number. >> at the end of the day, this is basically a numbers game. what's the price tag, that both factions of the democratic party, again the two that are holding out on the senate side. can actually agree on. >> from the beginning, it's never been about the price, tag it's about what we want to deliver. i don't feel the need to give a number, because i gave my number it was three point. five >> so if we're not looking at numbers, what about one point. five >> so it's gonna be. >> why won't add up to that. number >> because that's too small to get our priorities. and it will be somewhere between 1.5 and 3.5. and i think the white house is working on that right now. >> meanwhile, across the, aisle as you can imagine, republicans are practically giddy at this site of all of this dysfunction, as senator john barrasso made clear this morning on fox. >> i thought joe biden went to the hill on friday, to try to get that bipartisan infrastructure bill passed, and instead he surrendered to the radical wing of his party, and now you have this big governments reckless spending bill. the democrats are not coming to talk with republicans on any of these things. >> so at this, point all sides are basically talking past each, other because the white house wants to know why republicans are not helping the democrats dig out of the whole, they found themselves in. >> the real question is why are republicans making us go everything alone. we have to do an american rescue plan alone. the good news is we do have a united democratic party, we're always going to put people and purpose first, not politics, and we're going to get it done. >> so, just to be, clear i think he said united. did he just say united? >> with all due respect mr. richmond, if this is what unite it looks, like i would hate to see would a divided democratic house looks like. let's begin our discussion tonight, with one of the 11 democratic senators who last week voiced support for house progressives in their bid to delay the vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill. until, after the passage of the build back better act. i spoke with minnesota senator tina smith earlier this evening. >> senator smith, welcome, and thank you so much for your time. i want to start with that letter of support that you signed on to explicitly say that house progressives intend to vote for the bipartisan infrastructure bill, only once the build back better act is passed, is that a verbal commitments? that a deal is not enough, must the build back better act be formally passed first? or just agreed upon? . >> as progressives in the senate, the progressives that signed on to that, letter wanted to buck up the house progressives, and make sure that they knew that we were with them, in making the point that these two bills need to go together. they are both two sides of the same coin, of the broad agenda that president biden ran on in 2020. that iran on in 2020. and we need to do all of its together. the bipartisan bill is great. but we also need to remember the rest of the campaign that we ran on. which is around lowering prescription drugs. addressing the crisis of climate change. making childcare more affordable. we signed that letter just to kind of remind folks that these things are two peas in the same pot. they have to go together. >> at the core of this, it seems like trust, correct me if i'm wrong, but do you trust your colleagues senator cinnamon senator manchin? why is there this reluctance to sign the bipartisan infrastructure bill, get that done and then do the human infrastructure? it seems like he, or not you, but generally the members of the democratic caucus simply don't trust them. >> absolutely i trust, them and i believe that both of them that are gauche eating in good faith. but this is a negotiation, we don't all see this exactly the same way. and so it is not enough to say oh will find an agreement. we need to understand what exactly that agreement is going to be, and that i think is really at the root of why we wanted to send, that why we made that statement. and negotiations are. hard this is hard stuff and it's hard to. do we have to remember that and kind of keep on pushing forward, and finding that path forward, that all 50 of us in the senate can agree on. >> let me play for you this clip from senator -- director of white house paula for public engagement, he was on meet the press this morning. watch. >> people will be disappointed. people will not get everything they want. that is the art of legislating, but the goal here is to get both bills. and we're going to fight until we get both bills. >> so do you accept that you will be disappointed, and might not get everything that you want? what are you willing to accept, because i know congresswoman jayapal said the range is between 1.5 and 3.5 trillion dollars. are you willing to work within that range. or must be 3.5 trillion, or is it more about what is being cut? >> absolutely i'm willing to compromise. if you're not willing to compromise then you're not really in the midst of a negotiation. i don't really find these numbers all that meaningful. 1.5, 3.5. what i want to know is what are we going to do. we need to build up from what we say is important to accomplish for our country. lowering prescription drugs, paying for childcare. and making childcare more affordable. and what i've been focusing most of my time, and which is addressing the climate crisis. let's figure out how much that is going to cost, what we're able to do and then build from there. of course we're going to have to compromise. the progressives as well as the moderates. to get to an agreement. that i hope comes close as we possibly can to fulfilling the agenda, that caused americans in minnesotans to turnout in record numbers, in 2020, because they saw, okay now we're gonna really see something that's going to help me in my life, and i want to be able to get that done. >> senator manchin said on wednesday that an expansion of medicaid, that democrats are seeking to include in the reconciliation bill, must include the high amendment to get his support. obviously the hyde amendment states that medicaid and other federal programs are prohibited from covering abortion expenses. this morning congresswoman jayapal said she will not support the bill and if it includes the hyde amendment, where do you stand on this? how much of a roadblock to expected to be, this particular issue? that senator manchin is insisting on? >> i think representative paul said this is a negotiation, we have to work our way through. this but i want to be really clear. i strongly oppose the hyde amendment. with the hyde amendment does, is it says, that the one in five american women that are of reproductive age, that get their health insurance from medicaid, do not have full access to the reproductive health, care they don't have full access to all of the reproductive, rates because of the hyde amendment. it's not only discriminatory against poor, women but so many of the women that rely on medicaid or women of color. it also continues to statistic challenge of inequity that we have in our country. i'm strongly opposed to. it we have to figure out how to get this, through and unfortunately, the hyde amendment has been in place in one way or another since 1976, when it first was enacted, and so this is a battle that we fight over and over again, as we work to try to protect reproductive rights of women, in this case poor women. >> senator tina, smith you can now add one more title, you are a grandmother, congratulations on your new grandson. we certainly appreciate you spending a bit of your time with us this evening. congratulations. thank you senator for your time. >> thank you. >> okay let's continue the discussion now with near congressman -- a member of the congressional caucus to serves as a freshman representative to leadership on the democratic house, leadership, team congressman it's good to see you again. do you consider this week to be a victory for progressives? how are you measuring success? are you willing to accept a reconciliation bill, that is between as we're hearing these numbers 1.5 and 3.5 trillion dollars? >> it is good to be with you. last week was a success and a victory, not just for progressives, but for the american people. this is joe biden's broadly popular economic agenda. and we are back on track to negotiating, and passing a large reconciliation, bill known as the build back better act. and of course that smaller bipartisan infrastructure bill. i don't want to put a number on what the final reconciliation bill should, be more focused on the substance, can we do enough to ensure high quality affordable childcare for every family in america? what is required in order for us to invest in climate action that stops the climate crisis for more stunning. how much is it going to cost to do a real paid family leave program, so we can catch up with the rest of the developed world. and of course how much will it cost to expand medicare, to include dental vision and hearing. and so that's what i'm focused. and i'm focused on the substance, and i'm so thrilled to have a president, who agrees with the progressive strategy in the house, in ensuring that we passed both of these large bills. >> i want to read something that was attributed to, you quote that you said in the. hill and it says in part, referring to the small handful of conservative democrats, working to block the president's agenda as moderates, does grave harm to the english language. and unfairly maligned's my colleagues who are actually moderate, yet by and large understand the stakes of this historic moment. >> i actually agree with. you i've been keying on this show to use the word conservative democrats, to describe the positions that are being held by somebody like senator joe manchin, kristen, cinema is there a better term you would used to describe senator manchin and sinema? . look i think we can go with conservative for now to say the least. let's consider the fact that on the house side overwhelmingly, all members of the house democratic, caucus the president of the united states obviously the speaker of the house and majority leader chuck, schumer unsupportive this strategy. and adds support frankly of the 3.5 trillion-dollar budget reconciliation bill. that is true of literally everyone in the united states senate, on the democratic side. with the exception of two senators. so it's not accurate to refer to them as moderate, or representative. really of any faction other than a very conservative faction within the democratic party. >> i'm curious to get your thoughts because it was kind of new to a lot of the people, to a lot of people in the public, excuse me. this kind of agreement. i know it's on the senate side of this equation, what do you make of this kind of agreement that was signed between senator schumer and senator manchin, saying he would not go above 1.5 trillion. that that was his starting position. why did, we i soon you found out about at the same way we did, when it was put out there into the public. just a couple days ago. why was that held on to so secretly, and doesn't that just kind of conjure up the perception that people have about washington, that these deals are done kind of in secret, and nobody gets to know it was actually agreed upon until the very end? >> i actually don't agree with the fallout from that letter. i think people are being way too hard on the majority leader. the fact is, joe manchin, just like kristen cinema, voted for 3.5 trillion-dollar budget resolution, over the united states senate, after that acknowledgment was signed by both manchin and schumer, of course at the very bottom of that document, it talks about how manchin is not guaranteed to vote for something larger than 1.5. it doesn't say that he will. in the same with the majority leader said that he will work to dissuade joe manchin of his positions on a variety of subject matter, memorialized that document, clearly it was required to get him to vote for the 3.5, a trade-off for the resolution. i think it did the right thing. >> i appreciate you give me a little bit of that got. check let's talk about arizona for a moment. you have some arizona democrats laying the groundwork for a primary challenge to senator cinema. do you support that idea? even if it could make it vulnerable to a possible republican takeover? >> well, look, i think it's up to arizona democrats, as to what kind of leadership they want in the united states senate, make no mistake, about arizona politics, do not require kyrsten sinema to be as conservative and obstructionist as she has been, i would argue that west virginia politics, don't require joe manchin to be as conservative it ends as construction is since he's been. in the area of this budget reconciliation bill. when you do the polling, this stuff is broadly popular across both democratic and republican. >> that's what makes it so frustrating. >> it is, it is, and i think a lot of people have done analysis and other factors at, play how much money are people getting from various industries. i'm proud not to take corporate money, many of my colleagues don't. and just generally speaking, i come from a generation of folks, who are much more willing to do what's right by the american people, rather than compromise our values for the sake of compromise, i would submit. i think kirsten cinema can raise money without doing that kind of activities she's been doing. fleeing washington for example, to have a pack retreat, in the midst of the negotiation,. >> i was just gonna say the same, thing or two a ten from greater razors. you have to put out every, time you have to wonder who her big interest special interest donors are. and whether or not they have a stake in the outcome of these two bills. congressman jones, always a pleasure. sir thank you for your time. coming, up a new whistleblower is accusing facebook of contributing to the polarization here in the u.s.. some talk one-on-one with the whistleblower's attorney, coming up next. plus, the weeklong soap opera starring as the media has come to a close, we will discuss what happens, and how one bizarre story got bigger in weirder, over the past five days. but first, we are here with the headlines. hayman eta. >> thank you amy and there's some stories we're watching this. our major oil spill in southern california is forced multiple beaches to close. the coast guard is monitoring for any wildlife that could be contaminated. the mayor of huntington beach called, it a potentially ecologically disaster. eight people are dead after a small plane crashed in a vacant building in milan. officials confirm only those on board were involved in the crash, italy's national aviation safety agency as open an investigation. on saturday, the cdc released guidance for the upcoming holiday season. the agency recommends socially distance outdoor celebrations, if indoors they suggest circulating air to reduce the risk of spreading coronavirus. they are urging the unvaccinated not to travel. more after the break. o travel more after the break as someone who resembles someone else... i appreciate that liberty mutual knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ ♪♪ we believe everyone deserves to live better. and just being sustainable isn't enough. our future depends on regeneration. that's why we're working to not only protect our planet, but restore, renew, and replenish it. so we can all live better tomorrow. ♪♪ we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. ♪ ♪ you've never seene anything quite like it. we've never created anything quite like it. the all-electric, all-mercedes eqs. we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customizedhpaste car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. facebook will be facing tough ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ to scrutiny when a whistle blower, who used to work inside the company testifies on tuesday before a senate subcommittee. the testimony comes after the whistleblower, who was revealed to be frances francis haugen hogan. leaked internal research documents to the wall street journal. now the documents reportedly show that the social media giant knew its platforms were quote riddled with flaws, that cause harm, often in ways that only the company fully understands. the whistleblower spoke to cbs news in an interview that ran earlier tonight on 60 minutes. >> when we live in an intimation knit environment, that is full of anger, hateful, polarizing content, it arose our civic trust. it arose arch trust in each other. it erodes our ability to want to care for each other. the version of facebook that exist today, is tearing our societies apart and card is being ethnic violence around the world. >> hagen it's commits ringed especially true after the riots at the capitol. -- in response to our requests for comments, facebook sent us the following statement. >> every day our teams have to balance protecting the right of billions of people to express themselves openly with the need to keep our platform a safe and positive place. we continue to make significant improvements to tackle the spread of misinformation and harmful content. to says that we encourage bad content and do nothing is just not not true. >> joining me now is attorney andrew mckinney, helping represent the facebook whistle blower. >> andrew thank you so much for joining us this evening, talk to me a little bit about the your client's decision to come forward as a whistle blower, why is she doing this now and what she's alleging. >> well, first thank you very much for having me on. it's an honor. first, i just want to say that being a whistleblower is a very difficult thing to be. and individual like francis, doesn't do that without thinking about doing it first. and the impact that it has, not just on herself but on others. what i want to do is applaud her for her courage and dedication and doing that. the reason she came forward is she wants individuals in position of authority, congress, the sec, the federal government, regulators to have information so that way they can make the best decisions possible in how to regulate facebook. >> let's talk about the sec for a moment. and specifically, what she's alleging in terms of the documents that she provided them. can you shed more light, specifically into the allegation, what laws may have been broken or what specifically you as an eternity want the sec to investigate. >> there is a number of things that were disclosed to the scc, first a series of documents that francis had collected, that was provided to the sec as well as to congress. we also provided a series of disclosures articulating some of the underlying concerns. for example, you've seen in the wall street journal's article about the cross check program and the technical elements about how they were running algorithms, or allowing people who are in position of high-profile to effectively engage in behavior without any consequences, okay? but we also provided an explanation as to how these algorithms and how the system is being run to inversely effect them personally, like teenagers and mental health. but we also discuss and described how the platform has impacted society as a whole, democracies. include as so far as to have impacts as to a genius of genocide in mena. so we're talking about some technical things that have been brought forward and brought to life about the information that the company knew, when it knew it, and the fact that they knew there was an ability to mitigate these problems. >> as you can imagine, the reaction from facebook has been to try and do some damage control. they've been trying to get ahead of to tuesday's testimony. let me play for you a clip, from nick clog, he's a present company's vice president from cnn earlier today. watch. >> the insertion is that the january six can be explained because of social media. i think that's ludicrous. the responsibility for the violence of january 6th and the insurrection on that day lies squarely with the people who inflicted the violence and those who encourage them. including, then president trump and candidly many other people. i think it would be too easy to to suggest that a tweak to an algorithm, somehow all the disfiguring polarization in u.s. politics would suddenly evaporates. i think it absolves people of asking themselves the harder questions about the historical, cultural, social, economic reasons that have led to the politics that we have in the u.s. today. >> do you or your client believed that facebook had a role in january six? what is the allegation in relationship to facebook's role in the way communication an organization is taking place around that interaction? >> absolutely. this is a platform that has been used by individuals who are spreading misinformation, disinformation. we have foreign governments using the platform to stoke hatred and violence. but at the end of the day, it's about facebook's underlying algorithms and how the system was set up. one of our disclosures establish that facebook actually prioritize the spread of things that are hateful, because you got more clicks. because it's clickbait. and that's why people are attracted to. so, positive stories, favorable stories we're not spread as far and wide as disinformation. because people can latch on to. that so, to say that facebook had no role in what ultimately led to the january 6th or other events globally, again, -- is a false statement. they had a role. they are the vehicle by which misinformation is spread globally. >> and one final question to you andrew, and i've heard i'm sure you've heard this comparison to facebook to big compact tobacco -- categorically rejected there, massachusetts senator ed markey, said that they are pushing a product that they know is harmful to the health of young people. do you think a, that is an appropriate comparison and be, do you believe facebook to be or facebook or your client to believe that facebook is a overall all harmful products to society? >> so first, i do agree with that analogy. i do believe that what's coming out today is not dissimilar from what came about from big tobacco years ago, where it was finally publicly disclosed a big tobacco knew that their products were harmful to the general public. because of francis's disclosures, we now know that facebook knows that its product is harmful to teenagers, to society in general, to democracies, and to global health. that being said, unlike tobacco, if facebook will continue to exist or platforms like facebook will continue to exist, so it's not like you can do away with tobacco, with a tobacco analogy, we have to learn how to live with facebook, and regulate facebook so that way we can mitigate it from becoming a more harmful product. >> and you think congress, you have the confidence that congress can do that? given what we've seen from congress so far and dealing with big tech. >> well, i think before they were listening to big what big tech was telling them, now they know would big tech knows. and the differences, they know what big tech knows and what congress should want now, or should demand, it is full transparency. that is something that my client wants, my client wants congress to be knowledgeable about what these companies can do. what's tools are at their disposal to fix these problems. and i do believe that when congress were to stop this, starting on tuesday and going forward, perhaps we can have so meaningful conversations about how to fix these complex problems. >> we look forward to having to have these conversations with you, thank you so much for your time, i know it's been a busy day for you, a greatly appreciated. >> coming up this supreme court is returning to the bench tomorrow and tackling a slew of high-profile cases, we're going to break down what to expect in the coming weeks with my sunday night panel. don't go anywhere. don't go anywhere. sorry? limu, you're an animal! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ (man 1) oh, this looks like we're in a screen saver. (man 2) yeah, but we need to go higher. (man 1) higher. (man 2) definitely higher. (man 1) we're like yodeling high. [yodeling] yo-de-le-he... (man 2) hey, no. uh-uh, don't do that. (man 1) we should go even higher! (man 2) yeah, let's do it. (both) woah! (man 2) i'm good. (man 1) me, too. (man 2) mm-hm. (vo) adventure has a new look. (man 1) let's go lower. (man 2) lower, that sounds good. (vo) discover more in the all-new subaru outback wilderness. love. it's what makes subaru, subaru. ever notice how stiff clothes can feel rough on your skin? for softer clothes that are gentle on your skin, try downy free & gentle downy will soften your clothes without dyes or perfumes. the towel washed with downy is softer, and gentler on your skin. try downy free & gentle. we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. ♪♪ things you start when you're 45. my go to toothpaste coaching. new workouts. and screening for colon cancer. yep. the american cancer society recommends screening starting at age 45, instead of 50, since colon cancer is increasing in younger adults. i'm cologuard®. i'm convenient and find 92% of colon cancers... ...even in early stages. i'm for people 45 plus at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider if cologuard is right for you. one, two! one, two, three! only pay for what you need! with customized car insurance from liberty mutual! nothing rhymes with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ after my car accident, ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ i wondered what my case was worth. so i called the barnes firm. when that car hit my motorcycle, insurance wasn't fair. so i called the barnes firm. it was the best call i could've made. atat t bararnefirmrm, our r inry a attneysys wk hahard i could've made. atat t bararnefirmrm, to get you the best result possible. call us now and find out what your case could be worth. you u mit bebe sprisised tomorrow marks the first day ♪ the barnes firm injury attorneys ♪ ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪ the supreme court's new term and the stakes are. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] public perception of the court's hearing, do you think that the the person feeling some of this pressure. five of them doing interviews or at least making public statements about the perception of the court and the image of the court, just within the last couple of weeks. has all this speaking out done more harm than good? >> i think it's all done a little bit more harm than good, and the reason why i think that is because, never really do you hear much out of the supreme court justices on the media. you really don't hear much about it, the other thing of it was, do you remember when trump was running and campaigning, he would make references to the supreme court nominations. i think it would rally a lot of the conservatives base that he had to make different decisions on how they were gonna vote for u.s. senate. so in a weird way, we can almost look to president trump and say that he kind of fanned the flames for politicizing a lot of the supreme court justices. meaning vote for this person for u.s. senate, because don't forget whoever you have is going to make an impact on the supreme court. so when trump ran, he really put a lot of emphasis on don't forget i i, picked the nominee. so i think, that forefront the media. >> can i just say, can we put this charade aside when we have justices that are somehow supposed to be impartial, when the president specifically said, i'm going to pick pro-life justices. and then campaigns for, senators who will go out and appoints or at least endorsed pro life justices. why are we pretending that's not a factor or a litmus test in the way these justices were chosen. eva, you wrote that with a majority of conservatives, the kinds of cases the court considers, has moved dramatically to the, right and, quote it's not that every case will be decided 6 to 3. it's 6 to 3 excuse, me it's that all the cases will be argued on conservative terms, or the issues conservatives care about and decided based on what conservatives think they can get away with. explain that to me. how do you see that in the types of cases the court showed this term, and how could this alter now? >> we can look at the jobs case, the abortion case is a great example of this. mississippi bans abortion, after six weeks, after 15 weeks. this is a direct violation of roe v. wade, so direct, that a conservative republican appointed district judge, and a conservative-controlled fifth circuit, both took mississippi's law and threw it on the whale, that's how obviously violets evolve roe v. wade the mississippi ban is, but the supreme court, 6 to 3 conservative, at least for conservatives on the through supreme court decided, no no no they want to hear that case, they want to argue about that case, this is a case that would never be in front of a split core, or a liberal court. but it is absolutely in front of a conservative, core so however it comes down, whether it's merely a rollback of roe v. wade, a weakening of roe v. wade, that kind of gutted the voting rights act from the inside out. whether it's that are a complete overturning of roe v. wade, as mississippi has asked for, the window is all the way over, here were fighting over what's the right wants to fight about, because if we weren't, this case would not even be here. >>, aly do you think the court should be expanded? >> yes. by a lot. you just had tina smith and jones, on these are two democrats who get, it and who have been fighting for courts expansion. as a plus for expansion, 13 justices, 13 courts that kind of. think that's, fine i'm fine with, that because of mcconnell shenanigans with tony blair, and mayor garland, however, i support even, more i want ten or 20 more justices, because if you really expand the court by a lot, what you're doing is not just revenge against mcconnell. it's reforming the entire, court if you had 29 justices on the, court we would not fight like this every time one of them dies. air every time one of them retires. it would really de politicize the entire process. and in terms of their decision-making, people argue they want moderate decisions from the supreme court, i don't. i'm liberal, i want crazy liberal decisions from the supreme court. but other people say they want moderate decisions from the supreme court. you want moderate, decisions try getting 15 people together in a majority opinion that it's 29% court as it posed to. five i promise you that would be a more moderate decision. >> noel final thought to, you do you share that sentiment? should the supreme court be expanded? >> first of all, this is a wild thought, but i just wish that they were lifetime appointments, what position do you know, that has a lifetime appointment. and we really would not be dealing with this, i'm all about checks and balances, which are what the supreme court is supposed to, do they're supposed to look at different cases in rural according to the law, and i think i don't know, as far as court packing, if i were a democrat. and we made a great, point i'm a liberal democrat, i want the court, packed yes ease honest, yes of course but there's a lot of people on the gop camp, that are like oh my gosh, no we got our people in, and we want to see it through. we don't want to impact. back to my original point, i just wish they were lifetime appointments. >> okay noelle, ali, thank you both very much. greatly appreciate your insights's. evening and coming up, it's been three years since journalist -- was murdered, what has the units done to hold saudi arabia accountable? done to hold saudi arabi accountable? as someone who resembles someone else... i appreciate that liberty mutual knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ alright. y'all know when they say your home is a reflection of you? well helene found herself in a lamp. no joke. i got a fancy grown up lamp to make me feel like a fancy grown up. mhm. adulting ain't easy. ooh! check this one out. waffles loves her dog bed. we can hardly get her out of it. she's kind of a diva. yes, waffles! living your best life. [woof] i'm telling y'all there's no place like wayfair to make your home totally you. ooh! i want that. [music: "i swear"] jaycee tried gain flings for the first time the other day... and forgot where she was. you can always spot a first time gain flings user. ♪ we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. need to get your prescriptions refilled? capsule pharmacy can hand deliver your medications - today - for free. go to capsule.com. we handle your insurance. all you have to do is schedule delivery. go to capsule.com to get started in 15 seconds today. i'm still wowed by what's next. even with higher stroke risk due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin,... i want that. eliquis. eliquis reduces stroke risk better than warfarin. and has less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis has both. don't stop taking eliquis without talking to your doctor as this may increase your risk of stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking, you may bruise more easily... or take longer for bleeding to stop. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, or unusual bruising. it may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor about eliquis. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insuranced thinner. from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ still fresh unstopables in-wash scent booster make them, in fact the pariah downy unstopables that they are. >> all right, so that was then presidential candidate joe biden, less than two years ago. promising to hold a saudi levers accountable for the murder of jamal khashoggi -- but that hard stance has seemingly faded since then. take a look at yesterday's tweet from senator andy blinken, strikingly, there's no mention of saudi arabia, or crowning prince -- actually met with mbs this week, matching is the late fiancée of khashoggi said it best, writing quote do not claim that the killing of a good person who stood for democracy and freedom is wrong, when you have no intention to make it right. now don't get me wrong, biden has done more than trump to counter the saudis, he paused some weapons dale as approved by the previous administration, but the biden administration stopped short of saying to the mbs directly, despite the intelligence report confirming that the crown prince approved the operation. so three years later, what messages ascended to other sovereign countries and was it worth trading jamal khashoggi small legacy for? if you can get a bad week, take a look at aussie media, we're going to discuss the lies that led to the company's downfall, next. next. are you using liberty mutual's coverage customizer tool? so you only pay for what you need. sorry? limu, you're an animal! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ your eyes. beautiful on the outside, but if you have diabetes, there can be some not-so-pretty stuff going on, on the inside. it's true, if you have diabetes, you know high blood sugar is the root of the problem. but that excess sugar can cause the blood vessels to be seriously damaged. and when that happens, this could happen, vision loss or even blindness. that's right, diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of blindness for adults in the u.s. but even though you can't see it, there is something you can do about it. remember this: now is the time to get your eyes checked. eye care is an incredibly important part of your long-term diabetes management. see a path forward with actions and treatments that may help your eyes— and protect against vision loss. just say to yourself, “now eye see.” then—go see an eye care specialist. visit noweyesee.com to get the facts about diabetes, your eyes, and what you can do next—to take control of your sight. brought to you by regeneron. age-related macular degeneration may lead to severe vision loss, so the national eye institute did 20 years of clinical studies on a formula found in preservision. if it were my vision, i'd ask my doctor about preservision. it's the most studied eye vitamin brand. if it were my vision, i'd look into preservision preservision areds 2 contains the exact nutrient formula recommended by the nei to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. i have amd, it is my vision, so my plan includes preservision. we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. ♪ ♪ my go to toothpaste peerless design, cutting-edge tech, and a world-class interior. the exhilarating mercedes-benz glc. extraordinary runs in the family. one, two! one, two, three! only pay for what you need! with customized car insurance from liberty mutual! nothing rhymes with liberty mutual. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ , all right so, fake until you make it isn't that how the old saying goes? but would this fake it go too far? while one clue your heading in that direction as when an officer of your digital media company, in person a so you can to bake executive on a conference call, in order to secure $40 million of new financing from a major investment bank. and just to be clear, that is not a hypothetical situation. that's exactly what the cofounder and chief operating officer of aussie media reportedly did last winter, the incident was first reported by vincent in the media in the times on the 26th. and on friday, just five days after smith's bombshell column was published, asean ounce that they are closing up shop. joining me now, is bin smith, the new york times columnist who broke this story wide open. then, it's great to have you, i mean this is an absolutely fascinating story with so many twists and turns i couldn't even keep up with all the developments over the weeks. and as you didn't deny your reporting, in fact they blame the conference call incident on some mirror row, the co-founder and chief operating officer of aussie media. supposedly going through a mental health crisis, that's not to make jokes or make light of that in any capacity. but what do you make of that explanation? >> i think it was an attempt to prevent critics from writing about it. the thing was, and i don't know the details of his mental health, what we were really able to report on was that it was part of a pattern of deceiving investors, advertisers, the media, all sorts of people about what was going on with that company. although that was a particular spectacular thing. >> i know that you write in your piece that the line between hype and fraud is often blurry and comes into focus only in retrospect. so let me put the question to you, iowa pointed aussie cross the line in their fake it until you make it bluster? was it a conference call you reported on, or what you recall is the turning point in all of this? >> i'm not sure, the thing with aussie was that they had this idea for one media audit be, which is bipartisan -- having hot thoughtful conversations across party lines. and you know what, there's probably a reason the there's not a cable network that does that. the reason that americans, really want to consume that. but those who really did want to consume that are billionaires, and advertisers. so the sketch work just worked incredibly well. it just never got in an audience. >> the crazy thing about it is that when you look at some of the people that i attended aussie first, they are a who's who of society in this country. the idea that all as he was appeared or presented themselves to be something that talked about for a while within certain media circles. our issues like this widespread in the media industry, are you seeing this more and more with this kind of rush to find the next media gold mine if you will? >> yeah, i've actually heard nobody even watching the show, it's just the producers running around trying to give the impression that it's a real thing it's kind of like the truman show. no, actually. i think people say well there's a lot of digital media companies and that sort of the companies that come out of it, i think in any industry there's high, there are salesman, those people trying to push lines, but this is really an order of magnitude away from that. >> i know that aussie wasn't just faking it in the digital space, you also reported that they produce an entire tv show, with some truly a list guest on a false claim. walk us through that a little bit. >> yeah, the summer of 2020, it was after george floyd, it was a moment when a lot of people were looking for a way to make a difference, and aussie called up a couple of very experienced tv producers, the guys used to run entertainment tonight. and says we want to put on this show, our celebrities dig into social issues in a way that they haven't before. and it's going to start airing on any, in like two weeks from now, we really got a jump. and a month in they realize that it's not going to air, it just kind of going on youtube. will the producers all quit. there was just a lot of, it sort of goes beyond optimism. let's say. >> let me ask you, if i can, given your background as someone who's worked in the digital space with buzzfeed and launching that, and the pressures that carlos watson, who actually used to work at msnbc, who was an anchor, who was behind aussie. do you have any of sympathy for the pressure that he was on, and the mistakes that he made where, those presentable? it's really hard to fathom that someone in that position, without responsibility, would make that decision and then stick with it for that amount of time. >> yeah i should i should say i, to carlos a while ago, he feels that he did absolutely nothing wrong, he everything he said was true. he's totally, totally disputes this just of this reporting. i can't really -- i do think that that idea that you tell a small lie, and then a bigger one, and then your trapped is a real nightmare, for anyone. >> all right, ben smith, i don't know why don't get the hedman treatment, i saw you earlier on cbs cnn, you are wearing a headband. >> i have it here, i just wasn't sure if you are serious. >> no, this is definitely not a serious show, definitely not. good to talk to you, i appreciate you coming on, credible work as always. hashtag, journalism still matters, thank you for bringing that to light. thank you for making time for us this sunday, you can catch a man every friday at seven eastern and back on msnbc saturdays at eight and sundays at nine. be sure to follow us on twitter and tiktok at a man and be msnbc, we're gonna post highlights from the show. and a lot of fun stuff behind the scenes. until we meet again, i'm ayman mohyeldin, good night. n, good night. as someone who resembles someone else... i appreciate that liberty mutual knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ we have to be able to repair the enamel on a daily basis. with pronamel repair toothpaste, we can help actively repair enamel in its weakened state. it's innovative. my go to toothpaste is going to be pronamel repair. with downy infusions, let the scent set the mood. feel the difference with downy. my go to toothpaste i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! ( sighs wearily ) here, i'll take that! ( excited yell ) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one-gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health! ( abbot sonic ) (vo) singing, or speaking. and nutrients to supporreason,e health! or fun. daring, or thoughtful. sensitive, or strong. progress isn't either or progress is everything. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. i'm craig, melvin and i'm ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ natalie mullin, this is dateline. she was home with the kids. her husband out with friends when it happened. >> he said something about his kids telling him there was a. robber >> all they told us was there is an intruder. >> their home, so deep in the woods, now shrouded in a mystery even dipper. >> this is a real whodunnit. >> police said suspects. >> i remember kelly not wanting to be home alone. >> they also had a problem. >> why would this guy go up and kill this woman? >> her family had questions of