sexual abuse former president. but also the most important trial of our life times. the united states of america versus donald trump. tomorrow, trump will be arraigned in a washington, d.c. courtroom. he's expected to plead not guilty to four criminal counts, conspiracy to defraud the united states, conspiracy to obstruct, conspiracy to violate the right to vote and obstruction of an official proceeding. this latest indictment of the former president handed down by special counsel jack smith is an incredibly detailed and damning account of an attempt to subvert democracy and forcibly overturn the 2020 election. it pulls from first-hand accounts including people very close to the president and sets up a potential block buster trial with star witnesses, including his former vice president and countless maga senators and members of the -- and members of congress. the core of the case is broken down into three parts. the first part details how trump was fully aware that he lost the election. full stop. he was told point blank by multiple people, republicans who he had hired and who he trusted and who told him in no uncertain terms that he lost to joe biden. but he went on to repeat lies about election fraud and a stolen election any way. the second part of the indictment describes the harebrained, dangerous scheme to get the department of justice in on the act. trump and co-conspirator number four, believed to be an environmental lawyer at the justice department named jeffrey clark, tried to enlist the to tell republican lawmakers in seven swing states that the u.s. government believed in the fraud allegations and they should switch out the real electors who were chosen based on the popular vote in their states for fake electors to overturn the election results in those states. but it is part three of the indictment that is the most chilling part. that is the coup part. this section goes into dramatic detail about just how hell bent trump and his co-conspirators were to corrupt the united states government by whatever means necessary so he could stay in power. to the point where they were casually discussing using military force on u.s. citizens. according to the indictment, on the afternoon of january 3rd, coconspirator number four, jeffrey clark, spoke with a deputy white house counsel, the previous month, the deputy counsel had informed the defendant, trump, that there is no world, there is no option, in which you do not leave the white house on january 20th, inauguration day. now the same deputy white house counsel tried to dissuade clark from assuming the role of acting attorney general himself. and the deputy white house counsel reiterated to clark that there had not been outcome determinetive fraud in the election. and if the defendant, trump, remained in office nonetheless, there would be riots in every major city in the united states. to which clark responded, well, that's why there's an insurrection act. just marinate on that for a second. this is the man donald trump wanted to flash install as our new attorney general, casually discussing, sicking the united states military on americans if they dare to go into the streets in protest after their votes were literally deleted in seven states. and the electors they chose replaced by fake electors so trump could stay president. just stunning stuff. and even though this literal coup attempt was ultimately unsuccessful, it culminated in an hour's long violent attack on the u.s. capitol on january 6th, 2021, perpetrated by trump supporters that is in itself completely unprecedented. >> i ever heard the president say something to the effect of, i don't f'ing care they have weapons. they're not here to hurt me. take the f'ing mags away. let my people in. they can march the capitol from here. >> we have to fight much harder. you'll never take back our country with weakness. >> three men walking down the street in fatigue -- >> they know they have an elevated threat in the tree south side of constitution avenue. look for the adult flag. >> we're coming to take you out. we'll pull you out by your hairs. >> i'm not combat trained. and that day it was just hours of hand to hand combat. >> hang mike pence. hang mike pence. >> get a great f'ing criminal defense lawyer. you're going to need it. >> but beyond the alleged criminality, what jack smith lays out in this 45-page indictment is a frightening look at just how close we came to losing american democracy two and a half years ago. and yet n our current reality, the same person who has been criminally charged with conspireing to defraud the united states of america, to steal the votes of seven states worth of voters and to maybe sick the military on us to quash any resistance to him staying in power against our will, and who knows, maybe never leaving office again, is the republican front-runner for president. just let that sink in for a moment. the likely republican nominee for president has been charged with conspiracy to defraud the country he now wants to lead again. what a world. i'm joined now by paul butler, professor at georgetown law school, former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst, cater bener, justice reporter for "new york times" and msnbc contributor, frank former assistant director for counterintelligence at the fbi and msnbc national security analyst. frank, it's you i want to start with on this. because the invocation of the insurrection act -- the reason i really wanted to start with that tonight and that part of the indictment because i think that is the scariest part of the indictment, the insurrection act essentially says that to enforce laws of the united states in any state by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings the president may call into the federal service such of the military of any state and use such of the armed forces he considers necessary to enforce the laws or suppress a rebellion. the idea that there was a real consideration of using the united states military because per the indictment john eastman acknowledged to donald trump senior adviser that no court would support the proposal to switch out the electors for fake ones. and trump and his advisers were told you're going to cause riots in the street. so which eastman also responded, just like clark, previously been points in the nation's history where violence has been necessary to protect the republic. these guys were contemplating using the military on us, frank. your thoughts. >> yeah. that is perhaps the most chilling part of these 45 pages. although there are certainly competing pages as well. those who say, look, i don't understand why smith chose not to charge the actual breach of the capitol not inciting the riot, not seditious conspiracy, not insurrection, he's masterfully chosen as a strategy to stay away from saying trump made that happen and rather say trump and his cohorts were fully prepared for violence. they actually seemed to have welcomed it two, as you said, two of the coconspirators there that you identified were perfectly fine with violence and specifically with leveraging the violence. which is really what the 45 page indictment said. trump leveraged that violence that day and, yes, it appears he was fully prepared to call out the military per what we see here. you know what else the insurrection act allows a president to do? it's not just military troops. it's militia, to call out, quote unquote, the militia to suppress an insurrection. you know what stewart rhodes, the leader and founder of the oath keepers told all of us about what he was doing on january 6th, he was waiting for trump to invoke the insurrection act. and many, many of those arrested for january 6th violence will tell us the same thing. i was waiting for the president to invoke the insurrection act. so, yeah. chillingly close. a fragile experiment in democracy is what we are. and we came perilously close to seeing boots on the ground, u.s. troops either seizing voting machines, suppressing the so-called insurrection but they were fine with it. they were ready for it. and the president was willing to use it as leverage against pence and others. >> and katie, i think that is what it's hard for people to wrap their minds around that this wasn't just angry people at the capitol who were upset over the results of an election. there were people there who have now been convicted of seditious conspiracy who were leading literal militias between the oath keepers, the proud boys, the three percenters, whoever else was out there and some have already been convicted of this. as we put all of this together, you've got that, plus the weaponization of the department of justice. and somebody who was the person donald trump wanted to be the attorney general, being a leader of the idea that the justice department should participate. and i wonder what you make of the fact that given that the justice department was so central to the conspiracy, it did take a long time for this justice department to kind of react to that with indictments all the way at the top including to donald trump. >> so i think that this justice department had to be very careful as it proceeded because what had happened before biden became president. as you saw the justice department weaponized in these really extreme ways, especially at the end of the administration where donald trump was trying to use the justice department to validate his false claims of election fraud and maintain power. this is inherently political stuff. we can say that it's just a matter of following the facts and it's as easy as that and cleanse this country and the justice department of all the politicization and all the deep, deep suspicion of the department, both inside the department, there are people inside the department who are having clash, and outside the department, the american public is very divided over what this doj is and what it's about. so before merrick garland and special counsel jack smith to be as cautious as possible and try to put all the evidence together they felt would be compelling to show that these federal statutes have been violated, that was something that had to be done with extreme caution. and as carefully as possible because ultimately this investigation will be picked apart. reporters are going to try to put together tiktoks of how it was done. if a republican wins, you can expect that there will be some sort of, you know, attempt to reconstruct this investigation, to see if there are holes, to see if there are moves that were made that were sloppy, not careful or somehow violated somebody's civil liberties. this will be highly scrutinized for years to come. so i don't think it should be a surprise that it did take two and a half years to put together this indictment. >> yeah. and paul, let's go to the indictment. here it is. it is -- i hope people will read it, 45 pages and double spaced for a slow reader like me. the other person who will get criticized is the judge. let's talk about her for just a moment. you know this judge. her name is tawnya, jamaican born. sounds very no nonsense, confirmed 95-0. so obviously she had bipartisan support when she came in. >> i can first say i'll petition the special counsel to see if you can do the opening statement in the trial because your opening to this show got me hyped. you're right. this was about any kind of grand scheme or grand theory, i don't feel sorry for the almost 2,000 people, the foot soldiers who have been charged for january 6th by the end of this year. but it wasn't about politics for trump. it was about his ego. and he was willing to risk lives and, in fact, did cause deaths based on his ego. >> yeah. judge chutkan. known her for 20 years. she was a defense attorney when i was a prosecutor. fortunately i never went against her because she's brilliant. >> yeah. >> let's think about two kinds of justice. legal justice, poetic justice. poetic justice, presiding over donald trump's trial will be a black woman immigrant. trump doesn't like being challenged by anybody. >> that's right. >> but he hates being challenged by black women. you experienced his brunt of his wrath as as our colleague kristen walker. not just an immigrant but from jamaica. we remember the vulgar way that trump described caribbean -- >> s-hole countries. >> joy, the legal justice means that none of that will matter to judge chutkan. a former public defender. she will make sure that trump has all of the process and all of the fairness that any criminal defendant deserves. >> yeah. >> if, in fact, a jury finds him not guilty, she will be happy to say to him, as defendants love to hear, mr. trump, you are free to go. >> yeah. >> but if he is convicted, based on her sentencing practices in other january 6th cases, she's going to send that man to jail for a long time. >> yeah. >> 24 judges in d.c. federal court have had january 6th-related cases. judge chutkan has sentenced more of those people to more time than any of those other judges. she's sent people to prison for january 6th-related crimes even when the prosecutors didn't ask for jail time. >> right. and one of the criticisms -- i've had this criticism, a lot of these judges have been sentencing people to relatively light sentences that were below the guidelines that the government was asking for. they went really light. she's actually gone the other direction. she's actually been pretty tough. really quickly before -- stay with you for a moment. one of the arguments that donald trump's supporters are making is a free speech argument. and i note that jack smith was very careful in this indictment to get to that right away. this is from page 2, i believe. the defendant had a right like every american to speak publicly about the election and even to claim falsely that there had been outcome determinetive fraud during the election and that he had won. what do you make of that argument? >> it's bogus. two things, the argument from trump's defenders is bogus on the free speech front. first of all, not all speech is constitutionally protected. you can't threaten people. you can't famously say fire in a crowded theater. and you can't use words that conspire to subvert democracy. >> yeah. >> and the other piece is that jack smith doesn't care about trump's words. he cares about trump's actions. >> right. >> and that's what those four felony counts are focussed on. not what trump said. >> yeah. >> but what he did. >> and frank, you said this before. i mean, you can say i think the bank, you know, did me wrong and robbed me. that doesn't mean you can rob the bank, right? you can say -- you can say whatever you want. you can't do actions that are illegal. >> yeah. i love the fact that we're getting a glimpse of the defense this fast because mistakenly trump's attorney decided to go on attorney and blab incessantly. we're getting the two prong defense. we're hearing the fervent belief defense. hey, trump actually really believed that there was fraud and he needed to take action. and as you said, what i've been telling people, look, i might have a fervent belief that my local bank ripped me off, but i can't go rob it at gunpoint to get my money back. it's a crime. and you know, the other crime of the defense we're hearing is the free speech prong. again, you know, free speech can become a crime when it turns into criminal conduct. so if we're going to do away with all crimes that have to do with free speech, let's toss the entire fraud section of the u.s. code out. what is fraud? fraud is a lie, right? let's toss out money laundering because really what at its heart money laundering is a lie about where your money came from, right? how about lying to the fbi? title 18 section 1001. let's toss that out because, you know, lying is free speech. you know who would love us to toss those things out? steve bannon, the folks who led the build the wall coalition who pled guilty to money laundering and fraud. how about michael flynn who was convicted, pled guilty to lying to the fbi. they would love for lies to be free speech. but they're not always free speech when they turn into a crime. >> you know who also would love it, walt nauta, who is on tape lying to the fbi and who doesn't have donald trump's million dollar lawyers. he couldn't find a lawyer locally in miami. he's probably going to get got because he, you know, he's not the former president of the united states and he lied to the fbi. like a transcript of the tape. we have much more to talk about. our distinguished panel is staying right here because there's a lot more to discuss. "the reidout" continues right after this short break. "the reidout" continues right after this short break (♪♪) rsv can be a dangerous virus... [sneeze] ...for those 60 and older. it's not just a cold. and if you're 60 or older... ...you may be at increased risk of hospitalization... [coughing] ...from this highly... ...contagious virus. not all dangers come with warning labels. talk to your pharmacist or doctor... ...about getting vaccinated against rsv today. every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans. and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood when i first learned about my dupuytren's contracture, my physician referred me to a hand specialist. and i'm glad he did, because when i took the tabletop test, i couldn't lay my hand flat anymore. the first hand specialist i saw only offered surgery. so, i went to a second hand specialist who also offered nonsurgical options - which felt more right for me. so, what i'd say to other people with dupuytren's contracture is this: don't wait —find a hand specialist trained in nonsurgical options, today. i found mine at findahandspecialist.com. you've evolved. you've changed. so have we. that's why new dove body wash now has 24-hour renewing micro moisture for continuous care. new dove body wash. change is beautiful. we moved out of the city so our little sophie could appreciate nature. but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like? well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity... and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? what, we have a ton of mulch. we're back with our great panel, paul butler, katie bener and frank. i want to talk about the co-conspirators for just a moment. i want to go to you first, katie. to see if you have any intel or reporting. the one person we haven't been able to figure is coconspirator number six. is there any reporting who reveals who that might be? >> not yet. that is the piece of reporting that every reporter is pursuing right now. it's true. it was pretty easy to identify the first five coconspirators. but on the sixth, a political consultant that's extremely broad and trump did use several political consultants and a lot of them were doing little bits and pieces of what is described in this indictment. they were trying to convince local legislatures to accept the idea there was voter fraud. they were helping to come up with different plans and different ways to implement, for example, pressure campaigns on somebody like mike pence to file lawsuits in several states. i think it will take a while to figure out who exactly that person is. but what is interesting is to see whether or not the justice department in subsequent weeks ends up indicting any of these coconspirators. i think we'll not only see if that happens, not only will we see the identities of some of these people confirmed and revealed, we could see more information that would help us to understand what kind of case that jack smith and his prosecutors could bring in court, particularly vis-a-vis this idea that trump knew he had, indeed, lost the election. what we see in this indictment is that trump is told he lost the election. what we don't see anywhere is trump acknowledging it himself. it will be interesting to see what happens as more people are put on notice that they could be indicted themselves. >> well, the one place i think, katie, the only thing i dispute there's the one place he says we're going to hand it to the next guy. i feel like everything that's in here is very deliberate. he does put in that line that trump says, we'll hand it to the next guy which to me says he's not the next guy. but it's an excellent point nonetheless. let me come back to you paul. go ahead. go on. >> i was just trying to say that's true and that does -- that is our one piece of trump's state of mind that would imply that he knew. again, basically what the prosecution is doing is putting people on notice. unless they cooperate and provide more information to the justice department, they could be indicted, too. and so it will be interesting to see these are people who have had private conversations with the former president where he might have slipped up and said something like that. it will be interesting to see what happens. >> and frank, you know, you do have john eastman already putting out a statement saying he will never flip. he will never turn on trump. he will never do a deal. but, trump's lawyers have made it clear that part of their defense is eastman did it. eastman told me. eastman is an imminent legal scholar. i listen to him. so trump is going to throw eastman under the bus and eastman is saying i'm never leaving his side. makes no sense. >> well, nothing in the past several years has made any sense with regard to the loyalty shown to trump by people who seemingly can't get enough job without him. i don't understand it either. i will tell you this, as damning as this indictment is about trump, and i understand the indictment is all about trump and i understand the strategy behind that. it is equally, if not more damning, to these coconspirators. and i find it hard to believe that even if some of them decide to cooperate, i don't think any of them based on what we're seeing in these 45 pages is going to be allowed to completely escape. why? two reasons. the severity of what is described regarding their criminal conduct in this indictment. and secondly, smith already has trump. he's got him. yes, it would be helpful to get more. of course it's always helpful to get more, but they can't escape. and they're in deep trouble. >> yeah, that's right. you typically need to give somebody higher than you. there's nobody higher. they have trump. that's an excellent point. to come to you paul on this. good question as a former federal prosecutor. is it typical to put things in quotation marks if it's not based on a tape? >> no, it's not. well, it could be based on a tape or some other primary source. >> okay. >> but if it's in quotation marks, obviously that means somebody said it. >> it's a quote. we'll put up on the screen. you have when the vice president challenged coconspirator to john eastman whether to return to the states was defensible. so if it's in quotes, we should presume it's either contemporaneous notes or tape, right? >> that's right. >> what's the significance of that to you? >> first, how exhaustive the investigation was. again, the special counsel talked to everybody to fake electors, to state election officials, to mark meadows. five of the six unindicted coconspirators, unindicted at this moment, they might be indicted later, five of the six are lawyers. >> lawyers, yeah. >> so, that's going to advance trump's -- well, these lawyers told me i could do it, but john, the special counsel, he anticipates that, so he has a whole list of lawyers who said just the opposite. >> yeah. >> the acting attorney general. the acting deputy attorney general. the white house counsel. trump's own campaign manager told him there was no fraud in this election. the most damning evidence against trump, it's new in the indictment, paragraph 90 which says that trump told pence he was too honest. you don't get more corroboration about criminal intent. >> yeah. >> than those words. >> and by the way, mike pence took contemoraneous notes. as a former fbi investigator, frank, how happy would you be to have that quote? you're too honest from the defendant. >> boy, that stands out. some newspaper somewhere should have made that their headline because that really -- if there's one thing we all want to be accused of in any career we have is, hey, you're too honest, right? >> yeah. >> that says it all. that says it all about trump's mindset. i know this is wrong and god darn it you're getting in the way with this honesty of yours. it really jumps out. what does it say about one of the star witnesses that we're probably going to see if this goes to trial? well, it's going to be mike pence. >> it's going to be mike pence. mark meadows stands out to me, katie, somebody who is absent. he appears four times in the indictment. he's not a coconspirator and not listed. what do we know about whether he is a cooperating witness? >> i think that we know that mark meadows has a really great lawyer who would not allow mark meadows to speak to the fbi or speak to the justice department unless he felt that he had to. but speaking to the justice department and providing information does not mean you're cooperating. it doesn't mean that you're helping. it means you're asking the questions that you know you have to. and i think that's kind of what we see in this indictment. he's there. he's in georgia. he talks about the things that he saw. he talks about the things that he told the president about georgia. he feels that they did look into the fraud allegations and they weren't true. and that's pretty much all the information he was willing to provide. so, interesting to see if mark meadows had to take the stand and i would guess that he would, i think the prosecution would be careful with him because he's not necessarily going to help or hurt them. it's hard to tell. >> we really -- i hope this trial is televised. but if it is, every witness that you see on that stand will be republicans, loyal, pro trump maga republicans. that is who all of the star witnesses for the prosecution will be. it is a fascinating moment in american history. katie bener, paul butler, frank, thank you all very much. coming up, this indictment gives republicans a chance to finally make a clean break of it with this poisonous figure. but will they take it? what trump's so-called allies are saying next. ing next detect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato without talking to your doctor. don't take dovato if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking dofetilide. this can cause serious or life-threatening side effects. if you have a rash or allergic reaction symptoms, stop dovato and get medical help right away. serious or life-threatening lactic acid buildup and liver problems can occur. tell your doctor if you have kidney or liver problems, or if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. dovato may harm an unborn baby. most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, trouble sleeping, tiredness, and anxiety. detect this: i stay undetectable with fewer medicines. ask your doctor about switching to dovato. love you. have a good day, behave yourself. like she goes to work at three in the afternoon and sometimes gets off at midnight. she works a lot, a whole lot. we don't get to eat in the early morning. we just wait till we get to the school. so, yeah. right now here in america, millions of kids like victoria and andre live with hunger, and the need to help them has never been greater. when you join your friends, neighbors and me to support no kid hungry, you'll help hungry kids get the food they need. if we want to take care of our children, then we have to feed them. your gift of just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month at helpnokidhungry.org right now will help provide healthy meals and hope. we want our children to grow and thrive and to just not have to worry and face themselves with the struggles that we endure. nobody wants that for their children. like if these programs didn't exist me and aj, we wouldn't probably get lunch at all. please call or go online right now with your gift of just $19 a month. and when you use your credit card, you'll receive this limited edition t-shirt to show you're part of the team that's helping feed kids and change lives. if you're coming in hungry, there's no way you can listen to me teach, do this activity, work with this group. so starting their day with breakfast and ending their day with this big, beautiful snack is pretty incredible. whether kids are learning at school or at home, your support will ensure they get the healthy meals they need to thrive. because when you help feed kids, you feed their hopes, their dreams, and futures. kids need you now more than ever. so please call this number right now to join me in helping hungry kids or go online to helpnokidhungry.org and help feed hungry kids today. the latest indictment reaffirms my earlier call that donald trump should step away from the campaign for the good of the country. if not, the voters must choose a different path. >> okay. that was one of the most vehemently anti-trump candidates in the presidential primary, asa hutchinson reading his statement off his phone. making critique of donald trump's third criminal indictment and kind of lukewarm. he did have to read off his phone, right? maybe chris christie did better when he quote said it's a stain on our country's history and disgrace to the people who participated. okay. accurate. we're getting there. now let's look at mike pence. the man who's life was literally endangered on january 6th. anyone who puts himself over the constitution should never be president. also true. but that is where the critiques end and the worship begins. because trump still has plenty of defenders among the primary field. like tim scott. who is deeply concerned about the weaponization of biden's doj that he claims is hunting republicans with something, something hunter biden. and ron desantis, a harvard law school trained lawyer who didn't even bother to read the indictment before making it known he will end the weaponization of the federal government as president by i guess, ordering the doj to not prosecute republicans who break the law and probably something, something lock up hunter biden, i guess. queue the evil laughter in the woke. real talk, what the heck is going on with the republican party? what do they stand for at that point beside tax cuts for the super rich and retribution? they literally have become a retributionist party focussed obsessively on settling scores by impeaching democrat presidents for fake crisis and defending criminal behavior on their own side. they're howling of a weaponized doj and at the same time promising to weaponize the justice department against any democrat they can get their hands on. joining me now to try to make it make sense the rick tyler, republican strategist and cofounder of foundry strategies. rick tyler, it is great to see you. i saw you speaking earlier today with my colleague anna cabrera about this very thing. can we please see if he's available to come on in the 7:00 hour because i felt your pain through the tv. i'm just going to let you talk a little bit because you are a long-time republican strategist. you in theory understand this party. but can you explain to me why the people who are running against donald trump can't seem to just cleanly say, other than a couple of them, that what he did was wrong and anti-democracy and anti-american. >> you know, we somehow shifted from this ethics of right and wrong to right in which you can get away with. i think donald trump typifies that. desantis's response is particularly weak one. he's reviewing the indictment that he didn't even bother to read and ought to read the indictment because it's well written. when you read the indictment, it is well written and well put together. and it begins by some legitimate questioning of the election. you can do that. you can do it through public speech and lawsuits, through recounts and audits. but they exhausted all those. that's where trump left reality and engaged in criminal behavior. and it's very well laid out. what's absurd about the indictment as you read it, it wouldn't pass for a b movie script. you would be thrown out of a producer's office if you tried to sell this as a script. yet this is what really happened. the whole elector scheme is so harebrain. it's frightening how far it got. it has serious consequences and still does. the difference between us and banana republic or russia or dictator is understanding that we live in a system that hangs by a thread of the trust of the american people on our institutions, including our law enforcement, including fbi, and incluing our election system. but you really have to be -- deranged and deluded to believe that there's a conspiracy large enough to have turned the election. they want to have it both ways. they want to say that biden is incompetent and pulled off the most comprehensive election theft in american history or world history and left no trace of evidence because, remember, 60 cases, 60 court cases were filed. and no credible evidence was ever presented. unfortunately for the republicans now, this whole event turns into -- it's going to just exhaust the media a ton because the whole election will now be about whether or not spends a term in the white house or spends a term in the big house because there's no other alternative. none of the other candidates will get a chance to compete. that's what we're faced with. and it's -- look, if there were -- i wouldn't be tempted by this, but one could be tempted by saying, you can elect a criminal and a rapist, but you get all these great policies like balanced budgets, smallers government and lower taxes and controlled border and lower deficit with china and smaller debt. we didn't get any of those things with donald trump nor will we. so i don't understand the upside. from a raw political perspective, joy, not just the policy perspective, what has donald trump brought since 2016? he's brought the loss of the house, the loss of the -- just losing, losing, losing, losing. i just don't understand how they want to keep perpetuating this man who is mentally deranged. >> the thing is that part of it is i think a fear of the electorate? right 7 in 10 republicans, trooes according to "the new york times" poll want the republican party to fight for trump and not to oppose him. i think they're afraid of those voters. but, do you understand where those voters are coming from? they lived through the trump administration, too. but their perception of it is so different. and also by the theory that they're supporting, kamala harris could simply cause joe biden to remain president simply by throwing out electors. and i'm not sure that the base of the republican party is understanding where their theory ends. it ends with kamala harris deciding who the next president is. and i don't think they want that. >> people should read the indictment to know the reasons they'll get a great civics lessons. trump should read it. then he might understand how he was unelected as president in a very legal way. look, it all comes down to leadership. sometimes you just have to tell the truth and the voters will punish you for it. but in the end, you have to live with yourself. i just don't understand these people who know the truth. donald trump knows the truth. if you read the indictment, there's a lot of good news in the indictment. there's a lot of good people who stood up and said no. people who supported trump incluing elected officials in arizona and including secretary of state and the governor of georgia, including elected officials in wisconsin, including people in trump's own administration, including people in the fbi, the justice department and including people in trump's own campaign. a lot of people did the right thing. trump did the wrong thing. and six coconspirators also did the wrong thing. and i think they should pay seriously for it because it's a very dangerous thing of what they've done. and if they were successful, they could have effectively destroyed our country. >> yeah, absolutely. i appreciate you coming on and talking about this. and we will see. hopefully your party will somehow revive itself and return to a respect for the rule of law. we shall see. rick tyler, thank you, sir. very much. still ahead, our friend, presidential historian michael beschloss joins me to weigh on the historical firsts americans will be experiencing coming in the months ahead. stay right there. periencing comn the months ahead stay right there th your erc taxd so you can improve your business however you see fit. rosie used part of her refund to build an outdoor patio. clink! dr. marshall used part of his refund to give his practice a facelift. emily used part of her refund to buy... i run a wax museum. let innovation refunds help you get started on your erc tax refund. stop waiting. go to innovationrefunds.com you really got the brows. i'm saving with liberty mutual, mom. they customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. you could save $700 dollars just by switching. ooooh, let me put a reminder on my phone. on the top of the pile! oh. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ this is a bombas performance sock. for such a small item it performs big in so many ways. big on comfort. big on durability. big on breathability. bombas gives you big comfort for all your athletic pursuits. [music “this little light of mine”] in the world's poorest places, children with cleft conditions live in darkness and shame. for all your they're shunned, outcast, living in pain. you can reach out and change the life of a suffering child right now. a surgery that take as little as forty five minutes and your act of love can change a child's life forever. please call, scan or go online to give a new smile. thousands of children are waiting. (♪♪) rsv can be a dangerous virus... [sneeze] ...for those 60 and older. it's not just a cold. and if you're 60 or older... ...you may be at increased risk of hospitalization... [coughing] ...from this highly... ...contagious virus. not all dangers come with warning labels. talk to your pharmacist or doctor... ...about getting vaccinated against rsv today. power e*trade's easy-to-use tools, like dynamic charting and risk-reward analysis help make trading feel effortless. and its customizable scans with social sentiment help you find and unlock opportunities in the market. e*trade from morgan stanley. the phrase trial of the century has been thrown around a lot. there was the fatty arbukle trial, the lindbergh baby kidnapping trial in 1935 and more recently we all remember the o.j. simpson trial in 1995. but there has never been a trial like the one shaping up for donald trump. because in the history of this country, we have never had a president of the united states try to stay in office by subverting democracy and literally trying to overturn the will of the people. i'm joined now by nbc news presidential historian and friend of the show, michael beschloss. it is remarkable, michael, that we are here. but i want to zero you in on one specific aspect of it. and it is the shakespearian tale of the man trump said per the indictment you're too honest, mike pence. >> right. >> from the indictment. the vice president was told you need to overturn the election. the vice president responded that he thought there was no constitutional basis for such authority and that it was improper in response donald trump said to him, you're too honest. he was the most sick fan tick vice president probably in american history. he then becomes -- >> door mat. >> a door mat. but he was going to be hung that day. what what do you make of the fat that he will be the star witness in this trial? >> you live long enough, you get to see everything. mike pence is a hero? i don't think he is. >> no. >> he's doing the absolute minimum. he showing a pulse. he's not lying under oath, i think. but is that what we want? is that the test of our leadership in this country? you're absolutely right. and by the way, thank you for asking me tonight. what a night to talk together given the history that's being made as we speak. for four years he saw his boss, and not only his bars who treated like his ruler, treated him like a supplicant, nothing this as a vice president has to be that survival. remember he used to talk about our great president trump and his broad shoulders and all the rest of this. it used to make me sick. but here we are, and now mike pence, in the end, may be the one who is giving information that may contribute to the verdict against donald trump in this trial. you are too honest, mike pence was told by donald trump. is that something that george washington center someone or abraham lincoln? dwight eisenhower? eisenhower never said it to his vice president, because that was richard nixon. >> it is remarkable. there are so many things that are interesting. but the defenses of donald trump have been very. but i want to play one of the specific ones, this is john lauro. it is an interesting history based defense. here he is. >> there is something wrong with sending fake electors, trying to vote beyond, around the law. >> these weren't fake electors. these are alternate electors, which john kennedy did in 1960. it was a phone call followed previously. >> different situation. >> devin situation, michael, how so? >> really, please. are you provoking me tonight? this so-called alternate electors scheme that john kennedy supposedly followed, according to this ridiculous lawyer who doesn't deserve to be a lawyer if that's the kind of precedent he cites, do you know what that precedent was? in 1960, jon kennedy got 303 electoral votes. a lot of them were from southern states. a lot of southerners were worried, quite rightly, but if kennedy got to be president he would do everything he could to slowly but he would do everything he could to fight racial segregation, which he did with a civil rights act in 1963. so what did the southern electors and their ku klux klan backers and advisers, and they really were, what do they suggest? they said to southern electors, who were supposed to be voting for kennedy, instead you shouldn't vote for kennedy, you should threaten to vote for harry byrd, the white supremacist senator from virginia, and tell kennedy that unless he promises no desegregation, no action for civil rights, we will tell the southern electors to vote for harry byrd. that's like jesse james or jack the ripper. so this lawyer is saying it's okay for us to do this because jesse james did it or jack the ripper did it. that's how far we've come. you want to call that historical precedent? it is, but it's a precedent of corruption and evil and racism. >> unreal. okay, exit question. in your view, as a presidential historian, should this trial be televised? >> of course it should. we are living in a country, and you're the last person on earth that needs to be told this, but since you've honored me with the question i will respect you with an answer, which is that in this country there are all sorts of myths and conspiracy theories and crazy non fact being spread around. what better way to combat, and i can almost hear it being woven right now, donald trump is being given an unfair trial, he's being mistreated, this is a miscarriage of justice. well, if you saw this trial on television every single day as a primary historical source, it would be very hard for those lies to move very fire. if there's ever a time for television in a federal courtroom, this is it, i believe. >> i wish there had been television to be able to have the scopes monkey trial on televised. if there was ever a trial that needs to have no filter of people like me telling people what happened, it is this one. it is so good to have a -- >> and their theories. >> we love having a historian friend. everyone should have a historian friend. and i do, i appreciate you so much, michael beschloss. >> i appreciate you as a friend, especially a brilliant one. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. uld suffer like that. i started cosentyx®. five years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infection, some serious and a lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms or if you had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reaction may occur. best move i've ever made. ask your dermatologist about cosentyx®. she runs and plays like a puppy again. his #2s are perfect! he's a brand new dog, all in less than a year. when people switch their dog's food from kibble to the farmer's dog, they often say that it feels like magic. but there's no magic involved. (dog bark) it's simply fresh meat and vegetables, with all the nutrients dogs need— instead of dried pellets. just food made for the health of dogs. delivered in packs portioned for your dog. it's amazing what real food can do. (ambience of room, crickets, scrolling content on phone) they're off from school, but not really home. images and videos. social media, fine-tuned to suck them in. and steal them away. alone you can't stop it. together we will. we have a plan. join us. ( ♪♪ ) >> tomorrow, donald trump is expected to be arraigned in person, here in washington, d.c., for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. it is an historic moment for our country. i will be joining rachel meadow and the entire primetime team for live coverage tomorrow at four pm eastern time. then i'll be back live at seven pm eastern for another edition of the readout with full coverage of the day's legal developments. you don't want to miss it. tomorrow's going to be historic. all in with all over with chris hayes starts now. oric >> tonight, an all in. >> today, charging donald j trump with conspiring to defraud the united states. >> the key witness in the case against trump goes public. >> the president specifically asked me and his gaggle of crack pot lawyers asked me to literally reject the votes. >> tonight, hours before his third arrest and arraignment, the easy answer for the ex presidents defense. >> the indictment specica