this is something that i think we have in common. >> you also say in the documentary that comedy can be a coping mechanism for racism, sexism and home phobia. how has that factored into how you have approached your comedy? >> i think it is really like trying to explain to audiences the feeling of being a woman of color, the feeling of being a queer woman, the feeling of never seeing myself out there, so having to create that experience or having to explain invisibility which is hard but it is also a funny project. to me, it has always been about explaining to people what it is like to be me. >> and you know the documentary also highlights the younger generation. you have joel kim booster, bob the drag queen, fantastic talent. how does it feel to see this younger generation of comedy talent and how do you think they are picking up the mantle from what you are still continuing to do? >> they are doing so well. especially joel kim booster who is my son. he is really incredible. i'm so proud of him. he is just really taking on the role for me of the first born son in comedy. he is making such a name for himself in somany areas, not just a comedian but as an actor and writer. i'm so proud of him. there are incredible young comedians doing incredible work. there there are so many out there, sabrina wu, i'm so proud of the newest generation. it is my privilege to have inspired the new generation. >> i want to end with this with you. robin tyler who is a fantastic comedian said the following. people said you could have been a big star as long as you stay in the closet but closets are vertical coffins. when you think about what robin said and you think of how far things have come. what's the future? what's next? >> the future is living. the future is living and surviving. and making sure that we have a place to survive, to have a country to survive and a planet to survive. fighting all of the things we need to fight and getting out of the closet, getting out of the coffin and starting to live. >> well, you guys are not just surviving, you and others are thriving. margaret cho, thank you for being here. i had the privilege of interviewing you for the aapi women a year or so ago and it was a spectacular experience. i'm grateful. thank you for joining us today. you can catch me here next saturday. follow us on social media using the handle@katie phang show. you can catch clips on youtube and you can listen to the show as a podcast for free. scan the qr code on your screen to follow now. msnbc reports with alex witt is coming up next. alex witt i coming up next start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. smile! you found it. the feeling of finding psoriasis can't filter out the real you. so go ahead, live unfiltered with the one and only sotyktu, a once-daily pill for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, and the chance at clear or almost clear skin. it's like the feeling of finding you're so ready for your close-up. or finding you don't have to hide your skin just your background. once-daily sotyktu was proven better, getting more people clearer skin than the leading pill. don't take if you're allergic to sotyktu; serious reactions can occur. sotyktu can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections, cancers including lymphoma, muscle problems, and changes in certain labs have occurred. tell your doctor if you have an infection, liver or kidney problems, high triglycerides, or had a vaccine or plan to. sotyktu is a tyk2 inhibitor. tyk2 is part of the jak family. it's not known if sotyktu has the same risks as jak inhibitors. find what plaque psoriasis has been hiding. there's only one sotyktu, so ask for it by name. so clearly you. sotyktu. every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. good day to all from msnbc world headquarters here in new york. welcome to alex witt reports. we begin with no reaction to the new york times editorial board urging president biden to drop his re-election bid after his debate against former president donald trump. anita dunn, biden campaign strategist tried to put it in perspective this morning.