Transcripts For MSNBC Trump on Trial Presidential Immunity 20240702

important and i hope the supreme court has the courage to do that. >> the supreme court delivers for donald trump. >> this is a really historic day here the supreme court setting a brand-new standard for presidential immunity. >> a landmark decision on presidential immunity. >> absolutely immuned to undermine elections, to go after individuals. >> and a blistering dissent from the liberal justices. >> orders the navy s.e.a.l. team six to assassinate a political rival. the president is now a king above the law. >> what happens to the case against donald trump? and what does it mean for an election that's just four months away? >> now the stakes are astronomically. >> tonight, when msnbc special coverage of the trump immunity ruling begins. now. good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes. we have an absolutely huge night of special coverage of today's supreme court decision on presidential immunity, you should know the president of the united states joe biden is going to deliver remarks about the ruling from the white house, we're being told, within the hour, we'll take that live as well as reaction. rachel maddow and joy reid are joining us this hour. along with joy reid, jen psaki. in today's 6-3 ruling, the majority of supreme court threw out the entire post-watergate legal structure that has governed the country. legal order that's basic foundations reach back much further than the watergate era, to the country's founding. founded on the principle that the president of the united states, the man elected by the people, is not above the law as a king would be, rather subject to the same rules that govern every other citizen of this country. the decision by chief justice john roberts, the court's conservative majority invented a new legal doctrine. one that says actually the president is a lot more like a monarch than you might have guessed, he's not accountable criminally to the laws of this country for what the court deems to be quoting official acts. i quote from the opinion. under our constitutional structure of separated powers the nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immune from criminal procushions for actions. he's entitled to at least presumptive immunity for all his official acts. now the supreme court says the president has complete and total immuity for official acts. what qualify as an official act versus an unofficial act? the answer is frustraingly we don't really know. the subject of intense litigation and argue menation. it's going to be up to the courts, lower courts' discretion, which makes this hypothetical from this case's oral arguments before the d.c. circuit back in april very troubling. >> if the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him, is that within his official acts in which he could get immunity. >> that could well be an official act. >> from the supreme court justice oral arguments. hypothetical about s.e.a.l. team 6, lot of people talk about, referenced in justice sotomayor's dissent today. it appears the conservative majority's answer to this hypothetical has been floating over the case on whether a seating president should be shielded from prosecution for ordering the military to assassinate a political rival and as far as we can tell, it's, yeah, probably. here's justice sonia sotomayor in her dissent, quote, today, when he uses his official powers in any way under -- now, if you know anything about the founding principles of this country and our longstanding civic culture, you may be wondering where in the constitutional the originalists drew the justification for the presidential power. the answer is nowhere. they just made it up. point of fact, there was no such thing as absolute executive immunity for official acts from criminal prosecution until this morning at 10:30 a.m. eastern time, no law professors taught it. it wasn't discussed in lower court rulings. it didn't exist until when this decision came down in that moment it was called forth into being. obviously, the conservative majority has a twisted interpretation of the constitution. it's clear to anyone watching, the text here is not what was at issue or the tex of the constitutional. the end result of course among other things, but most immediately is to spring donald trump from potentially facing jail time for his actions leading up to january 6th. that's not definitive but it goes a long way toward it. donald trump tells the world that he believes deeply and fully, that he should be above the law as president. it's deep sense the core campaign message for the second term to finish the job on january 6th. he asked the court to grant him that power and today shockingly, appallingly the court acqueiced. rachel, just your thoughts. i remember talking to you the day of oral arguments when we did a special. everyone's action to that, whoa, are they going to do this? >> yeah. i remember talking to you about this, chris, the day they chose to take it up, the decision to take it up itself was so gob smacking and i'm generally a glass half empty kind of person, i always see the cloud before i see the silver lining. we talked about the radicalism of that decision in and of itself. when the district court, ruled on this issue basically the rule was, you know, of course a president isn't immune, when the appeals court then looked at it and reviewed that decision, it was a bulletproof decision from that appeals court where the bottom line was essentially, of course, no, a president can't be immuned. it was gobsmacking when the supreme court took it up. in my glass half-empty kind of way, i thought, well -- under the worst case scenario they're not going to decide he's immune. it's outrageous they've taken it up. give him temporary immunity before the election. once the election happens, if he wins he makes the prosecutions go away anyway. i didn't expect they'd do this and they, you know, donald trump and his counsel asked for this 100% absolute immunity thing which was insane, i'd say they got 105% of what they were asking for, they got immunity from this court despite so much the language in justice roberts' ruling, saying that there was some -- some measure of humility here, or some measure of restraint. they give trump immunity that even he and counsel did not ask for and given the hypotheticals over the course of these arguments as you rightly pointed out, can a president assassinate a rival? we have to look at the supreme court's affirmative answer to that, yes, you can. with as much seriousness as it deserves. this is a death squad ruling. this is ruling that says as long as you can construe it as an official or quasi-official act you can do absolutely anything, absolutely anything, and never be held accountable, not only while you are president but forever. this president has activated pro-trump paramilitary group, wear t-shirts and celebrate right-wing death squads. a president who has talked about using the justice department to go after his -- to go after his rivals, this explicitly immunizes anything the president wants to do through the justice department and full stop to anyone. >> i'm 100% with you on that. i want to stay on department of justice thing, obviously there's reason why in those, the hypothetical offered by a federal judge in the appeals court arguments about s.e.a.l. team 6, why that's had such significance, but that's a hypothetical, it hasn't happened in american history, what has happened in american history is a president richard nixon using the justice department, the irs, all kinds -- i mean, he had the irs audit his political enemies. he attempted to use the justice department to go after his enemies. that's american history. you've been a historian of this period for a lot of reasons, there was a conclusion that watergate was wrong, and that what nixon did was wrong. the reading from roberts today, watergate wasn't prosecutorable, what nixon did as president he probably was immune for, too bad john roberts wasn't around in 1974. >> i mean, the executive sort of the imperial executive idea pie neared by republican justice department officials like ed meese, governing apex under dick cheney and worked in republican politics to approve the sort of things that happened particularly after 9/11 under the george w. bush white house, those have been brought by bringing a bunch of people who are part of that cultural, bringing them into a supermajority in the supreme court that has brought us to a place where a president has had his lawyers asked by a justice in open court, are you saying your guy can assassinate someone and he'll have immunity for that? the answer was yes. the court wrote it down. and that answer is the logical, you know, apex of where those things go over time. but to have that radicalism land, when you have a potential next term of donald trump on the horizon if he wins in november, where he's saying exactly what he'll do with this power, is quite a remarkable thing, you'll notice that nobody in reacting to today's ruling they're saying, wow, how scary, what is joe biden going to do with this power, right, nobody's saying that, nobody is worried a president like joe biden is going to, you know, abuse this in such a way that's going to be bring about a de dictatorship. because a this's what donald trump is promising that, they're doing this in the full context, the full knowledge of the radicalism of what they're bringing down upon the country and the only solution to this, the only way out of this is to have noncriminals and nonauthoritarian-minded win presidential elections. this is the only way to fix it. if you have someone who's criminal or authoritarian minded when they get in there armed with this ruling there's nothing they can't do. >> on that final point, yeah, the prospective implications of today's ruling are more profound in some ways and more unnerving than the retroactive ones, about the trial, we'll talk about this, was did it mean for the case that jack smith has? it's still alive. they can cabin enough of this to bring it. but the symbolic meaning to me as important as the legal meaning. for the reasons that you say. what it says to trump and to republicans, i mean, the joke i made today was like john roberts pulled down the american flag turned it upside-down and hoisted it back up on the supreme court, it felt like to me the opinion we're with you on this. >> yeah. >> over and above its findings, its holdings as a matter of constitutional law. >> yeah, i mean, if the president -- when donald trump running for president in 2016 started leading crowds in that lock her up chant, as shocking as it was to most of the country, it was a transgressive thrill to trump and his followers because they knew it sounded so wrong. but they enjoyed that transgressive thrill so much that it became policy, he tried to get the justice department to bring improper political motivations against opponents. we know that he's very, very -- this is what he wants to do. this is what he thinks power should be. now the supreme court has said, without reservation, and without limit, yeah, you can do that, we promise you explicitly in the ruling and the language of the ruling, anything you say to your justice department subject to immunity for you. and that is -- i mean, the rule of law means in this country that the law isn't used as a instrument of the ruler, the rule of law is supposed to constrained the ruler. the supreme court just undid it. it's binding. now the way our country is structured. the only way out of this, the only fix to this, is to put someone in the white house from here on out who will not abuse the absolutely tir ran call power. i should note of course joy reid is usually sitting in this chair at this hour, she's with us as well. we'll go to her. lot to get to tonight. don't go anywhere. we'll be right back after this break. right back after this break. e 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. the cockroach. resilient creatures. where there is one, others aren't far behind. well that's horrifying. always scavenging... ortho home defense max indoor insect barrier. one application kills and prevents bugs for 365 days. nature is wild. your home doesn't have to be. the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. it's lying dormant, waiting... and could reactivate. shingles strikes as a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. and it could wake at any time. think you're not at risk for shingles? it's time to wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention. we're expecting the president of the united states to issue an address to give a live address today from the white house in response to the supreme court ruling something that's extremely rare, that should be happening just in a little bit, we'll bring that to you when that happens. i want to bring in joy reid who whose hour is this, who has a lot to say about the decision today. >> chris, it was -- it was something to read today, both the decision and the dissent and i guess the sort of best way for him to sum it up, i don't know if everyone here watches game of thrones, if you're a game of thrones fan you'll know there's a king and then there's the hand of the king, and when the king is very young or very old or very mad, the hand of the king is effectively the king, and what i think you saw in this ruling today was the supreme court declare their preferred president of course because they no democrat would exercise these powers would like their next president to, they declare their presidents to be king and the hand of the king. this is from page 110. from the dissent. with its adoption that sometimes exempt the president of dictates of the law when the court says so, the court has effectively snapped from the legislative to bind the president or not to congress's mandates and it's also thereby augmented the power of the office of the presidency and itself. what john roberts said today, he and his five fellow leonard leo appointees will decide when the president has ire. only they can make that decision, they are the hand of the king. the last thing i will say they repeatedly called for boldness and decisive action that we need to see boldness and decisive action and only absolute immunity and presumed immunity can give a president such boldness. how previous presidents how to implement the trail of tears for indigenous people to march, how president lincoln essentially deleted the human property, $10 billion worth of human property from every state in rebellion by fiat, how presidents, let's talk about the presidents in the 20th harry truman unleashed a nuclear holocaust on two parts of japan, he did that boldly and decisively without fear of prosecution, how then does a new president, a future president need such boldness to come from the fiat of the supreme court. >> there has been no lack of boldness and decisive from american presidents and executives through the years particularly when operating in the conduct of war, particularly, andrew, this has been a shocking trajectory for you as someone who knows the law quite well and the department of justice. >> definitely agreed with rachel that i just did not expect there would be five votes for this, this is a watershed moment big picture. i want to make sure people understand, with respect to the department of justice on pages 20 and 21, the decision makes it clear even if there's a known sham prosecution that's off-limits, if you have a president who's on tape saying bring a false prosecution cannot prosecute. no matter how strong the evidence is and this is not a hypothetical because you have people talking about it rue now about weaponizing if they get back in office, so that part is -- it's just so -- to the rule of law when you're talking about a department of justice that the whole principle is to be separate and independent and not be sort of oh baying what the president says you have to do. >> i think the whole piece of this where the legal intersects collides violently with the political is that 2016, trump was, you could go back and say maybe there were other reasons to run, in 2024, the only reason he's running is for retribution, defining it as official. he wants to use official acts. forget about us. forget about the free press's analysis that the justices wrote down and put in writing. we do now have a king. he's ahead in the polls running to take official acts to seek out in his words to seek out retribution, only interested in the official parts of the job. he could have someone architect the white house around officially seeking out punishment for his enemies. 2017, a story in "the new york times" he wanted to prosecute hillary clinton. he fires james comey -- he wanted to commit crimes disguised as official acts. >> i think he said this publicly a thousand times. i was reading today, on the lovely project 2025 plan, on page 560, this is first line of that part, the next conservative administration should embrace the constitution and understand the obligation of the executive branch to use its independent resources and authorities to restrain the excesses of both the legislative and judicial branches. this is plan that steve bannon has been holding up in he cent interviews. and the justices what they did today is basically, i worked for two presidents. nicole worked for a president. they haven't -- they've done the bad things without -- now you have the person you're asking the american public to rachel's point to vote for people and trust the presidents they elect will have the morality to not abuse. that's essentially what they're doing. >> so, the very bad news for donald trump in this decision today and for candidate trump, very, very bad, is that mike pence is going to walk into a federal courtroom raise his right hand and take an oath to tell the truth and testify against donald trump in this case in september. it's going to happen much faster. absolutely. what this is, is we created an absolute immunity on one paragraph of the indictment, applying to exactly one paragraph of the indictment. the rest of the indictment goes back to the judge chutkan's courtroom, this supreme court has ordered her to have a hearing about the evidence in the case to determine whether the act in question is an official act or has a protection or not. that's for everything in the case except for one conversation that he had with the acting attorney general. so what you're looking at here, basically, there will be some briefs on each side and the judge will schedule a day and say we start today. mr. smith, who's your first witness? exactly like a prosecution. what jack smith will have to do and sometimes in pretrial evidentiary stuff they don't want to turn all cards over. they need to see every single one of your cards. every witness he has he'll bring into that courtroom, they're all going to be under oath and the defense is going to able to cross examine them. you're going to see this incredible january 6th hearing on steroids, possibly for six, eight weeks, september, october maybe. >> andrew, do you think that's going to happen. >> yeah, i'd always thought the silver lining, a small one because the big picture here is this decision is horrendous for american democracy, but lawrence is right, there's going to be hearing and the supreme court has actually said there has to be, and obviously they're going to be a loft fighting about it. this is hearing, judge chutkan can have a briefing. >> joy, there's also to your point earlier about the sort of clarity of this, or the stakes, one thing i was thinking about, too, rachel's point is just how terrifying this is about the election. some activating small democratic energy that can be brought out that's generally appalling move by the court. >> it's very clarifying. by the way, google project 2025, we're authorizing, really sort of -- they repeatedly talking about bold and decisive action. what action do they have in mind? probably the same action that the heritage foundation has in mind. heritage action has in mind. leonard leo had in mind. steve bannon has in mind. i think what they're saying to the american people is that, if we ge our preferred president back we're going to encourage him to break the boundaries of the law, push it to the limit, to feel free to even use violence, to use mass incarceration, do those camps, to take the bold and decisive action that we have said is necessary for the function of the presidency, to get the agenda done and we'll protect you and we'll let you know, donald trump, when you've gone too far and only then will be stopped. this is a clarion call to every american. that debate is like 34 counts old. it doesn't matter anymore. all that matters is you don't allow the person back into office who will use this power given by this court, this imperial court, to implement that agenda they wrote down and published because they know no one will stop them except voters. it doesn't matter if biden is old. what matters the other guy wants to be a king and this court has said, yes, you're a king and we're the king's hand and together the seven of us will rule this country. >> we're still waiting for president biden who's going to comment on the ruling. that's not, that's quite remarkable. this ruling is quite striking. first the law paiker who's actively invest gating the ethics of the supreme court. senator sheldon whitehouse will join me live next. in me live ne. . good thing there's leaffilter. our patented filter technology keeps leaves and debris out of your gutters forever. guaranteed. call 833- leaffilter to get started. and get the permanent gutter solution that ends clogs for good. they took the time to answer all of our questions. they really put us at ease. end clogged gutters for good. call 833.leaf.filter, or visit leaffilter.com today. from pep in their step to shine in their coats, when people switch their dog's food to the farmer's dog, the effects can seem like magic. but there's no magic involved. (dog bark) it's just smarter, healthier pet food. it's amazing what real food can do. millions of children are fighting to survive due to inequality, conflict, poverty and the climate crisis. save the children® is working alongside communities to provide a better life for children. and there's a way you can help. please call or go online to give just $10 a month. only $0.33 a day. we urgently need 1000 new monthly donors in the next 30 days to help the children we support around the world. you can help provide food, medicine, care and protection, plus so much more that a child needs by calling right now and giving just $10 a month. all we need are 1000 monthly donors in the next 30 days. please call or go online now with your monthly gift of just $10. thanks to generous government grants, every dollar you give can have up to ten times the impact. and when you call with your credit card, we will send you this save the children® tote bag as a thank you for your support. your small monthly donation of just $10 could be the reason a child in crisis survives. please call or go online to hungerstopsnow.org to help save lives today. today was the last day of the supreme court term, it's remarkable how wide the swath of destruction cut by this conservative supreme court majority has been both in this term and over the last five years from of course overturning roe to ending affirmative action, kneecapping the epa, completely remaking administrative law in this term. six unelected conservative justices, three appointed by a man who lost the popular vote have reversed decades of progress all to satisfy donald trump, the right-wing legal movement. now those same six justice have ended the term by essentially granting trump immunity for official acts. sheldon whiteshouse -- the far-right radicals on the court have essentially made the president a monarch above the law. sheldon whitehouse joins us now. your reaction to the ruling today? >> it was pretty stunning. we knew this was a court that's out of control. insulated itself from fact-finding accountability, that violates basic tenet of human pro pryty. as you just pointed out there is their second upending of big chunks of american law, they have over four decisions upended the administrative law that protects us all from corporate abuses, but now they've upended the separation of powers of the president. against members of congress, against members of the supreme court, as long as he does it through official channels. >> it's struck me, this ethical compromises that have been so front of mind, the obvious case for recusal from justice thomas and justice alito, given you know the involvement of their respective spouses with both the actual january 6th and the flying of flag in support thereof, you could have -- they could have recused and have had 4-3 decision without the kind of obvious taint of the refusal to do so. >> yes, day could have, but they can't resist, again this is a court with these federalist society justices, who feel they're on a mission to reshape america, and whatever it takes to get there is what they'll do, and just to go back to the point about recusal you know when they're violating the law about recusal when you know what the facts are, these nine justices are the only people in the united states government who have insulated themselves from even basic fact-finding. you don't get to know what the facts are. thomas just ignores questions about what he knew about his wife's insurrection activities and alito's statement about his wife's insurrection activities are false. this fact-finding is really a bad problem for the court and i don't think it's sustainable, i think ultimately we'll get this fixed and we'll be able to have real investigations and when we do, look out. >> senator whitehouse that's a perfect note, this is joy, if taken as a whole the decision of this court they have irrigated tremendous power to themselves when as you said they are tainted by corruption, multiple justices taking trips and gifts and now legal idesing great tooties and bribes, lot of questions, have asked for the department of justice to start looking at justice thomas. jim jordan in the house, he understands in a fundamental way the power of investigations the january 6th select committee showed the power of public investigations to concentrate the public mind. can we look forward to extensive hearings about this court? subpoena them, if they won't be subpoena, put an empty chair there, subpoena these justices and have hearings. >> what's our best chance of that is to win the house in november, is because we're not going to win more than 60 democrats in the senate, so the republicans are going to filibuster any effort to enforce senate subpoenas, we're laying the groundwork, we're talking to our house coordinates, so that if they win in november they can start the process of teeing up like a january 6th commission, a full-fledged investigative commission to look at this long, long pattern of supreme court mischief and packing of the court so that in january they got off to a strong, fast start and can do things like do a proper weeks' long deposition and debrief of leonard leo, the functionary at the middle of this whole scheme, he has a lot to tell, the republican senators are blocking us, but senators can't block a house subpoena. >> senator whitehouse, thank you very much for your time tonight. >> thank you. one of the things that's clear from senator whitehouse, the court is at the center as well of this election now, it has been since the dobbs decision, overturning roe v. wade, if there was any question about whether that could continue on the two-year anniversary of dobbs i think we got answer today and the jen, the president giving remarks on a supreme court decision from the white house speaks to their awareness of that. >> i mean -- >> right now -- >> the president who was the former judicial committee. president joe biden right now. good evening. the presidency is the most powerful office in the world, an office that not only tests your judgment but more importantly it's an office that can test your character because you're not only faced moments when you need courage to exercise the full power of the presidency, you also face moments where you need the wisdom to respects the limits of the office of presidency. this nation was founded on the principle there was no king in this country. we're each equal before the law, no one is above the law, not even the president of the united states. but today's supreme court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed for all practical purposes, today's decision almost certainly means there's no limits what a president can do. this is a fundamentally new principle and it's a dangerous precedent. the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even the supreme court of the united states. the only limits will be self-imposed by the president alone. this decision today has continued the court's attack in recent years on a long range of long established. taking away a woman's right to choose, to today's decision, undermines the rule of law of this nation. four years ago, my predecessor sent a violent mob to the u.s. capitol to stop the peaceful transfer of power, we saw it with our own eyes, we sat there and watched it happen. attack on the police. ransacking of the capitol. a mob hunting down the house speaker nancy pelosi. gallows erected to hang the vice president mike pence. one of the darkest days in history of america, now the man who sent that mob to the u.s. capitol is facing potential criminal conviction for what happened that day. american people deserve to have answer to that before the upcoming election. about what happened on january 6th before they're asked to vote again this. now because of today's decision that's highly unlikely. it's a terrible disservice to the people of this nation. so, now, now the american people will have to do what the courts should have been willing to do but will not, the american people have to render judgment about donald trump's behavior. the american people must decide whether donald trump's assault on our democracy on january 6th makes him unfit for public office, the highest office in the land. american people must decide if trump's embrace of violence to preserve his power is acceptable. perhaps most importantly, american people must decide they want to entrust the presidency once again to donald trump. being even more emboldened. you know, the outset of our nation, it was the character of george washington, our first president defined the presidency, he believe power was limited, not absolute. that power always resides with the people, always. now over 200 years later, today's supreme court decision, once again, it will depend on the character of the men and women who hold that presidency, that are going to define the limits of the power of the presidency because the law will no longer do it. i know i will respect the limits of the presidential powers i have for 3 1/2 years, but any president including donald trump will now be free to ignore the law. i concur with justice sotomayor's dissent today. she said in every use of visual power, the president is now a king above the law, with fear for our democracy i dissent. end of quote. so should the american people dissent. i dissent. may god bless you >> what makes you so confident you should be the president? >> president biden from the white house, five minutes of remarks criticizing strongly both the decision by the court today and also what it would mean in the hands of his opponent, donald trump, and recalling the fact that trump's sent an armed mob to the capital. we all saw it with our own eyes and pledging that he will not abuse the power. there is something interesting today from the institutional equity standpoint as they always say in washington. usually the executive is psyched when he gets a decision that gives the executive more power. there are times when you go to what is happening and you will see the department of justice is arguing for this view of executive power because that is what they do. there is something remarkable about the court in its holding giving a ton of power to joe biden personally, essentially that man coming out to say, i don't want it. >> i wish the president had given examples for he says, i respect the limits of the power i have read he said i will respect. he has already expected -- respected those. he could have given the example that i ordered the justice department to not prosecute my son. i could have issued that order and i did not. the supreme court today has encouraged me more than anything then pre-existed today to do that, i won't. i will not do what the supreme court is in effect more than authorizing me to do, which is to stop the prosecution right now. i wish you had gone straight in on those examples because that would make the trump contrast much more vivid and it would make it much more clear what there is to fear in a trump presidency. >> i think he might get there over the next several days. that might be but my bet he did not feel it was the right moment to raise his son. what that backdrop was was the cross hall, as we all know. which is not even traditionally where you do most statements but you do them from the roosevelt rooms in the rose garden. that is where barack obama came out and said, osama bin laden is dead but it is a formal part of the white house. i was struck and surprised, pleasantly surprised i will say, how politically he was in the statement. as you said earlier, it is uncommon for presidents to do statements on supreme court rulings. you may do a written statement, especially joe biden. he would be resistant to do that because he is as usual who respects the separation of powers and the legal system. not only did he do a statement, he went into a very political place of naming his predecessor, the risk that his predecessor being unfit for office and the tracy american public had to make and talked about what rachel talk about and what we have been talking about, the fact that as president, you have to respect the limits of your own power and alluding to the fact that trump is a person who will not do that. and that is what part of this election is about. >> that is what i find so remarkable. if you put it in historical context, washington said, i am not running again. he understood the self-restraint was absolutely essential to this country. you do not have a king. you needed to have peaceful transfers of power. the idea that you have the president of the united states after the supreme court decision going on air today to say, this is wrong. i do not leave this power. this is fundamentally undermining democracy. if you want a sense of what it means in terms of his character, it is true he could've talked about his son but he is embodying in the same way that he did not pardon his son. he did not order the department of justice to say, don't prosecute my son. going today on air to say, this is wrong to give me this power. this is fundamentally at odds with a system of checks and balances, i find that so impressive. >> you are all much smarter than me. the political person and he wanted to do with the of it in the room, thursday night. he should have said, i should know, i was there. >> [ laughter ] >> every opportunity has to be viewed through a political lens if we agree with what rachel set up beginning of the hour and i think we do. the only way to protect the country is to make sure donald trump is never president again. there is no more separating out. there are no more while he was here. everything is talking to the voters about what rachel said making sure donald trump is not the president. i thought this was a near- perfect speech. the only way it could have been better was to address the joke and deer with the element in the room. i want to get your thoughts just before before we move on or we will not move on. >> [ laughter ] >> what i want to say is because you are physically not here i want to make sure we do not keep you out of the conversation. i want to hear what you have to say. >> i wanted him to come out as a noun i have all of this power, maybe i will declare donald trump to be an enemy of the state and lock him in a log because i can do that. sigh, i will not do that because i am not donald trump. i am kind of with lawrence and nicole. i would love to see him say a couple of examples. for instance, let me explain what the supreme court, that when donald trump was attending our nuclear secrets, i could've had the fbi kick down the door when he was there and drag him off and throw him into sing sing. this course is i could have. i could have ordered the justice department to help the prosecution of hunter biden, according to this court. i did not do that and what would you think of me if i didn't? people need to understand the practicalities but i like what justice jackson said in getting practical. what they are saying if you want to remove an official, what if you want to do it by poisoning them ? i think that people need -- that is a footnote. that is scary that was red in the ruling. i think what biden needs to understand is everyone understands he is a decent man. when he presents himself and talking about the removal of rights of voting rights and women's rights to choose, it is important to remind people of that. in a less generic way. people need to understand put it down to where she'll be looking at and grab it. he needs to make it very clear how scary this can be in the hands of donald trump in very specific terms. maybe i want to talk about that and maybe i will come back to you on this question, andrew. i don't want to do anything that appears to be minimizing the appalling nature of the court's decision. there is a distinction between what the president can do, what is legal and what he can be prosecuted for under this the reason i think that is important because we still have a constitution. those constitutional protections still adhere to us as citizens. if the president of united states goes and says i want you to open an investigation that a person, that is a violation of my constitutional due process and is not lawful nor constitutional. whether or not the president could subsequently be prosecuted for that action. those are two distinct things. the reason i make this point, i do not want to concede too much to the worst elements in our political, democratic and legal culture about the powers of the president from this opinion. >> and that is true. if you marry this opinion which says that the pairs didn't -- president has an expansive core function and that is one of the more shocking parts of this decision is they say take care of the law provision. this is not alice in wonderland, the take care of the law provision is what gives them exclusive authority and immunity to violate the law. let us be clear. that is their logic. he gets to prosecute chris hayes and say to his attorney general, prosecute chris hayes. it is true but chris hayes, can say you are violating my rights and i will sue the attorney general. the president can pardon the attorney general. what the court said today, the pardon power, is unreviewable. with the president's power in core areas is unreviewable. you do have this mix that really goes to president biden's point, if there is any time right now but you need to have somebody with judgment and character because you do not have a check and balance system with this supreme court decision. >> quickly, nicole. this character question seems to be an important and fruitful political line. he said character three times. i think it is the other half of it. i may not be sprinting down the tarmac these days but i have character. everyone believes it. you deal is something that everyone can see with their own eyes and you do something everyone believes. he is dripping with character. >> that contrast with endorsement of democratic values contracts is one of the things that we have. thank you for sticking with us for our second hour special coverage on today's ruling on presidential immunity. in a 6-3 rolling along ideological lines the conservative majority ruled that the president and donald trump in particular have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for what the court deems official acts. there is some ambiguity as to what constitutes an official act the court makes clear that as it applies to special counsel jack smith's january 6th case the answer is quite a bit it seems to believe that trump attempted to pressure mike pence into overture election is an official act they are not definitive on that point. they are more definitive on this. roberts is reaching out and touching this issue. the pressure on department of justice officials into rubberstamping the screams national claims of fraud. apparently they see no issue at all with the president directing the doj to do his bidding. that is john roberts. the president may discuss prosecutions of the attorney general and other justice department officials to carry out his constitutional duty. the limits of this immunity is now an open and pressing question. we do not have the answer. judge tanya chutkan will have to resolve some of the ambiguity in the cord. this concept announced today at 10:30 a.m. eastern by the conservative majority of absolute immunity for presidents from criminal prosecution for official acts is an invented legal right. you can google, you know, law professor syllabi on this question and you would find nothing because it did not happen. coordinate it up. they decreed this, legislated from the bench, dude to borrow a term. today's decision was not born from any coherent judicial philosophy rather from the true philosophy of the conservative legal movement in this country. they did not interpret the constitution as the founders intended. i think it is fair to say with anyone that debates from the constitutional convention, the executive, the king, the limits and scope of the authority of the federal government. they chose to protect the powerful conservative ex- president and others that may come in the future to harass the powerless in their perceived enemies. according to this court in this term, if you are sleeping outside because you quite literally do not have a home and nowhere else to sleep, you can be criminally charged. the full force of the law can be weapon mice against you. they just handed down the ruling last week. if you are a republican mayor from indiana and you take 13,000 bucks from a trucking company after stirring my government contracts, you did not commit a crime. that is fine the supreme court overturned the conviction last week. just like they overturned the conviction of former republican bob mcdonald. a case that was cited by the majority today in his own corruption charges back in 2016 like they overturned the conviction of two associates chris christie, who create intentional traffic jam on the george washington bridge to punish a political rival if you are a sitting supreme court justice and you have taken, i don't know, $4 million in disclosed and undisclosed gifts, that is fine too. the law in this conception from this 6-3 majority exist to protect people like you. just like in exist to allow a former republican president of united states accountability to end democracy and steal an election which he lost. the standard we try to aspire to, i think we have bought in on this is the one that is actually chiseled into the face of the supreme court, equal justice under law. we often fall short as a country. the supreme court has shown us that they don't aspire to this. the law is for the little people . it is not for the rich. it is not for politicians. it is not for the supreme court. it is for the parties of the 6- 3 supreme court. and to pretend otherwise is dishonest. just moments ago president biden had his own thoughts about the court's really and he gave those comments from the white house. >> this nation was founded on principles that there are no kings in america. each of us is equal before the law. no one is above the law. not even the president of the united states. today supreme court decision of presidential immunity, that fundamentally change to . this decision today has continued to track the recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation. >> back with me i have katie phang and alex. it is good to have you both here. >> what was the point of the american revolution to >> exactly. >> we did not want monarch? it makes me rethink the flag and whose how should be applying it. >> martha and alito. it is a shame. >> it is not something conservatives seem to have at this point. i was stunned by a couple things. obviously, the scope of the ruling the scat -- fact that the ones that you want most scrutinized. organize the department of justice. that has been taken off of the table is indicative -- >> the unofficial acts are he is refuting some wall. okay, maybe we will prosecute that or not. telling the justice department -- >> it is specifically that. the job ahead for tanya chutkan seems impossible. it is if justice roberts have handed her a ziploc bag full of dirty water. here you go, figured out looking through best. the line between official and unofficial is almost impossible to clean if you cannot look at motive and you cannot put the official acts that may have led to the unofficial abuse. my last thought is that this is the culmination of 40 years of devious and focus planning on the part of the right wing. everything that the roberts court has done from affirmative action to voting rights, abortion and to executive power to this has been the result of feeds that were planted. sam alito, clarence thomas and john roberts were all coming of age in the doj and related agencies when this plan was effectively laid out by right wing conservatives. they have with discipline and tenacity delivered today. >> katie, i see the opinion out before you. >> this is my version of beautiful mind going on. >> you were tweeting about it this morning. from a legal perspective, folks that i respect the my wife chief among them. >> good to start with her. she is my number one go to. less so after the oral arguments but even the opinion was out past even what the arguments communicate. do you feel that way? >> a lot of us anticipated the return back to judge chutkan with the rubric. we talked about the arguments with the idea you have to make a determination of what is official and unofficial. i was stunned by two things. we always knew the official acts would get absolute immunity. we also knew unofficial acts would not get the immunity. it is the expansion of the middle of the road trade this presumptive immunity where the burden shifts show largely to special counsel jack smith or the government. the second thing was the exclusion of the evidence that is problematic. yet, i will say this and call me pollyanna about this. i had slaves i would roll them up right now but i am a trial lawyer. we now are bound by this decision. now we have to buckle up and look at what the evidence is. i heard this in the prior hour. it becomes more difficult but it does not become impossible. why? as we prepare cases and deal with pretrial rulings, sometimes it ends up being the striking through a one line of testimony or one small aspect of evidence but then you build your case around it. there is still this upper chamber judge chutkan these many trials are evidentiary hearings to present, not only to -- or jack smith, more accurately, to allow the american public to hear evidence they otherwise have stolen from them because this trial is not before november. it is important for people to realize there are rules of evidence that have not been changed but it does make it difficult for you have the one they could stool we heard about the oral arguments of but you still have the opportunity to present evidence. >> we will not just hear the evidence. judge chutkan is going to roll. there is no reason to roll that every line of this indictment goes forward except for the paragraph they have given absolute immunity. >> can trump appeal ? >> you will not see this trial for at least two years. this hearing that we will have is massive. it will have to do this. knowing what else was said contemporaneous to the extra communications or who was involved in transmitting the electronic communications, these electron tweets. and who is involved in organizing the rally. it could be relevant to the classification of each communication. we, therefore, demanded judge chutkan to find out who organized the rally and get those people in. this is a massive and very long hearing including testimony from people out of state. bringing all the people in from arizona. >> there is conspiracy counselor, three of the four are conspiracy counts. conspiracy lot will not be, what to trump do in this narrow avenue? what was this big conspiracy? that is all evidence. >> there is some question about what is under the evidentiary hearing sort of shadow. >> they are saying it is up to judge chutkan. and then the court will review her and we will review them. right now they have had an entirely back to judge chutkan. she will not be intimidated. she will look at what they wrote and take the most liberal interpretation because this is a really messy decision. it has gigantic holes in it that judge chutkan can just drive through. >> what is the timeline? she can have that hearing starting in september. it could take many, many weeks. >> can it be delayed past september? >> there was a little bit of time left so you might have to have some discovery that will happen. it will happen before november. >> there is no provision here for discovery at all. >> if it is evidentiary hearing, they may give space. >> in terms of the remand and we will talk more about this with the calendar work and the other cases because there is a bunch of other cases, including sentencing. that is a busy completely untouched by this decision. >> donald trump has just filed a letter with the judge in manhattan saying this has to throw out the entire convention in that case. we will hear more about that. >> she does get the ball back, as it were. it is your case again after today? >> yes, she does. >> she has a back and the clock starts back up again. the scheduling goes back to judge chutkan? >> it all goes back to herbert 100% it gets remanded back to her. she has control of the scheduling and substance. to lawrence's point, the way that she teases up is not just a very super technical legal experience. in this opinion, it says to the extent that the case objective analysis of context will necessary inform the inquiry. there are opportunities to have more context and more content than what you necessary would read from the majority opinion. >> i want to bring in chuck rosenberg, a former fbi official and msnbc contributor and has spent a career in a justice department that i think it is fair to say operated under entirely different set of expectations, norms and internal regulations than what exists now after the court decision. is that fair? >> i think so. now i am an outsider with the department i came from. the norms that may have shifted. i don't mean to be pollyanna- ish here. they are overwhelming agent career, career civil servants and the norms i grew up with are still the norms that these folks live and breathe. >> in terms of the breath of this and what it means for judge chutkan and to put on your prosecutor had, sort of off of the conversation we were just having with lawrence and katie. one of the things that people noted with jack smith actually anticipated a ruling like this and try to proactively cabinet parts of this indictment and say , even if you find immunity for official acts, here's why we think these are not official acts and the indictment can go forward pretty has to go back and figure out what to do with this case. how would you be thinking about it? >> they had almost three months to gain out worst-case scenarios. they got a bad case handed back to them. maybe they are a little bit surprised but they are not caught offguard. i think of the road is rockier and longer. there is no way that we have a trial before the election. we may well have the hearing. the contours of that with who they call, how long it takes, what documents they have and what questions they ask are all things that the team has been gaming out now for months. it is in the hands of a good judge. she has demonstrated that she can move her docket she is smart and thoughtful and there's no reason not to have that hearing soon. i think anything's point, there may be some additional discovery that is necessary. the special counsel was not waiting for this decision. they could have gathered all of that stuff up and now that judge chutkan has the case before her on her docket under her control, they can drive up a truck and back it up into the lawyer suite and dump it on their desk. >> at jack smith and his team, as you said, are planning for the potential of this. what evidence or things that they may have presented can they no longer use or utilize or rely on? >> a great question. they are having five parts to this scheme that the smith team allege. one of them is now off the table. according to the spring court decision today, it is fully immunized. that part involves the communications between mr. trump and his justice department. there are four other pieces. communications between trump and vice president pence. perhaps immunize but to be determined. and then there is a whole bunch of communications and a scheme between trump and private lawyers, trump and private consultants. that is presumptively fair game . private actors are not part -- if it is private conduct, i would say of the five, one is gone and one is in danger and three seem to be fully in play. >> chuck rosenberg, who has a long experience with these cases and what that department of justice. appreciate it. lawrence, to your point. that is two ways to think about it. what if the case survives as a case, which is on a two year trajectory, and from a public information standpoint happens in the fall ? >> from a public information standpoint the entire case is going to be presented by the prosecution in this hearing. every single thing he has against trump except for one conversation with the acting attorney general in which the acting attorney general says i will resign if you go ahead with this plan to send the letter. that cannot be presented in this case according to this. nothing else is been ruled out. we arty have a pretty good idea about judge chutkan's attitude towards the evidence. she thinks, 100% is trial criminal accusations. she is basically going to send this back to his room court, in effect for the trump people we'll appeal it. she will going to think that everything in here except the paragraph is a prosecutable charge. there is nothing in this opinion that prevents her from doing it, nothing, including the vice president staff. the supreme court says a trial judge, you figure this out. everything including the mike pence stuff, she will figure out. then it will go to the appeals court and back up to them. >> i want to jump off the point you made about the one part that is explicitly reached by the majority opinion. that is the meeting the big climatic meeting which there is a plot that has been concocted. too basically did have a date department of justice and put this environmental lawyer and run the department of justice and send out a later on a letterhead that goes to georgia and maybe six or seven other states saying, the department of justice think there's a gray ladies and we think your state legislature go ahead and can be and send your electors. it would be an official imprimatur from the department of justice on the big lie. you made this point and i want to underscore it here. i personally have always felt that the closest the crew ever came to working with that. if the letters have gone out, given the amount of pressure and the testimony of rusty bowers in arizona who said he was under amanda's pressure to convene some alternate special session, that might have been the thing that succeeded. that specific thing that came the closest is the thing that robert said you cannot do it is weaponization of the federal government. every accusation is a confession. to have that letter on doj letterhead go out, that is the federal government and the machinery and all the weight of it pressuring state officials that can be done forever. consider the following, there was only a limited number of people within the doj, oils been jeff clark that was a part of this. outside of that is why trump needed to go to the john eastman of the world and other officials. that is your private conduct did that is the conduct that is not immunized and that is a reason why, even though it is part of the presumptive immunity analysis that conversations with people external of the executive branch. that is why you will have chutkan, the real wildcard is who does he drop from the d.c. circuit court of appeals when he appeals judge chutkan's ruling? >> it is also going into the same building on first street. i want to say that we have dan goldman on the supreme court ruling, a congressman from new york and why it is important not to abandon a lot of our norms and commitments in the wake of today's decision. much more covers coming up and all of that ahead. do not go anywhere. anywhere right now across the u.s., people are trying to ban books from public schools and public libraries. yes, libraries. all er seen. it's people in power who want to control everything. well, i say no to censorship. and i say yes to freedom of speech and expression. if you do too, please join us in supporting the american civil liberties union today. for over 100 years, the aclu has fought for your rights and mine. including the right to read all manner of books. so please call or go online to myaclu.org. for just $19 a month, only $0.63 a day. you can become a guardian of liberty and help protect all the rights promised to us by the u.s. constitution. make no mistake, this move to ban books is a coordinated attack on students right to learn. this is a clear violation of free speech. that's why the aclu is working to fight against censorship in all its forms. it is so important now more than ever. so please call or go to myaclu.org and become an aclu guardian of liberty, for just $19 a month. use your credit card and you'll get this special we the people t-shirt and more to show you're helping to protect the rights of all people. the aclu is in all 50 states, d.c. and puerto rico defending our first amendment right of free speech and all of your constitutional rights. because we the people, means all of us. so please, call or, go online to myaclu.org today. i still love to surf, snowboard, so please, call or, go online to and, of course, skate. so, i take qunol magnesium to support my muscle and bone health. qunol's extra strength, high absorption magnesium helps me get the full benefits of magnesium. qunol, the brand i trust. why use 10 buckets of water when you can use 1 fire extinguisher. and to fight heartburn, 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. here's why you should switch fo to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today. join the millions of people - it's polite to thank someone when they do something nice for you, isn't it? well, how about when they do something brave for you? let's show veterans our gratitude. ask your local veterans affairs office how you can help. the more you know. if there was not enough news, we have breaking news it is not that surprising given that we're dealing with. donald trump is now trying to overturn his conviction, wait for it, in the new york hush money case. based on the new powers of immunity that were just granted to him from the spring court but he was not the president when the majority of the conduct at issue in that conviction took place. dan goldman is a democrat of new york and was lead counsel in the first impeachment of donald trump and he joins me now. you have strong inks to say about the court's finding but let me start with you on the notion that the newly created invented ex vivo absolute immunity for the present may not apply to the conviction in the new york court of law. >> i suppose the theory is that some of the conduct including signing the checks occurred while he was president if the supreme court says that assigning personal checks from his own company to repay michael cohen for paying off porn star that he slept with as an official act, then we know our country has fallen. our country, unfortunately took a real hit today. our democracy really took a stab in the heart by the supreme court, three of whom of the 6-3 decision were appointed by donald trump and two others in the majority should have recused themselves by law. >> is someone like yourself, who has spent her life with the law and you were a prosecutor. you worked in congress and now a member of congress. i think people like yourself, it can be hard to see the court acting this way. almost at a bistro level, your expectation for what this court is and how it works in america and how a president function and legal reasoning, what that adds up to today when you look a decision like the one the court handed down. >> a great point this afternoon my wife looked at me and said, what is wrong with you? i said i am depressed about this case. it is literally a road map to a trump to leadership. it is a road map given to someone who has stated that he wants to be a dictator. someone who says that he will be on a revenge and retribution tour. just to put this in context and certainly the details and the nuts and bolts of this actual case that he is chargers will have to be sorted out. under this opinion today, donald trump can pardon anyone that he wants in return for $1 million and he cannot be charged with that. he literally can take a bribe. that is one person in this entire country, who now is truly above the law. no other politician, including me, i can do that. there is one person that can do that and this is someone who just recently offered oil executives the regulation in return for $1 million. he is opening up a chasm for a corrupt line, fraudster, convicted felon, accused and liable rapist and is barreled through and take over this country. when we say democracy is at stake, now we know exactly how and why that it is. >> just to emphasize this point it is the holding of this majority opinion specifically, if they do not have to reach this, it was not before them. one of the things they like to do is reach out and grab issues they do not have to settle and settle them for the pardon power is absolutely unreviewable. essentially, an official act and nothing around a pardon, essentially, it can be anything but immune and unreviewable to your point about selling pardons for $1 million. >> absolutely. the way they overreached even further is more shocking. they unnecessarily determine that any official acts cannot be used even as evidence of a crime. that was only a 5-4 decision. justin -- justice any told him barrett was the other was but it was justice thomas and justice alito both have hume should have recused. justice thomas' wife was involved. justice alito and his wife made political statements in support of the stop the steal. that is basic black letter law grounds for recusal. they refused to recuse. it must be reined in and when the house takes over the democrats take over the majority we will past the independent counsel bill and make sure that we rein it in. >> gann -- dan goldman, thank you for your time tonight. want to welcome legal correspondent lisa rubin who has joined us here. just because i want to underscore what the congressman was saying. chief justice roberts and talking about evidence and i love to get your thoughts says, the answers immunity is the entitlement to not to have to answer for his conagra presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution. putting a whole bunch of evidence outside of the purview , which is over and above the prosecutorial immunity. >> this is not something everyone that was legitimate on the table. jack smith address the issue of evidence in his reply brief prior to or garments with the last two pages but even if you grant some immunity, here are things you should not do. you should not take evidence of official acts off the table. yet, they did so anyway. in f but note they say, something that is a matter of public record, the fact of taking an official act can still come into evidence. testimony are private records of a present with respect to those official acts, those are off limits. they never explain what is meant by a public record? are tweets of public record? in a separate portion they talk about the fact that the bucket of allegations about the president's behavior on january 6th are primarily about his speeches and his tweets on that day. if those can constitute official acts, then what is a matter of public record? this is an inconsistent opinion that is as confusing as it is demoralizing with respect to the future prosecution of this case. >> can we talk about pardon power? you the court wanted to. >> i think this is kind of thrown around. i want to reference how it typically works under a normal president. typically, the department of justice has an entire process the the review who can be pardon that is recommended to the president. it is reviewed and he make decisions when we talk about donald trump prosecuting people, political enemies, the pardoning piece is pivotal. he can say to people, you do me this favor, i will pardon you. he can self pardon himself which is the dream and why he runs for president. this piece which is reference in the ruling is a big part of the threat of donald trump. and part of why he is running. >> let self parting motion was unresolved until today they seem to resolve it. by the way -- >> practically. >> you cannot self pardon, what are the consequences for that under this ruling? that they can happen if he tries to sell pardon when he cannot be prosecuted for trying to self pardon. i think they have answered that question even by not addressing it squarely >> rachel said is okay to be a glass half empty at the top of this coverage. i am at last have empty person right now. >> it is fully empty. >> i know there is some optimism about what the evidentiary hearing could hear politically in terms of the case. it seems like jack smith has been hobbled. i want to get your thoughts and your thoughts on the new york case. i understand that as dan goldman said, is paying off the star and official duty? basin we got today, the checks were cut while trump was in office as president. that would be a fundamental problem for that verdict. secondarily, georgia what happens down there where they were waiting on the immunity case can they are expected to file in the next few weeks. does that derail everything else? >> the checks that were written from his personal i don't think it converts into an official act. the bigger problem is evidentiary one. they argued shortly before trial that he said he wrote about michael: or stormy daniels were written while he was in office for official acts. they should be good from evidence from the immunity printout on them to appear and have a better shot as opposed to getting rid of the case entirely. >> georgia is fake electors. there is explicit notation throughout this opinion about a collector being private. although it is still subject to germination. although amy coney barrett said that is private. >> it is in the name. thank you so much. there is a lot more in today's ruling we have not unpacked including what it means for the very institution of a special counsel. that is coming up. i still to , and, of course, skate. so, i take qunol magnesium to support my muscle and bone health. qunol's extra strength, high absorption magnesium helps me get the full benefits of magnesium. qunol, the brand i trust. the itch and rash of moderate to severe eczema disrupts my skin, night and day. despite treatment, it's still not under control. but now i have rinvoq. a once-daily pill that reduces the itch and helps clear the rash of eczema —fast. some taking rinvoq felt significant itch relief as early as 2 days— and some achieved dramatic skin clearance as early as 2 weeks. many saw clear or almost-clear skin. plus, many had clearer skin and less itch, even at 3 years. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin, heart attack, stroke, and gi tears occurred. people 50 and older with a heart disease risk factor have an increased risk of death. serious allergic reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch & rash of eczema. talk to your dermatologist about rinvoq. learn how abbvie can help you save. we are back on this enormous consequential newsday that started with a pretty shocking opinion from the supreme court. just to keep you apprised of where things are headed. at 9:00 rachel maddow will do her show. and right now at the table joining us is the one and only stephanie newell, we have texted today about today and i'm not got a chance to hear your thoughts about this ruling. >> you know i am always here to talk about money. and just think back to when trump was in office. he said, there is conflict of interest. i am the president and a businessman. it is what it is. we all talked about the monuments. the hotel he was operating, the bribery pallets down the block. >> 100% produce all lobbying groups and foreign governments take entire floors. it was not just the trump hotel in d.c. it was mar-a-lago. it was doral. it was ibaka getting trademark from china. and then jared getting money from the saudi's. if you are uncomfortable before, it would get way, way worse. now donald trump has a wider main that he can mix business with official office and the irony that today we learn that there the trump sons are overseas and there is going to be a trump tower saudi arabia. we will not let this happen again, business and government get tangled. it is going to . the lane is now wide open. if you were to be the president again. >> if. >> yes. >> what has been put before this trump and the possible power. in the degree that it perfectly , it sort of perfectly compliments when trump himself was. i have to say that i am surprised by that at the level of institutional prerogative. which is to say that you would think the court just purely out of greediness over their own power would want, knowing that he may likely be the next president to be a little more just protective -- yet, but that is a constitutional principle. i needed at a baser level. we still control things. >> also, we do not want everyone to think that we are stooges. rick made this point. they spent not a moment in this decision talking about january 6th. >> not one. >> not a line. not even a concession. >> is it that they bashed a bunch of cops' brains in? >> it falls with the fisher decision from earlier. january 6th is able cooler for this court. it is indicative of a court, i think, has found real kinship with trumpism in a weird way and not just alito and thomas but even roberts. the fact that roberts offered this opinion says nothing of the fact that if true these allegations on the part of the federal government would be devastating for our democracy. not a mention of that. >> that is not a hard paragraph to write. it has been written 100 different ways by different judges at different levels. i want to get your thoughts on this but it is absolutely a useful point of comparison. that paragraph, that sentence does not exist in the pinion but i want to take a quick break. do not go anywhere. much more to come after this. r s ya know, if you were cashbacking you could earn on everything with just one card. chase freedom unlimited. so, if you're off the racking... ...or crab cracking, you're cashbacking. cashback on flapjacks, baby backs, or tacos at the taco shack. nah, i'm working on my six pack. switch to a king suite- or book a silent retreat. silent retreat? hold up - yeeerp? i can't talk right now, i'm at a silent retreat. cashback on everything you buy with chase freedom unlimited with no annual fee. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. i love that my daughter still needs me. but sometimes i can't help due to burning and stabbing pain in my hands, so i use nervive. nervive's clinical dose of ala reduces nerve discomfort in as little as seven days. now i can help again feel the difference with nervive. ohhh crap. now we gotta get nfrance something.in wait! we could use etsy's gift mode! alright. done. (♪♪) plateau de fromage! [cheering] oh la la! [cheering] don't panic. gift easy with gift mode, now on etsy. ouples can it keep me warm sleewhen i'm cold? bed? wait, no, i'm always hot. sleep number does that. shop our lowest prices of the season with free home delivery when you add a base. sleep number smart beds starting at $999. learn more at sleepnumber.com saving on your education should be a right, not a competition. at university of phoenix, you'll get the best scholarship or savings you qualify for. simple as that. explore scholarship options at university of phoenix. (♪♪) (♪♪) sandals rhythm and blues caribbean sale is now on. visit sandals.com or call 1-800-sandals. (granddaughter laughing) when pain freezes you in your tracks... ...vapofreeze your pain away. penetrating pain relief... ...with vicks vapors. (granddaughter laughing) vapofreeze your pain away. now at walmart. we are back at the table of katie phang, alexander -- the strangest with which the court does not seem to be zealously guarded even is most basic institutional partners about being able to say, what is and is not good and far a little warning shot for a second term. >> if you read this as a human and not as a lawyer, which i am. i was struck by a couple of things. one is the way that john roberts talks which is as if he is an observer and not the chief justice. which is generally how he has buffet -- has behaved over the years when there has been ethics scandals and criticized. he is an observer. the second piece is if trump is in the past. not that he is running for president and could be sitting in the oval office there has never been, i don't think a presidential candidate who wanted immunity more than donald trump. he desires it. it is written as if that is not it. like mitt romney is running for president but he is not the republican nominee, donald trump is. the fact that is disconnected from the moment we are living in, they will justifies that as we are in institution looking to the teacher. we are in a moment right now this guy is posing a threat. >> part of the thing i think everyone feels about this card, a lot of people feel, you cannot take it seriously as some sort of presidential thing for both parties and in institution because no one has any faith that if the shoe was on the other foot, they will not do what is partisan in that case. joe biden could do all these things. of course the court will find some of these and joe biden cannot do it. there is not some standard here that people have any faith being easily followed. >> the double standard only flows one way. there was one thing you said i want to dissent. respectful dissent. >> descent is good. new in this framework. sotomayor and jackson did not have to respect the dissent. you were talking at how the supreme court did not retain some kind of power on a basic level when it comes to donald trump or the office of the president. i disagree. all roads lead back to the supreme court. at the end of the date the final arbiters will be the nine justices. they underscore the importance of elections. >> those nine justices face no consequences and no term limits. do not need to run again. when he panic and say, the american people do not trust them anymore, they do not care. >> they don't have to care. they clearly do not have to care. >> i would make this point, i am now citing data, not showing it to you which is excellent television on my part. there was polling on this question about, do you think presidents are immune? 71% disapprove of the notion. even republicans and even when they are told it is donald trump, there is still a sizable portion. >> 64% of independents. >> if you ask an american, you know, embedded in civic culture, should they be immune from prosecution for exit office? most americans, rightly, are saying, no. >> would you not say god save the king anymore. >> we do not pay attention to all the details until it is too late. especially because donald trump runs on you not like the powerful people take advantage of things? vote for me. and then he delivers on the opposite. >> to be the big take away is about the stakes of 2024 and how they have been put even more sharply into focus. stay with us. our special coverage continues and rachel maddow, all ahead. do not go anywhere. we've always loved taking care of our home. but last year, grandpa here broke his arm. we realized some home maintenance jobs aren't worth the risk. that's when we called leaffilter to protect our gutters. leaffilter's patented filter technology keeps debris out of your gutters for good. they gave us a free inspection and we had the system installed that week. my only regret is not calling them sooner. now we can focus on what we really enjoy. join millions of satisfied homeowners. call 833 leaffilter today or visit leaffilter.com 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. old spice gentleman's super hydration body wash. (whispered) vanilla and shea. 24/7 moisturization with vitamin b3. (knock on the door) are you using all the old spice? oops. ♪ (old spice mnemonic) ♪ we are back on a monumental day for american democracy and i thank katie for clarifying -- if there is any doubt about the stakes for the election, the degree to which democracy and rule of law are irrelevant thing to be talking about, to date was clarifying that. i will take the glass is half- full right now. this is going to galvanize vote in november. this is bigger than dobbs. this is something that is going to make people say, the choice is so evident and this galvanize vote for joe biden in november. >> trump has to be careful. he sent out a fundraising email with the subject line total immunity. he is mckechnie and katie said. >> this is a substantive win for donald trump because of the general impulses about politicians and whether they should be immune and whether that word sounds good to people, i do think it is a political -- there is political backlash possible. >> i am delivering your worst nightmare and four people have to make a point and not enough time. i will group these two and leave you more time. >> [ laughter ] >> this could be bigger than dobbs and being this bizarre win for democrats that will galvanize voters to say, i am not up to a dictator and down with the king. >> i want to lightly december and i do think dobbs will be bigger than this this people care about what impacts them directly. unless the campaign makes this about how it impacts you sitting in your house, which maybe they can do and will do. i will say that this is a reminder after things they will, the supreme court will not save us. it is saving no one. they have no accountability and do not care. they invited john roberts to go to the hill, no thanks. >> this is such a good point but when i talked to business leaders, stop worrying about democracy, the institution is whole. it is not. >> this is it. >> the supreme court is broken. the justice system is broken. >> the final part of this is that the court, and i think this is where dobbs and this come together as a political argument for the democratic party and joe biden as the nominee to make is that the court is part of, front and center the agenda of what it means to be voting one way or another. not just in terms of reforming the court but who will be sitting on the court. if you think it cannot get worse , one more term of trump 30 roc. the rachel maddow show starts right now. i get to say good evening for first time in a long time. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. i miss handovers with you. you've been doing an amazing job these last couple of hours. you scared me and

Related Keywords

Home Router ,Home Wrecker ,Book Title ,Joe Biden In November ,White House ,Supreme Court Ruling ,Sh ,Eastern ,45 ,7 ,District Court ,Ruling ,Presidency ,Jack Smith ,Case ,Powers ,Federalist Society Justices ,Questions ,Conservatives ,Experts ,The Future Of American Democracy ,Immunity ,Coverage ,Speech ,Sure Donald Trump ,Courage ,Landmark Decision ,Dissent ,Elections ,Borders ,Individuals ,Navy Seal Team Six ,Election ,King ,Rival ,Above The Law ,Six ,Four ,Stakes ,Special Coverage Of The Trump Immunity Ruling ,Msnbc ,New York ,President ,United States ,Remarks ,Chris Hayes ,Night Of Special Coverage Today S Supreme Court Decision ,Joy Reid ,Reaction ,Rachel Maddow ,Jen Psaki ,Country ,Majority ,Structure ,6 ,3 ,People ,Law ,Oman ,Principle ,Order ,Reach ,Foundations ,Founding ,Chief Justice Roberts ,Doctrine ,Rules ,Citizen ,Opinion ,Court Deems Official Acts ,Monarch ,Deems ,Laws ,One ,Tir Ran Call Power ,Actions ,Nature ,Procushions ,Facts ,Immuity ,Fact ,Answer ,Official ,Frustraingly ,Subject ,Litigation ,Menation ,Courts ,Arguments ,Circuit Back ,Discretion ,D C ,Person ,Someone ,Supreme Court Justice ,Oral Arguments ,Referenced In Justice Sotomayor ,Seating ,Equal Justice Under Law ,Prosecution ,Sonia Sotomayor ,Military ,The Way ,Quote ,Anything ,Principles ,Culture ,Originalists ,Thing ,Justification ,Executive Immunity ,Point Of Fact ,Nowhere ,Fisher Decision ,It Wasn T ,It Didn T ,Court Rulings ,Law Professors ,10 ,30 ,Anyone ,Text ,Being ,Twisted Interpretation Of The Constitution ,Things ,Course ,Tex Of The Constitutional ,Result ,The End ,World ,January 6th ,Second Term ,Power ,Job ,Core ,Campaign Message ,Thoughts ,Appallingly The Court Acqueiced ,Action ,Everyone ,Special ,Kind ,Silver Lining ,Glass ,Cloud ,Smacking ,Radicalism ,Rule ,Isn T Immune ,Appeals Court ,Can T Be Immuned ,Bottom Line ,Worst Case Scenario ,Prosecutions ,Counsel ,105 ,100 ,Language ,Measure ,Restraint ,Humility ,Out ,Hypotheticals ,Yes ,Seriousness ,Death Squad ,Accountable ,Paramilitary Group ,Pro Trump ,Justice Department ,Death Squads ,Wear T Shirts ,Rivals ,Stop ,Reason ,Judge ,Court Arguments ,History ,Significance ,It Hasn T ,Richard Nixon ,American History ,Irs ,Enemies ,Kinds ,Historian ,Audit ,Lot ,Reasons ,Reading ,Conclusion ,Executive ,Wasn T ,Watergate Wasn T Prosecutorable ,Executive Idea Pie ,What Nixon ,1974 ,Sort ,Justice ,Department Officials ,Republican ,Politics ,Governing Apex ,Dick Cheney ,Ed Meese ,Part ,Bunch ,Supermajority In The Supreme Court ,Place ,George W Bush ,9 11 ,Court ,Guy ,Lawyers ,Apex ,Radicalism Land ,Nobody ,Horizon ,November ,Saying ,Joe Biden ,Context ,Knowledge , ,De Dictatorship ,Solution ,Noncriminals ,Point ,Nothing ,Way ,Win ,Trial ,Ways ,Ones ,Implications ,Meaning ,Has ,Republicans ,Flag ,Joke ,Matter ,Findings ,Holdings ,Running ,Chant ,Crowds ,Clock ,2016 ,Thrill ,Followers ,Policy ,Opponents ,Motivations ,Reservation ,Limit ,Rule Of Law ,It ,Ruler ,Instrument ,Law Isn T ,Binding ,Fix ,Chair ,The One And Only Sotyktu ,Anywhere ,Break ,Unfiltered ,Don T Go ,Skin ,Pill ,Plaque Psoriasis ,Chance ,Moderate ,Background ,Close Up ,Feeling ,Infections ,Reactions ,Ability ,Cancers ,Lymphoma ,Don T ,Changes ,Muscle Problems ,Better ,Labs ,Tb ,Tyk2 Inhibitor ,Doctor ,Find ,Risks ,Kidney Problems ,Infection ,Vaccine ,Triglycerides ,Liver ,Jak Family ,Hiding ,Jak Inhibitors ,Name ,Home Defense ,Creatures ,One Sotyktu ,Indoor Insect Barrier ,Horrifying ,The Cockroach ,Always Scavenging ,Ortho ,Home ,Bugs ,Kills ,Application ,365 ,Shingles ,Virus ,Sleeping ,Waiting ,Lying Dormant ,99 ,50 ,Rash ,Risk ,Pharmacist ,Prevention ,Something ,Address ,Response ,Bit ,Decision ,Game Of Thrones ,A Game Of Thrones ,Hand ,Fan ,Democrat ,Presidents ,Page ,Adoption ,110 ,Congress ,Dictates ,Legislative ,Mandates ,Office ,Leonard Leo Appointees ,Five ,Such Boldness ,Trail Of Tears ,Estate ,Human Property ,20th Harry Truman ,Fiat ,Rebellion ,Lincoln ,0 Billion ,10 Billion ,20 ,Parts ,Fear ,Holocaust ,Japan ,Two ,Conduct ,Executives ,Boldness ,War ,Black ,Andrew ,Fiat Of The Supreme Court ,Votes ,Watershed ,Trajectory ,Respect ,Pages ,Picture ,21 ,Evidence ,Sham Prosecution ,Off Limits ,Tape ,Weaponizing ,It Rue ,Piece ,Intersects ,What ,Oh Baying ,Trump ,Retribution ,2024 ,Press ,Writing ,Analysis ,Polls ,Words ,The New York Times ,Story ,Punishment ,Someone Architect ,Enemies ,2017 ,Times ,Crimes ,James Comey ,Hillary Clinton ,A Thousand ,Line ,Constitution ,Plan ,Administration ,Executive Branch ,Project ,Obligation ,560 ,2025 ,Branches ,Interviews ,Steve Bannon ,Authorities ,Resources ,Excesses ,He Cent ,Nicole ,Haven T ,The American Public To Rachel ,Morality ,Mike Pence ,Courtroom ,Oath ,Candidate Trump ,News ,Truth ,Tanya Chutkan ,Indictment ,Paragraph ,Rest ,Everything ,Hearing ,Protection ,The Act In Question ,Conversation ,Acting Attorney General ,Briefs ,Side ,Witness ,Cards ,Stuff ,Mr ,Cross ,Defense ,Single ,Incredible January 6th Hearing ,Steroids ,September ,Eight ,Democracy ,Lawrence ,The Big Picture ,Joy ,Briefing ,Loft ,Clarity ,This ,Google ,Energy ,Move ,Mind ,Heritage Foundation ,Leonard Leo ,Heritage Action ,We Ge Our ,Violence ,Camps ,Boundaries ,Incarceration ,Push It To The Limit ,Agenda ,Clarion Call ,Function ,Matters ,Counts ,Debate ,It Doesn T Matter ,34 ,Voters ,Imperial Court ,It Doesn T ,Seven ,Law Paiker ,Ethics Of The Supreme Court ,Sheldon Whitehouse ,Gutters ,Debris ,Filter ,Leaffilter ,Technology ,Leaves ,Wall ,Gutter Solution ,Call ,Guaranteed ,Leaf Filter ,At Ease ,833 Leaf Filter ,833 ,833 Leaffilter ,Magic ,Food ,Effects ,Dog ,Dog Bark ,Visit Leaffilter Com ,Pet Food ,Step ,Pep ,Coats ,Farmer ,Children ,Millions ,Fighting ,Communities ,Life ,Conflict ,Climate Crisis ,Poverty ,Inequality ,Save The Children ,0 33 , 33 ,0 ,Care ,Child ,Donors ,Plus ,Medicine ,1000 ,Gift ,Support ,Credit Card ,Thanks ,Government Grants ,Dollar ,Impact ,Tote Bag ,Ten ,Donation ,Crisis ,Hungerstopsnow Org ,Save ,Conservative Supreme Court ,Supreme Court Term ,Destruction ,Swath ,Affirmative Action ,Overturning ,Roe ,Kneecapping ,Epa ,Justices ,Popular Vote ,Progress ,Three ,Trump Immunity ,Movement ,Sheldon Whiteshouse ,Radicals ,Out Of Control ,Fact Finding Accountability ,Itself ,Tenet ,Insulated ,Upending ,Human Pro Pryty ,Big Chunks Of American Law ,Decisions ,Separation ,Abuses ,Members ,Channels ,Hush Money Case ,Justice Alito ,Clarence Thomas ,Recusal ,Compromises ,Spouses ,Involvement ,Taint ,Refusal ,Flying ,Support Thereof ,4 ,Mission ,Nine ,Wife ,Activities ,Fact Finding ,Insurrection ,United States Government ,Statement ,Investigations ,Problem ,Senator ,Corruption ,Note ,Gifts ,Bribes ,Trips ,Idesing Great Tooties ,In The House ,Jim Jordan ,January 6th Select Committee ,Hearings ,Subpoena ,Subpoena Them ,House ,Senate ,60 ,Groundwork ,Process ,Subpoenas ,January 6th Commission ,Effort ,House Coordinates ,Investigative Commission ,Strong ,Packing ,Mischief ,Pattern ,Scheme ,Senators ,Deposition ,Debrief ,Middle ,House Subpoena ,Center ,Question ,Anniversary ,Roe V Wade ,Committee ,Awareness ,Character ,Judgment ,Tests ,Nation ,Limits ,Wisdom ,But Today S Supreme Court Decision ,Equal ,No One ,Purposes ,Attack ,Precedent ,Orange ,Woman ,Mob ,Eyes ,Capitol ,Transfer ,Predecessor ,Nancy Pelosi ,Police ,Mob Hunting ,Ransacking ,Gallows ,Conviction ,U S Capitol ,Behavior ,Disservice ,Land ,Assault ,Embrace ,Outset ,George Washington ,Men ,Women ,200 ,3 1 2 ,Use ,Hands ,Opponent ,Equity Standpoint ,Capital ,Washington ,Executive Power ,View ,Holding ,Ton ,Son ,Examples ,Example ,Effect ,Backdrop ,Know ,Bet ,Cross Hall ,Statements ,Osama Bin Laden ,Roosevelt Rooms ,Barack Obama ,Rose Garden ,System ,Rulings ,Written Statement ,Tracy American Public ,Self Restraint ,Transfers ,Say ,Idea ,Terms ,Sense ,My Son ,Checks ,Hair ,Odds ,Balances ,Laughter ,Opportunity ,Lens ,The Room ,More ,Separating ,Rachel Set Up Beginning ,Room ,Element ,Deer ,Noun ,Log ,Enemy Of The State ,Couple ,Instance ,Secrets ,Door ,Kick ,Fbi ,Sing ,Jackson ,Hunter Biden ,Practicalities ,Footnote ,Red ,Removal ,Rights ,Voting Rights ,Women S Rights ,Distinction ,Protections ,Citizens ,Violation ,Investigation ,Whether ,My Constitutional Due Process ,Elements ,Core Function ,Pairs ,Provision ,Alice In Wonderland ,Law Provision ,Attorney General ,Authority ,Logic ,Pardon Power ,Mix ,Unreviewable ,Areas ,Somebody ,Check ,Half ,Character Question ,Sprinting ,Quickly ,Contrast ,Tarmac ,Contracts ,Values ,Endorsement ,Particular ,Lines ,Ambiguity ,Issue ,Pressure ,Officials ,Rubberstamping ,Doj ,Bidding ,Fraud ,Claims ,Duty ,Some ,Right ,Concept ,Law Professor ,Cord ,Legislated ,The Bench ,Dude ,Founders ,Philosophy ,Coherent Judicial Philosophy ,Government ,Scope ,Sex ,Constitutional Convention ,Others ,Sleep ,Force ,Weapon Mice ,Crime ,Government Contracts ,Trucking Company ,Indiana ,Bucks ,Mayor ,13000 ,13000 Bucks ,Chris Christie ,Corruption Charges ,Bob Mcdonald ,I Don T Know ,Traffic Jam ,George Washington Bridge ,A Million ,4 Million ,Accountability ,Conception ,Standard ,Aspire ,Face ,Parties ,Politicians ,Comments ,Kings ,Peach ,Katie Phang ,Alex ,The American Revolution ,Shame ,Martha ,Scat ,Table ,Water ,Bag ,Planning ,Wing ,Culmination ,Motive ,Abuse ,Led ,40 ,Roberts Court ,Abortion ,Feeds ,Discipline ,Agencies ,Coming Of Age ,Tweeting ,Version ,Tenacity ,Folks ,Perspective ,Number One ,Wife Chief ,Return ,Rubric ,Expansion ,Determination ,Exclusion ,Middle Of The Road ,Shifts ,Trial Lawyer ,Slaves ,Cases ,Testimony ,Striking ,Aspect ,American ,Trials ,Public ,Chamber ,Appeal ,Knowing ,Else ,Communications ,Rally ,Communication ,Electron Tweets ,Classification ,Conspiracy ,Arizona ,Counselor ,Conspiracy Counts ,Conspiracy Lot ,Avenue ,Hearing Sort Of Shadow ,Interpretation ,Holes ,Timeline ,Hearing Starting In September ,Many ,Discovery ,Remand ,Work ,Calendar ,Space ,Letter ,Sentencing ,Back ,Ball Back ,Convention ,Scheduling ,Control ,Substance ,Experience ,Content ,Case Objective Analysis ,Opportunities ,Extent ,Inquiry ,Majority Opinion ,Chuck Rosenberg ,Career ,Contributor ,Norms ,Court Decision ,Expectations ,Regulations ,Set ,Agent Career ,Outsider ,Pollyanna Ish ,Breath ,Servants ,Prosecutor ,Cabinet ,Scenarios ,Contours ,Road ,Team ,Gaming ,Docket ,Lawyer ,Truck ,Suite ,Desk ,Potential ,Spring Court Decision ,Vice President ,Pieces ,Consultants ,Fair Game ,Actors ,Play ,Danger ,Standpoint ,Information ,Attitude ,We Arty ,Room Court ,Accusations ,Charge ,Trial Judge ,Plot ,Meeting ,Big Climatic Meeting ,Georgia ,States ,Letterhead ,State Legislature ,Ladies ,Electors ,Imprimatur ,Big Lie ,Rusty Bowers ,Amount ,Letters ,Crew ,Special Session ,Amanda S ,Weaponization ,Closest ,It Pressuring State Officials ,Confession ,Accusation ,Machinery ,Weight ,Doj Letterhead Go Out ,Number ,Following ,Oils ,John Eastman ,Jeff Clark ,Conversations ,Immunity Analysis ,Circuit Court Of Appeals ,Building ,First Street ,Dan Goldman On The Supreme Court Ruling ,Commitments ,Wake ,Covers ,Books ,Libraries ,Schools ,Censorship ,Her ,Freedom Of Speech And Expression ,American Civil Liberties Union ,Manner ,Myaclu Org ,0 63 ,9 , 63 ,19 ,Liberty ,Free Speech ,Guardian ,U S Constitution ,Help ,Mistake ,Students ,Aclu ,Eforms ,We The People ,T Shirt ,Amendment ,Puerto Rico ,Strength ,Magnesium ,Benefits ,Bone Health ,Muscle ,Qunol Magnesium ,Qunol ,Snowboard ,Surf ,Brand ,Heartburn ,Prilosec ,Buckets ,Heartburn Relief ,Fire Extinguisher ,Antacids ,Prilosec Otc ,1 ,Devie Duckduckgo ,Blocks Cooi ,Like Google ,Zero Heartburn ,Pi ,Fo ,Searchs ,Doesn T Spy ,Chrome ,24 ,Zero ,Money ,Ads ,Companie ,Privacy ,Devices ,Catch ,Duckduckgo ,Fre ,Show Veterans ,Gratitude ,Veterans Affairs ,Let ,Given ,Spring Court ,Dan Goldman ,Notion ,Finding ,Lead ,Impeachment ,Inks ,Theory ,Ex Vivo Absolute ,Company ,Porn Star ,Michael Cohen ,Heart ,Stab ,Hit ,Whom ,Member ,Reasoning ,Bistro Level ,Expectation ,President Function ,Road Map ,Leadership ,Details ,Dictator ,Retribution Tour ,Revenge ,Chargers ,Bribe ,Bolts ,Nuts ,1 Million ,Politician ,Dime ,Chasm ,Oil Executives ,Regulation ,Fraudster ,Rapist ,Convicted Felon ,Stake ,Pardon ,Grab ,Pardons ,Mother ,Justin ,Him Barrett ,5 ,Black Letter Law Grounds ,Steal ,Have Hume ,Bill ,Gann ,Lisa Rubin ,Underscore ,Entitlement ,Presidents Cannot ,Conagra ,Purview ,Garments ,Reply ,Public Record ,Records ,Tweets ,Record ,Bucket ,Portion ,Allegations ,Speeches ,Demoralizing ,Wanted To ,Prosecuting ,Review ,Dream ,Favor ,Threat ,Self Parting Motion ,Reference ,Consequences ,Top ,Optimism ,Secondarily ,Basin ,Verdict ,The Star ,Immunity Case ,Personal ,Everything Else ,Immunity Printout ,Stormy Daniels ,Notation ,Shot ,Collector ,Germination ,Institution ,Night And Day ,Pitch ,Eczema ,Treatment ,Rinvoq ,Skin Clearance ,Relief ,Saw ,Eczema Fast ,Rinvoq Felt ,2 ,Heart Attack ,Tears ,Blood Clots ,Gi ,Stroke ,Heart Disease Risk Factor ,Death ,Dermatologist ,Abbvie ,Newsday ,Show ,00 ,The One And Only ,Stephanie Newell ,Hotel ,Businessman ,Monuments ,Bribery Pallets ,Conflict Of Interest ,Governments ,Lobbying Groups ,Floors ,Trademark ,Mar A Lago ,Doral ,Business ,Main ,Before ,Saudi ,China ,Irony ,Sons ,Trump Tower ,Degree ,Lane ,Level ,Prerogative ,Greediness ,Stooges ,Brick ,Concession ,Cops ,Brains ,Trumpism ,Kinship ,Mention ,Judges ,Comparison ,Levels ,Sentence ,Mrs ,Cashbacking ,Card ,Baby Backs ,Tacos ,Ya ,Racking ,Crab Cracking ,Chase Freedom Unlimited ,Taco Shack ,Cashback On Flapjacks ,Book ,Pack ,Silent Retreat ,Switch ,Fee ,Hold Up ,Yeeerp ,Spain ,Dose ,Discomfort ,Nerve ,Stabbing ,Daughter ,Ala ,Nervive ,Difference ,Gift Mode ,Scrap ,Cheering ,Etsy ,La ,Don T Panic ,Sleep Number ,Sleewhen ,Base ,Bed ,Home Delivery ,Prices ,Season ,Wait ,Ouples ,999 ,Competition ,Scholarship ,Education ,Savings ,University Of Phoenix ,Explore Scholarship Options ,Visit Sandals Com ,Rhythm And Blues Caribbean Sale ,Sandals ,1 800 Sandals ,800 ,Granddaughter ,Pain Relief ,Tracks ,Vicks Vapors ,Walmart ,Partners ,Strangest ,Alexander ,Warning Shot ,Talks ,Human ,Observer ,Chief Justice ,Buffet ,Ethics Scandals ,Candidate ,Oval Office ,Nominee ,Teacher ,Mitt Romney ,Faith ,Shoe ,Partisan ,These ,Foot ,Cannot ,Descent ,Framework ,Office Of The President ,Arbiters ,Term Limits ,Roads ,Importance ,Television ,Polling ,Data ,Disapprove ,Independents ,71 ,64 ,Exit Office ,Americans ,God Save The King ,Civic Culture ,Vote ,Attention ,Opposite ,Advantage ,Focus ,Stay ,Call 833 Leaffilter ,Jobs Aren T Worth ,Good ,Arm ,Inspection ,Filter Technology ,Homeowners ,Regret ,Lift Design ,Nose ,Sleep Nasal Strips ,Air Flow ,Super Hydration Body Wash ,Gentleman ,Old Spice ,Mnemonic ,Vanilla ,Vitamin B3 ,24 7 ,Doubt ,Clarifying ,Think Dobbs ,Choice ,Subject Line Total Immunity ,Fundraising Email ,Political ,Backlash ,Word ,Impulses ,Down With The King ,Nightmare ,Campaign ,Reminder ,The Hill ,This Is It ,Justice System ,Business Leaders ,Argument ,Term ,Roc ,One Way Or Another ,Evening ,Handovers ,Chris ,Rachel Maddow Show ,