the stand, what he says tonight about the intruder looking for his wife nearly killed him. tonight on the workers live. so, what is it about the political rhetoric in this country that got us here? in 83 year old man hit in the head with a hammer in his own house, his skull was fractured. allegedly by a man looking for his wife. then house speaker nancy pelosi. now, the defendants own attorney says the attack was motivated by david pups believe, belief, that nancy pelosi was part of a, quote, a plot to manipulate the country, to spread lies, and to steal votes from donald trump. now, he has pleaded not guilty in this matter. the paul pelosi testifying today about the moment he woke up at 2:00 in the morning to find a stranger in his bedroom. quote, it was a tremendous shock to recognize that somebody had broken into the house and, looking at him, and looking at the hammer, and the ties, i recognized that i was in serious danger. so i tried to stay as calm as possible. pelosi is testifying that he led the intruder downstairs, thinking that police could grab him maybe more quickly there, saying, quote, i knew that my only shot was that, if we were downstairs and the police came, it would be much easier to arrest him. god knows what would have happened if we were upstairs. remember the police body cam video of what happened next? we're going to show it to you. i remind you that it is difficult and disturbing to watch. >> how are you doing? what's going on, man? drop the hammer. >> no. >> what's going on? [bleep] >> disturbing is the word for that. what is also disturbing, the graphic illustration of the consequences of our poisonous politics. >> the person was searching for me and my dear husband wasn't even that political, actually, paid the price. >> as nancy pelosi says, her husband paid the price. and it is a terrible price. but one big question that i cannot get off of my mind is what price america will pay for what seems to be increasingly so, our politics of violence. i want to turn out to danielle harvin, he's the former head of intelligence for the washington d.c. homeland security department, and currently a faculty member at georgetown university. darnell, it's so good to see this evening. united spoke about this case when it first happened and just the overall rhetoric that we have seen in this community and this country over the past several years at the very least. i'm wondering, from your perspective, how did we get, and how did you get to the point where the husband of one of the most powerful people in government is attacked in his home by a hammer wielding assailant? >> laura, how we got here is that paul pelosi is a victim of the caustic political environment that we have had over the last, at least a decade. nancy pelosi has been the bogeyman for detractors for over a decade, and the issue is that, really, with the rise of trump maga, this is some on the far right that are addicted to this malignant miss and disinformation and conspiracy theory movement. and words and tweets that are put out by politicians and people on the far-right media, it is just words for them. but they are individuals who are sitting at home, who are very unwell like the one it has been charged with paul pelosi's assault, that are ruminating on this. and they are not happy people. they're not going out, enjoying life. they're taking these words, they are doing in them, and this is what we would call, in terrorism, caustic terrorism. somebody who is demonized is, essentially, assaulted. so this is the environment that we're in right now. what kind of terrorism? >> so caustic terrorism. >> when you demonize an individual long enough, those words will manifest and just, like this individual, this is the manifestation of misinformation, conspiracy theories, and demonization of a political party. >> when you talk about that way and why this is so relevant even today, of, course is paul pelosi on the stand testifying today, but even after he was attacked, and people went straight to conspiracy theories. floating rumors that he was, that he was having an affair, and also the overall distortion of truth in society more broadly. people can be very susceptible to hearing something over and over again and having a face of who they are told is the villain. it's supposed to be demonized, and when that happens, all sorts of things can go wrong. you are sounding the alarm, for example, leading up to what happened on january six and people choosing the particular villain. in that case it was political as well. >> yeah, unfortunately, i had to stay, this but for those of us in this business, the targeting of political figures is, really was not something that was a surprise. what was surprise was, literally, as this man was getting operated on, prominent members of the far-right and of the republican party went to twitter, went to social media to make fun of this, to make light of this, to put memes out. what that does is it normalizes this type of violence. it almost makes it okay. i would love for you to put up on your screen, for the, viewers the official statement from the rnc announcing this, but there was none. and so this is where we're at. many americans would find political violence unpalatable, they think it is something that happens in failed states. but, unfortunately, unless the rhetoric is going to be brought down, people are going to have to get used to this kind of targeted, individual violence until things get better. >> juneau harvin, thank you for coming. i can imagine a lot of people are going, oh yeah, i think i remember this particular case? even hearing about it today, and it was an extraordinary moment and people thinking about all the different things that have happened since, the normalization, look compartmentalization, and then, of course, the dismissing of what has. happened thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. >> i want to bring in sarah matthews, a former trump white house deputy press secretary, also republican strategist for michael singleton. i'm glad you brought here. a lot of people forgot about this happening and they were surprised in the trial of still going on, that there is a testimony from paul pelosi. it does speak in many ways to how distant memory people make things that were completely outrageous when they happened because of all that was going on. what is your reaction, thinking about, are we in for a great deal more of political violence? and the rhetoric eating up more? >> i think so. i think delray just a great point about sarcastic terrorism, and i was brought out of a populism. if trump were to go away, or if you are go away that things would somehow be better. i'm not convinced of that, gloria. i think there are a lot of people who feel marginalized, economically. i think a lot of people feel marginalized politically. i think a lot of people feel marginalized because of the cultural changes that have occurred in the country. i think it is easier to point to a political leaders rhetoric, and that's not to say that rhetoric can't inflame tensions, but it doesn't get to the crux of what people are dealing with. and that is something that i think about often in my moments of solitude. how do we get the country to move forward as a whole regardless of who's in charge. i don't think we're talking about that. now >> i'll talk more about your moments of quietude -- . i want you to hear this, because when the reason that is so relevant right now is because the rhetoric has not stopped. we talked about tim scott dropping out of the race, because it wasn't hitting for a lot of people. yet, you've got this grievance based political structure, people saying that i like the anger because i feel angry too. listen to this, though. we saw a result of some dangerous rhetoric recently. listen to what trump said over the weekend. >> we pledge, to you, that we will root out the communist, marxist, fascist, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country. >> not exactly our parents a version of political campaigning. why is this resonating? >> i think that donald trump knows that this is a type of rhetoric that his base wants to hear and he is always focused on his base and this will riled up. but i do think that it serves to just further divide americans. look, republicans are really upset when hillary clinton called maga supporters deplorables, but when trump says that he wants to root out the -- vermin that are as enemies,. oregonians are silent. the rnc chairman was asked about it over the weekend, said she wasn't to make a comment on it. the only republican that we've seen make any sort of comment on this is liz cheney, who obviously has largely moved away from the party or has been pushed out mostly because of her willingness to call out donald trump for this type of rhetoric. and, i think that biden won in large part in 2020 because he said that he was going to heal this country of our divisions and it's a battle for the soul of the nation. unfortunately i think that americans are still really divided and that's a large part of why people are maybe reluctant to support him again in 2024 because they thought that a vote for biden in 2020 would move the country in a different direction, unfortunately a lot of republicans, a lot of americans are still suffering. >> certainly the idea of one person being able to be the solution is always going to be elusive for people. but just the vermin comment, maybe one thing. but there is also reporting from axios, and i want to share with you. and they say, i am quoting, here former president trump's allies are prescreen-ing the ideologies of thousands of a potential foot soldiers as part of an unprecedented operation to centralize and expand his power at every level of the u.s. government if he wins in 2024. by the way, shermichael, it is up to 54,000 of them. that is an astonishing number. >> i think it is lessons learned, i would suppose, or from the first time. we remember within the first year, or first couple of months, actually, this process of going through people social media to see if you are critical of the former president. i was one of those individuals. if you, were than you got the boot, you are fired 40 immediately. but, i think this goes back to the point i was making about this political disenchantment among a sector of the republican base. and i think that trump has figured out, and we can debate whether or not this is good or bad, but he is figured out that these people are starving for somebody to be an answer to what they perceive as a political corruption by this elite class, not only just from democrats, laura, but from republicans themselves. this, as long as trump continues to pick himself as i and the answer, the resolution to this corruption, that he is going to continue to have support. >> i'm always tickled that trump is supposed to be not a part of the elite class. sara, does this scare you? wildly before it was about having adults in the room, i joined because i wanted to be the adult in the room. but to the recruitment around political philosophy rather than experience or credentials or legions is really scary. >> i think this is one of the things that most concerned about, if donald trump were to win a second term is who would be staffing this second administration? i think that, you look at the first administration and, whether you are liked all the people who worked for him, i do think that the real people of good character who were in positions of power who did pushback on trump's worst instincts and who thwarted a lot of his more extreme plans that he wanted. i'm thankful that we had people in positions of power like bill barr or general kelly or, even mike pence, because he did not go along with donald trump's plan. >> will others come, now? >> i do think that there will still be some good people, but i don't know if in large part that is going to be the case. i think that it is going to be mainly yes men who are willing to carry out trump's marching orders and will not push back. >> can i say, laura, this is part of a plan right? if you are a supporter of trump and your ideas and the first time the agenda was not fully realized, or fully actualized, the only way the agenda can be realized is by having like-minded people at the close to 100% as possible. so you're not gonna get a lot of pushback from the rnc chair woman, or many of the republicans who want to be close to trump because, if the idea is to promise to the base that, in order to receive this make america great again idealism we have to have people fully believe it who aren't going to check the president was his worst instincts take control. >> i tell, you paul pelosi on the stand today is the illustration of what happens when political violent rhetoric manifests and focused on a target and the collateral damage that ensues. we think about this is the husband of somebody who is in government. thinking about what's happening there. sarah matthews, michael singleton. you might not want people to see a trial on television. well, donald trump does. why he is making his election subversion trial in washington d.c. d.c. must-see television. has donald trump ever seen a camera that he does not like? and, i'm asking you a rhetorical question, right. this is the man who introduced himself to america on tv. >> your fired. your fired. your fired. your fired. your fired. >> and the man who, now, is demanding that his election subversion charles right here in washington d.c. be televised. unless you think i'm overstating it. here is what the former presidents attorney wrote in the filing just late friday night. and i'm quoting here presidential bob salute lee agrees and in fact demands that these proceedings should be fully tevised. now, media organizations, including cnn, by the, way have asked for permission to broadcast the trial. i want to bring in trial attorney and defense attorney for convicted murderer alec murdaugh jim griffin. now before the murdaugh trial he was a big advocate for cameras in the courtroom. jim, thank you for being here this evening. you actually changed your mind ever since that trial about having cameras in the courtroom. why? >> yes, i sure did learn. thanks for having me. i was a big component of cameras in the courtroom, going into the trial, i traveled a couple of other cases where there were quite tvs. and i felt it was important to educate the public on how trials operate. and better educated and hopefully have the faith in the judicial system. but the murdaugh trial was a whole different character, i mean it brought out probably the worst of the viewing audience. we had people traveling from around the country to come to the courtroom, just so they could get on television. we had sort of devolved into a sporting event. at times, the jurors and the gallery and the courtroom would clap when the judge would rule against us. and there is really a tremendous temptation, if you're on that type of a stage. trial lawyers are, actors they love the stage. and you do lose track of what the focus of the trial us and the jury. and i think in the murdaugh case that happened to some degree, to all of. us quite official, lawyers. and then there was a tremendous circus atmosphere on the outside of the courtroom. and, when the jurors would lead, they would seem tense and reporters from major networks and you're -- cnn, another networks. >> well, jim, firstly i understand the trial attorney's big hands. we indict ham sandwiches. were attempts in the courtroom. i get it all. but what you described couldn't that be contained by minimizing who's present in the courtroom? and allowing cameras to be there for the greater audience? i mean a case like this of course, we have a former president on the stand and a former president in the courtroom. aren't there ways to change what you saw a circus like? >> when that's a lesson learned and if i were to be faced with the same situation again i would know better to ask for more restrictions on how the media is placed outside of the courthouse. but you, know media had the first rights. it's a real balancing test for judges, balancing the first amendment right to the medias and the public's right to access charleston defendants for a public trial. and i have to tell, you i understand why president trump and his lawyers a friend of mine who have worked with why they would want to have cameras in the courtroom. because they want as much spillover effect to what happens outside the courtroom would impact the jury. and we felt like, in the murdaugh case, there was a spillover effect of what happened outside the courtroom that the jurors couldn't ignore. and, murdaugh was a renowned defendant. he was doing some real bad things financially, stealing from his clients and he was not like. president trump is liked by a lot of people and so i can understand why they would want a broader audience coming into play and the jurors hearing from them. and that data that may be, that they sequester the jury. that jury was sequestered for months on end. >> well, look -- >> maybe that is in the answer, but it's a pretty draconian response. >> i think everyone right now is changing their address. they don't want to be in one that's as long as the oj trial. but jim, let me ask, you when you balance it out at the end of the day you've got two competing interests. you mentioned the first, on the transparency and being able to have people see the process of justice. especially because trump will be outside the courtroom, undoubtedly, talking about the new york civil fraud trial about what he proceeds us injustice inside the courtroom. so when you balanced to, what is better? to have that transparency in the courtroom in realtime? or to just have a transcript at the end. and having a hallway discussion for the cameras? >> well, i can tell you without a doubt for president trump's trial it would be best that it be broadcast. all of trump's supporters, and trump has made a political career out of attacking the media, the mainstream media and the enemy of his people. and if the verdict comes back against donald trump, and all that donald trump supporters have heard mainstream media's filtering our interpretation of the evidence, they will not accept it. so, i strongly believe that an unfiltered public broadcasting of president trump's trial would be in everybody's best interest. now you have to take cases, individually. if i had to do the murdaugh case again i would tell you the complete opposite. i would not want cameras in the room. >> really interesting, we'll see what the federal court says about it. you're not normally allowed in court rooms for any reason so this will be a real departure from what is the standard. jim, nice to talk to you. thank you so much. >> all right, thanks for having me on loin. >> and don't forget to check out jim's crime podcasts. the presumption. wherever you get your podcast it's also available on youtube. well she pleaded guilty in the georgia election interference case and now we're hearing what former trump attorney janet ellis told prosecutors about the final days in the white house of ways to overturn the election. running out. he said the boss is not going to leave under any cicircumstanceces. wewe a are just gogoing to statn power. my sport propels me forward. contra costa college saw potential in me that i didn't know i had. focus. determination. drive. contra costa college helped me blaze the trail. now i'm a comet, and there's no stopping me. come on, this is your shot. take it. join the team at contra costa college. start today at contracosta.edu well we've got news out of fulton county tonight, abc news obtaining video connecting to the first plea deals in the georgia 2020 election subversion case. -- condense giving. don't give you, know where