defamatory for far too long. david, there used to be a care case. now it s their bread and butter. they find sometimes an obscure person in the bureaucracy, and they seek to reputationally annihilate them. it is more the anomaly it always leads to threats of violence. i can t think of a single example where the targeting of someone doesn t lead to the person either having to move or being swatted or teaming up with law enforcement. the violence that tucker carlson fetishizes are believed to be among the straws that breaks the camel s back, seems to be something they re aware of as a liability. what s your sense of how they re sword of girding themselves for what may be a flurry of lawsuits like this? i think they think somehow this will be open season, that people will come forward with lawsuits of varying degrees of substance altd to challenge them
probing and trying to understand what the consequences are. i want to play it s not new. this is mark milley having to defend himself for wanting to understand white supremacy and white rage. i want to understand white rage, and i m white. i want to understand it. so what is it that cause thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the consultation of the united states of america? what caused that? i want to find that out. i want to maintain an open mind here. i do want to analyze it. it s important that we understand it. our soldiers come from the american people. so it is important that the leaders now and in the future do understand it. i ve read mao tse-tung. i ve read carl marks. i ve read lennon. that doesn t make me a communist. what is wrong with having some sort of understanding of the country for which we re here to defend. i don t know that there s anything chairman mark milley that enraged the right more than
him. at this point that feels like an outlier. one after another like dominos, the establishment republicans have decided they re going to cave in to donald trump. we re going to see, with all of this on display, and once again, if there s any upside to what happened last night, it removed any doubt who donald trump is, what kind of a candidate he will be and what he will talk about and how he will behave. republicans all across the country have to look at him and say, is that going to be our nominee? am i going to link my political future to him? do i want to put him back into the white house? right now a strong majority of republican primary voters are saying yes. it will be interesting to see how many other republicans like senator young are willing to say that they re not going along with him because that doesn t seem to be the trend at the moment unfortunately. eddie, you were always high
the latest developments in the special counsel s investigation amid a judge s warning of the creation of a, quote, supercitizen are another way of saying two separate standards of justice is where we begin the hour. washington post congressional investigations reporter jackie alemany is back. plus former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst glenn kirschner s here. former u.s. attorney and former deputy assistant attorney general harry litman, who has left the table but is still very much with us. and former fbi counterintelligence agent pete strzok. pete, what is it on the phones, what do they want on the phones that doesn t fall into it sounds like what the judge is saying is that most of what is relevant to the investigation doesn t by any stretch fall under this ridiculous claim that the congressman s making. so what do they want on the phone? well, they want evidence of what he was doing with regard to january 6th. and it seems that the body of material includes e-mail messa
be an informational process with no further indictments? to me as a former prosecutor, i guess i read more into it than you have. when a prosecutor talks about charging decisions, i intend to infer from that that that suggests someone will be charged. often when there is a decision not to prosecute, there really isn t a public statement. the investigation doesn t get punctuated by, we finished the investigation, and here s our result, which is no one gets indicted. i also and maybe i m reading too much into the language, which you could take either way, but the fact that they talk about indictments and that they ll make public their recommendations on indictments doesn t sound to me on the surface of it like their recommendations are against indicting. but i think what will also be important is whether georgia got answers we couldn t get from