person to be charged in connection with the insurrection according to one count is a former president and a current front runner for the nomination of a major political party who is already facing 74 criminal counts. who stands accused of trying to defraud the government that he led at that time. trying to obstruct the proceedings of a branch of government and trying to overturn the will of millions of voters in the swing states that determined the outcome of the electoral college. the big question now that trump has been booked and fingerprinted, what's next in this case? which is really unlike any other in american history. here is what team trump has planned according to the "new york times." his lawyers used the arraignment to hint at one of his central defense strategies, a request to delay a second pending federal trial for months if not years. delaying the proceedings as much as possible is widely expected to be part of mr. trump's legal strategy given that he could effectively call off federal cases against him if he wins the 2024 election. in recent days the defendant and his lawyers have been banging the drum about a change of venue, complaining about the impossibility of getting a fair jury in d.c. and suggesting that deep red west virginia is a reasonable site for a trial. "the new york times" reports the jury selection comes with a unique set of challenges for trump's attorneys, but not necessarily in the ways that they've been suggesting. from that reporting, quote, it's not just that the pool of potential jurors in the district of columbia is heavily democratic, though it is, or that the city is home to a great many lawyers, 1 in 40 residents, the most per capita of any state or district according to one estimate. to many of the district's residents the mob attack on the capitol on january 6, 2021, was more than a national political crisis, it was also a horrific fact of local violence that felt deeply personal. joining us now former acting u.s. solicitor general neal katyal, glenn kirschner and katie phang. neil, let's start with the arraignment and what happens next. did we get a glimpse yesterday into how team trump is expecting to handle the case? >> yeah, absolutely. i think we did in two senses, one is the delay tactics that they want to use, one of trump's attorneys said outside the courtroom that jack smith has had three and a half years to investigate this case, so they should get three and a half years. it doesn't quite work that way. i mean, there's several problems with that. i mean, one is three and a half years ago was like january of 2020, well before the election. so nobody was investigating trump at that point in time. but, you know, more generally, there is no such symmetry rule and in deed the system would grind to a halt if there was. i don't think that these delay tactics are going to work. they might work better in florida in the stolen documents case where you have classified information and things like that, but not here. the other thing i think we heard a lot of yesterday is this, as you say, change of venue, that the trial can't take place in washington, d.c. alicia, that is going nowhere fact, that the same argument that the special prosecutor in the george floyd murder where the city was a scene of violence for a long time right after the murder and the officers tried to change venue because of that, and the courts rejected that very quickly, basically because the legal rule is that the crime -- that you take the trial in the place that the crime occurred. that's what the constitution says. and the other point is sometimes if there's a lot of pretrial publicity in a particular place, then you can move the trial, but in the case like floyd and a case like january 6th and trump there's publicity everywhere about the trial in every nook and cranny. so what trump really wants and his lawyers, i think trump himself said this in a social media tweet, he said i want to move this to west virginia because that's a politically better state for me. again, there's no such defense in the law. that is going nowhere. you don't get to get tried by a jury of people who like you more, you get tried in the place where the crime occurred. here i think the symbolism, returning to your question about the arraignment, the former president of the united states yesterday walking into a courtroom in washington, d.c. on pennsylvania avenue, 16 blocks away from another building on pennsylvania avenue, the white house, where he formerly served as our leader and just a few blocks away from the united states capitol where he fomented, you know, basically an attack on that building, of course the trial has to take place in washington, d.c. there is no other place for it. >> i mean, glen, understanding that three and a half years west virginia -- those would be more political arguments than they are legal arguments. i wonder what you make more broadly about the delay tactic and could this potentially delay the trial until after 2024? >> no. delay will not work because judge tanya chutkan is presiding over this case. i had the pleasure of trying murder cases many years ago against tanya chutkan when she was a public defender in washington, d.c. and i was an assistant united states attorney handling murder cases. back then she, you know, distinguished herself as a smart, strong, tactically savvy, no-nonsense criminal defense attorney who was also entirely honest, ethical and trustworthy. i don't always say i enjoyed trying cases against a particular defense attorney, but i can honestly say that with now judge chutkan. i've also seen her presiding over criminal matters more recently and, you know, she is a no-nonsense judge. she is not to be tested or trifled with. she will give the defendant a fair trial, about that i have no doubt, but she will also give both the defendant and the people, the prosecution, a speedy trial. so i don't think donald trump or his attorneys' tricks and attempts to delay will work and i think that was proved when the spectre of judge chutkan hung over yesterday's arraignment hearing. i was watching it from the overflow courtroom and toward the end the magistrate judge said, you will both file briefs with your proposed trial date. the defense mightily fought against that but they lost that fight. and then on the 28th of august judge chutkan will set a trial date. i suspect we're going to see a trial date in the near term, whether it's january or february, but i think donald trump and his lawyers have met their match because they have a fair, no-nonsense, determined jurist presiding over this case. >> katie, speaking of trump's attorneys there's what they say in the courtroom and there is what they say on cable news. i want to play something for you that trump's attorney john lauro said on fox news last night defending what his client donald j. trump tried to do on january 6th. >> but ultimately what president trump said is let's go with option d, let's just halt, let's just pause the voting and allow the state legislatures to take one last look and make a determination as to the -- as to whether or not the elections were handled fairly. that's constitutional law. that's not an issue of criminal activity. >> and here is a bit of what prosecutors allege in the indictment, this is from a january 4th meeting, quote, the defendant and co-conspirator 2 then asked the vice president to either unilaterally reject the legitimate electors from the seven targeted state or send the question of which state was legitimate to the targeted state's legislatures. jack smith, trump's lawyers are not exactly disagreeing here, katie. >> they're actually not in disagreement but most importantly john lauro was going on tv and asserting a law that doesn't exist. i mean, he's saying that there was the opportunity for mike pence to delay the count, and that's not possible under existing federal law or the law that was in existence back then. i think what you're seeing is a new criminal defense lawyer for trump world trying to float a test balloon of a theory so that he can taint the jury pool. donald trump knows that there is no sympathetic jury pool for him in d.c. so he's hoping that if he puts these random theories out for consumption that perhaps this will take hold on maybe one, because as we all know it only takes one holdout in order to get a hung jury for a criminal case. i think what's problematic, though, is if you really look at this indictment, jack smith made sure it was clear that he anticipated these types of defenses from donald trump. we see it at the beginning of the indictment when jack smith makes great haste to dispose of this idea that this is an attack ton donald trump's first amendment free speech rights. he acknowledged that trump could say i won that election fair and square, but there were legal remedies by which trump would have to pursue to be able to find the truth in that, but the reality is it was all a lie and donald trump knew it was a lie, and when donald trump basically started that pressure campaign that went from state officials to fake elector schemes to the department of justice and then finally mike pence, the only thing left was for donald trump to call upon his supporters to exact violence on january 6th. so john lauro was going to do the best job that he can but really to your point there's the court of public opinion and then there's the courts that glen and neil and i know very well and those theories just don't fly in a real courtroom. >> neil, what do you think john lauro was doing on fox news? >> yeah, i think -- you know, i don't think that it was an admission that is going to dramatically undermine donald trump any more than what donald trump has already said. he said something very similar earlier. i think the problem is -- you know, to use the legal term it's poppycock. i mean, basically it is donald trump saying i genuinely believed i won the election and i was just looking for a way to slow things down enough to prove it. as katie said, that isn't a thing. there is no law that authorizes you to do that, and jack smith's indictment, the 45-page document, obliterates this argument. i mean, it shows that trump was told by anyone who is anyone he lost the election, the attorney general, the white house counsel, the top white house lawyer, the national intelligence community, all the people in charge of election security. 62 different courts across the country. you know, at some point i suppose he can cling to this idea, well, i still believed it even though everyone was telling me otherwise. there's two problems with that. one is the law doesn't recognize such a defense. like if i pull out a gun and shoot someone and kill them, my defense can't be, well, i didn't think bullets killed people. you know, that just defies any notion of common sense or logic. similarly, you know, given what everyone told trump that's a problem and jack smith even found in the indictment, it's in there, that trump himself thought he lost, that he told the vice president that and he told other officials at the time. that's one problem. the other is just a really practical problem as glenn knows well, which is if we have a client who wants to assert a lack of criminal intent defense, the way to do that is to put that defendant on the stand and say, well, here is what i actually believe. you can't do that with donald trump if you are a criminal defense lawyer because you have to worry that trump is going to perjure himself and commit an additional crime on the stand. so just the task of proving it up, this mens rea defense is going to be really hard. maybe trump can call someone else, i don't know, ma landia or someone who is say he told me that he legitimately won but i don't think that's going to be all that compelling to a jury because the jury is going to ask if he really thought that why isn't he saying it, why is someone else saying it for him. >> glenn, to this question about trump's grasp of reality i want you to take a listen to something chris christie who to say to journalist kara swisher on her podcast. >> have you been questioned in the investigations? >> questioned in any investigations. one of them. >> which one? >> i can't say. >> okay. >> but one of them. >> one of them. >> uh-huh. >> and what was the broad idea? >> they were trying to get a handle on what i knew about his knowledge of the reality of the election results. >> okay. all right. and when was this? >> when was i questioned? >> uh-huh. >> six weeks ago. >> six weeks ago. >> eight weeks ago. >> glenn, read between the lines for me. what do you make of that exchange? >> you know, if it was six weeks ago it feels like it was part of, you know, jack smith tying up loose ends or making sure he covered all the bases before he had the grand jury vote out the four-count indictment on which donald trump was arraigned yesterday, and i think this, again, proves the point, alicia, that donald trump will be convicted at trial with evidence, with testimony that comes from a chorus of republican voices. not only republican voices, some of his own cabinet officials, it will also come from some of his employees, it will potentially come from some of his family members, some of his attorneys. i mean, donald trump really has no viable defense, which is why i agree that he will be playing for a hung jury. he may look to try to confuse just one juror into voting not guilty. the beauty of a hung jury, not that there's much beautiful about it, is jack smith will get to retry the case and having handled lots of retrials, i like to think that i usually did it a little bit better the second time around because i learned from the mistakes that i made in the first trial. so this is going to be a real uphill battle for donald trump. >> katie, there's some new reporting in the "washington post" about what happens if trump is convicted in any of the cases he's facing which is still very far off. if convicted in any of the three criminal cases he is now facing, donald trump may be able to influence whether he goes to prison and what his stay there looks like under a law that allows former u.s. presidents to keep secret service protection for life. some current and former u.s. officials said trump could force politically and logistically complex questions over officials should detail agents to protect a former american president behind bars. leave it to prison authorities to keep him safe or secure him under some type of home confinement former u.s. officials said. another way, katie, in which the justice system dealing with this very unique defendant here. >> yeah, and i offered up a solution this afternoon, it's put donald trump in solitary. if he is in solitary then he won't be in gen pop, general population and they could park a secret service agent outside. look, i agree, we use the adjective "unprecedented" a lot because of donald trump but i think if you have a convicted felon as district court judge tanya chutkan has said herself, presidents are not kings and donald trump is not the president. if you take the adage and you believe as we all do if you believe in democracy that no one is above the law then donald trump should not get any type of specialized treatment just because he happened to occupy the oval office. and especially after he goes through our judicial process and he is found guilty by a jury of his peers for either this case, the pending mar-a-lago case, the manhattan da's case and the imminent idictment by fulton county. if the process runs to its logical conclusion, which is a conviction and a sentencing then i don't think home arrest or house arrest is the same thing that you and i would get if we were convicted of these crimes. and i think because of that i think that he's going to go to prison and whether or not secret service goes with him, i guess will be left to be seen. >> katie, i will leave it there. no one is going anywhere. more with our guests when we come back. it is predicted to be one of the biggest trials of his lifetime. we will talk with neil about why it should be televised. the big lie it is he heart of this case and will republicans on the campaign trail be forced to address that topic all over again. and later until the show the trump team floating the defense of free speech and looking like a big loser for them. we will dive into that and more when ded line white house continues after there. could not go anywhere. ues after. could not go anywhe.er become an aunty. a big loser for them. a big loser for them meet the baby. make the baby cry. give the baby back. fly home. silver tier in a single trip. join one key and move up tiers fast. for too long, big pharmaceutical companies have bought off politicians so they can get away with ripping us off. that's changing now. joe biden just capped the price of insulin for seniors at $35 a month. gave medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices. and prices are already starting to go down. the out-of-pocket cost is dropping for 27 drugs. [narrator] learn how the inflation reduction act will save you money. we always had questions. who do we belong to? who are our ancestors? i know we have them. oh my god, here it is. when i found that immigration record on ancestry®, it was amazing. everything was there. the u.s. was in dire need of nurses during world war ii. tía amalia as a nurse in el salvador decided to answer that call. it's a lot of excitement finding something new. i feel like a time traveler. claudia starts calling me. it's a party every time. ♪ the first thing we would ask for is let's have -- let's have cameras in the courtroom. so all americans can see what's happening in our criminal justice system. and i would hope the department of justice would join in that effort so that we take the curtain away and all americans get to see what's happening. >> that's right. we heard it from the ex-president's own lawyer demand ago one-time exemption to federal law, the cameras will allow the public to witness his 2020 election related trial, one of the most significant trials in our lifetimes. house democrats, too, are on board, 40 of them including several members of the january 6th committee called for the judicial conference to allow both of trump's federal trials to be televised. given the extraordinary national importance to our democratic institutions and the need for transparency. and this week neal katyal argues it would be -- for the sake of truth over disinformation. katyal writes, quote, this criminal trial is being conducted in the name of the people of the united states. it is our tax dollars at work. we have a right to see it. we have the right to ensure that rumor mongerers and conspiracy theorists don't control the narrative. back with neal, glenn and katie. you write about how this could happen, either congress pass has law or with the exception made by chief justice roberts. it seems like a no-brainer to you or maybe he doesn't want to reignite the argument for cameras before supreme court proceedings? >> i do think it is ultimately a no-brainer. this rule originated in 1946 and we now live in a digital age where people think visually and are accustomed to seeing things with their own eyes and, look, i know the chief justice and many of the justices have a concern about cameras in the supreme court, but that's a very different thing than what we're talking about here for two reasons, one is in the supreme court there are no witnesses or credibility determinations, you are not looking at a defendant's demeanor. the defendant isn't there and there are no witnesses, this is a purely legal argument. whereas in a criminal trial that's kind of the essence of what a criminal trial is all about. indeed in the george floyd case minnesota had a rule that banned all tv for criminal trials, it had never been done, and the judge authorized an exception for that case and i thought it worked well because it allowed all americans, you know, and there was a whole lot of hoopla around that case, this he could see it for themselves, see what actually happened. the other thing is that this case united states versus trump is really different than anything else. i mean, this is one of the defining cases of american history. not just in our lifetime. this is obviously the most important case in our lifetimes but in american history. so i do think it's possible to think of this case operating a little differently than other cases. and, you know, the concern on the other side, i think the best argument is, well, if you look at, for example, the o.j. simpson trial, there was a lot of -- a lack of decorum around the courtroom proceedings, the television -- televising those proceedings may have contributed to that. there are two fundamental differences. one s again, this is not, you know, some athlete charged with, you know, a crime of violence. this is the president of the united states as the president of the united states being charged for his behavior while president, being charged with basically trying to launch a coup to keep himself in power. it goes to the essence of what our democracy s the second is don't underestimate donald trump's ability to try to, you know, say stuff outside of court and to, you know -- his party and his lawyers and so many others, all of which can undermine the decorum anyway. the best check on this, this is something one of our greatest justices said, sunlight is the best disinfectant. let the american people see this trial for themselves day in and day out and make their own determinations. we shouldn't be relegated to second-hand descriptions and some courtroom sketches of what's going on in the courtroom. >> glenn, do you think it makes a difference for people to watch it, hear it, see it, versus what we know will happen, which is to be exposed to the spin machine that happens outside of the courtroom? >> absolutely, alicia, i agree with everything in neal's excellent op-ed. and let me make two points. first of all, if cameras are not permitted in the courtroom donald trump and his criminal defense attorneys and donald trump's lackeys and sycophants at the end of every trial day will spin what happened in trial. they will probably come out and say what a great day it was for donald trump, you know, the evidence is falling apart, that the prosecution is introducing, proving it's nothing but a witch-hunt or election interference. whereas jack smith and his team of prosecutors will come out of the courtroom every day and say exactly nothing. that's not a fair fight. we need a fair fight in the court of law, which donald trump is going to get, and the american people are going to get, but, you know, this is also going to be fought in the court of public opinion and what the voters hear about what happened during the trial will impact their decision about who to vote for in the 2024 presidential election. and the second point real quick is there's something called the crime victims rights act, 18 united states code, 3771, and it says crime victims may not be excluded from court proceedings in which they were a victim. look at charge 4 in the indictment, it is a conspiracy to deprive us all of the full value of our voting rights, the american people, in a very real sense are crime victims, and, therefore, the crime victims bill of rights, the crime victims rights act, provides that they shall not be excluded from the courtroom, but if this proceeding is not televised, all of the victims will be excluded from the courtroom. and i think that's actually another legal statutory right that is at risk if we the people don't get to see these proceedings. >> katie, when you have trump's lawyers making the argument for cameras in court, do you take that seriously or do you think they're bluffing? >> i take it seriously because we know that trump is pushing his lawyers to take positions. i mean, i'd like to have more respect for fellow members of the bar and i will reserve judgment on some of trump's legal team, but you and i both know that trump's positions are just echoed through his lawyers out for public consumption. and so trump wants the circus, and that's the fear, right? if you are the federal judge in this instance, do you provide that opportunity? i will say this, neal, glenn and i have practiced in federal court for several years. federal court is not fake court. i have a lot of respect for state court judges it's where i cut my teeth but federal court has a level of decorum that has to be respected and the judges are not going to take any bleep from any criminal defendant, especially somebody like donald trump. i think we've already seen that. we've seen an admonishment from the magistrate judge saying you better mind your ps and qs, mr. trump, in terms of what you do, in terms of influencing witnessing, et cetera. i think they believe it, alicia, i think it's what their client wants and i think we all should have this opportunity to witness history in the making especially when you consider the fact that this was donald trump's attempt to steal the outcome of the 2020 presidential election from all of us. to invalidate what were legal votes that were rendered by all of us and i think it's important for america to be able to be a part of what is history in the making. >> i have to tell you i was in d.c. on thursday, i saw a lot of colorful t-shirts and signs, but the retort that the three of you keep offering to the trump legal strategy, which is that's not a thing, is something that all of you should put on a t-shirt or on a shine. i think we will hear a lot of that. neal, glenn and katie thank you for getting us started. up next, we have new reporting on how donald trump is actually looking for to using these election interference charges as an opportunity to relitigate the 2020 election. also looking forward to him doing that is correct democrats. the politics surrounding the ex-president's legal troubles is next. urrounding the ex-president's legal troubles is next pain was keeping me off my game. and now i'm winning again. blue-emu is the powerful relief i need. shop our expanded family of products at major online retailers. -dad, what's with your toenail? -oh, that...? i'm not sure... -it's a nail fungus infection. -...that's gross! -it's nothing, really... -it's contagious. you can even spread it to other people. -mom, come here! -don't worry about it. it'll go away on its own! -no, it won't go away on its own. it's an infection. you need a prescription. nail fungus is a contagious infection. at the first signs, show it to your doctor... ... and ask if jublia is right for you. jublia is a prescription medicine used to treat toenail fungus. its most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness... ... itching, swelling, burning or stinging, blisters and pain. jublia is recognized by the apma. most commercially insured patients may pay as little as $0 copay. go to jubliarx.com now to get started. okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health. yaaay! woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ when my doctor gave me breztri for my copd things changed for me. breztri gave me better breathing, symptom improvement, and reduced flare-ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ask your doctor about breztri. (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. ( ♪♪ ) despite the hopes of some in the republican party that the 2024 election would focus on looking ahead instead of relitigating past elections, the disgraced twice impeached donald trump appears to make 2020 the focus of his presidential campaign in 2024. a new "washington post" report claims that as the ex-president confronts charges that he conspired to overthrow the 2020 presidential election, quote, a looming courtroom showdown is poised to push his insistence that election fraud occurred in 2020 for the center of the 2024 presidential campaign. a dismaying prospect for republicans and some of trump's advisers who have urged him to stop belaboring that subject. trump's defense team has signaled that they will focus on rebutting prosecutors' allegations that trump knew his fraud claims were false. joining us conversation president of the national action network and host of "politics nation" here on msnbc, the reverend al sharpton and msnbc contributor and editor at large for the bulwark charlie sykes. good to see you both. reverend al, i am old enough to remember when presidential campaigns for both parties were about america's better days, best days being ahead, a bright future, looking forward the horizon. what does it tell you that donald trump's best idea is to look back to an election he lost? >> it tells me that we are in a very, very serious, in my opinion, political dilemma in this country on what is acceptable and what is not accept presidential or even presidential contender behavior. i have never seen any presidential election in my lifetime or in history where the person that is raising the questions of trying to disassemble an american election was the president or former president of the united states. you know, some people tried to distort it, but i said, you know, when i was growing up and going to school and we learned about the founding fathers, they fought an american revolution to have an election. they were not arguing about i need 11,000 more votes in this colony or that colony as we fight british autocracy. this man will go down in american history as being a president that was indicted for trying to undermine an american election, not british autocracy. and it is acceptable -- what's disturbing is it's acceptable by many if not all of his republican opponents, other than maybe chris christie and one other. so i think that this is what is most disturbing to me. those of us in new york, alicia, that know donald trump are not surprised with his narcissism and chicanery, but the silence of the republican party and the silence of his opponents when a man for the first time in american history is trying to undermine an american democratic process and is charged with that, that shows me that we're in a danger zone in terms of american politics. >> charlie, i want to bring your attention to this online poll conducted by abc news and ipsos after the jack smith indictment was announced. it shows when asked if trump should be charged with a crime in connection to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election 52% said he should be charged, 32% said he should not. when you look at those numbers, right, what's then the strategy if there is a strategy from trump's team if the majority of people do believe that trump deserves to be charged? >> well, it's not going well. i mean, apparently some things do matter. look, to your point i think we have a new definition of political insanity here doing the same thing over and over again. i don't think there is any parallel in american history for a political party to surrender itself into the hands of one man's obsession, which, by the way, understates it. because they are basically now mortgaging the future of the republican party to the criminal delusions of one man, donald trump. to the reverend's point it's one thing that donald trump turns out to be exactly who many of us warned he would be. it continues to be extraordinary the degree to which the republican party is willing to go along with it. but in terms of the political insanity, this guarantees that the only thing that we will really be talking about in 2024 are donald trump's lies and his attempts to relitigate an election loss, an issue that did not play well in 2022. look, republicans want to talk about inflation, they want to talk about crime and the border, they want to talk about hunter biden, they want to talk about culture wars and drag queen story hours, but the reality is that if they renominate him, we're going to be talking about donald trump's lies and his attempt to overturn the election and we're going to be talking about it for days and weeks and months on end. and this is something that the republican party has decided is a good idea, that they are voluntarily embracing? it is an extraordinary moment. >> talk to me, then, reverend al, if that is what republicans are busy doing where it leaves democrats. we knew the two basic frames we are going to see from the biden campaign, we're going to hear this idea of chaos versus competence, we're going to hear this idea of rights being given versus rights being taken away. this all seems like a third frame which is do you want the guy who is looking backwards to the past, or do you want the guy who is looking forward to the future? >> or do you want the guy not only looking forward to the future but that is delivering for you now and the infrastructure bill and the inflation reduction bill and other things that they can point to. but also that is going to save the very principles of american democracy. we are in a world of global fight of autocracy against democracy, whether it's in niger or ukraine or whether it's in the united states. what side are you on? that's what we need to say to voters. this man is being charged with trying to undermine an american election. is that what you want to elect? to vote for him is to cosign autocracy coming to the united states. the government has charged this man. this is no longer pundits talking, tv hosts, civil rights leaders, whoever. the government has charged him with this. they have charged him for three different things, the most serious he was arraigned for yesterday. this is about as serious as you can get in the body politics of this country. >> reverend sharpton and charlie, you are tick sticking with me. >> a plot that runs through much of the 25-page criminal indictment, now he's being heralded as a new star in maga world. that story is next. star in maga world. that story is next (fan #1) there ya go! that's what i'm talkin' about! (josh allen) is this your plan to watch the game today? (hero fan) uh, yea. i have to watch my neighbors' nfl sunday ticket. (josh allen) it's not your best plan. but you know what is? myplan from verizon. switch now and they'll give you nfl sunday ticket from youtubetv, on them. (hero fan) this plan is amazing! (josh allen) another amazing plan, backing away from here very slowly. (fan #1) that was josh allen. (fan #2) mmhm. (vo) for a limited time get nfl sunday ticket from youtubetv on us. a $449 value. plus, get a free samsung galaxy s23. only on verizon. my husband and i have never been more active. shingles doesn't care. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care but, shingrix protects. shingrix is now zero dollars for almost everyone. ask your doctor about shingrix today. your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire 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. ♪ disgrace ex-president donald trump and overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election former senior justice department official jeffrey clark is reportedly now a rising star for the maga faithful. a new "washington post" report says, quote, the criminal indictment of trump unsealed on tuesday depicts in vivid detail clark's alleged role in the conspiracy prosecutors accused trump of orchestrating, it portrays him as a linchpin of plans to bypass the acting attorney general and use the justice department to spread knownly false claims of election fraud, the to substitute electors supporting trump. within the pro trump wing of the gop rather than being shunned for plotting to use justice department authority to strong arm states into disregarding the will of the voters. we are back with the rev and with charlie. charlie, the obvious question is what it says about the state of the gop that this guy is being lauded as a hero but i also think there is a question about the long tail of the conservative movement. i want to read you more from the "washington post," quote, in a conference room near the capitol young conservatives gathered in april to learn how to run for office. how to win and wield government power. jeffrey clark who accused the biden administration of abusing its power really fired up our attendees and inspired them to get more active in the political process, recalled the head of one conservative group. i mean, charlie, we keep talk being a conservative movement, a republican party that is post-trump, but i wonder when you read something like this if you see this kind of insurrectionist tendency holding. >> this is a really good question. i mean, one thing to talk about jeffrey clark who is a mediocre lawyer and obviously a crank and we're going to see that and he's likely to be charged, he may be disbarred, about your point about the long tail is something i think we need to take seriously. you have an entire generation of young conservatives who are coming of age during this, looking around they're saying what are the incentives? how do you become a celebrity? how do you get on television? how do you get lots of -- on youtube. these folks are going to be around for a very long time, the next 20 or 30 years and i think we're going to be paying a very serious price for all of that because these things do not just go away, they don't heal themselves even if donald trump disappears from the scene in the next couple of years. >> reverend sharpton, i'm looking at the sign behind you no justice no peace and it's sending shivers as i read you this from the "washington post," according to steve bannon clark would, quote, be 100% short list for the nation's top law enforcement position or else white house counsel if trump returned to the oval office. so considering the source there, do you think people understand that if trump is reelected it's not just donald trump, it's every person who was associated with the attempted coup elevated in the administration, including to roles such as top law enforcement official. >> it is a methodical way of really destabilizing this government in a way that it would serve the interests of people, families and justice. i mean, i think people totally underestimate how much of an outlier this is to american history. we had arguments, fights, we have had duals, but a methodical attempt to not certify an election and then to storm the capitol and then to harm and talk about hanging the vice president of the united states, i don't know that we understand that. and then for him to be put back in office and put people like clark over the justice system, this -- words could not express the threat this is, which is why these trials are important and the lack of -- from republican leadership, they don't have to agree with me or anybody that they are on the other side of the political spectrum, but stand up for the country. stand up for what people fought for when they created this country and went against monarchy and autocracy because that's what you're talking b you're talking about making donald trump the king and all of us sub servant to that and that clearly was the mentality he had when he told the vice president don't certify the election and told people who head over to the capitol, i will meet you there. knowing some of them were there to do violence and things that were dangerous to the well-being of people in the united states senate and the congress and their chambers. this was unprecedented and we ought to not act like this is just another news story. >> charlie, just to put a fine point on t clark is believed to be co-conspirator number 4 in the indictment. i want to read the section where he appears to be mentioned. the deputy white house counsel reiterated the co-conspirator four there had nobody the out -- and if the defendant remained in office nonetheless there would be, quote, riots in every major city in the united states. co-conspirator four responded, well, deputy white house counsel, that's why there's an insurrection act. your thoughts? >> yeah, i was thinking about that passage when you were having the discussion. jeffrey clark -- that there was a possible of violence, and he was completely okay using the u.s. military to put down -- to put down the opposition. putting american soldiers on the streets of american cities. look, to the reverend's point, donald trump is telling us exactly what he intends to the. i am we're retribution if you have people like steve bannon and -- mr. clark in power, there are no checks and balances anymore. i do think that a second trump term will by like the first term. i think it was "mime herald" that had an editorial, that he's saying second term would be one-man rule, but based on this kind of cruelty, this kind of brutality. >> reverend sharpton, charlie sikes, as always, thanks for your time. could the president be in court against next week? an update after this very quick break. an update after this very quick break. for too long, big oil companies have bought off politicians .. .. with ripping us off. that's changing now. joe biden passed a plan to jumpstart clean energy production in america. it's creating good jobs that can't be outsourced and will lower energy costs. $1800. that's how much a new report says the inflation reduction act could save just the average american family on energy costs. [narrator] learn how the inflation reduction act will save you money. a very busy week for donald trump and his legal team. the ex-president filed a notice that he pleads, again, not guilty in the other federal case against him, the classified documents case. he was hit with in charges filed against him in the super ceding indictment, including two in obstruction counts that he tried to delete surveillance video at mar an lago. he also waives his right to the appear in court for an arraignment next week. and the new codefendant is expected to attend the arraignment next thursday in florida. much more news ahead for us this friday. trump lawyers hinting at a first amendment defense in the, and why that could be debt on arrival already. next hour. "deadline: white house" starts after a quick break. "deadline: white house" starts after a quick break. the first e you heard of a town named dinosaur, colorado. we just got an order from dinosaur, colorado. start an easy to build, powerful website for free with a partner that always puts you first. start for free at godaddy.com every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet 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. ♪♪ the indictment says that they're not attacking his first amendment right. he can say whatever he wants, he can even lie. he can even tell people that the election was stolen when he knew better, but that does not protect you from entering into a conspiracy. all conspiracies involve speech, and all fraud involves speech. so, you know, free speech doesn't give you the right to engage in a fraudulent conspiracy. >> hi again, everyone. it is 5:00:00 in new york. the defense from donald trump's team and defenders on the right, the ex-president's conduct around the 2020 election results are protected by the first amendment. it's a claim that trump's own hand-pitched former attorney general bill barr says has no merit. he anticipated this defense, saying he had every right to speak publicly and make statement, but the former president went beyond that. smith says, quote, each of these conspiracies, which built on the widespread mistrust the president was creating about election fraud started a bedrocks function of the united states government. the federal government function, meaning it was the former president's actions, not his words, that trump is being charmed for. our friend and former u.s. attorney barbara mcconveyed put it, the first amendment threat is a loser. no right is absolute. by this logic all that osama bin laden did on 9/11 was engage in speech. axios provides this context. the first amendment would have played a biggser role here if special counsel had charged trump with directly inciting the riot it is extremely difficult to convict someone of inciting violence, but that's not a charge in this indictment. which may have well been a strategic count. the four charges against, conspiracy to dwraut the united states, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. conspiracy against rights. yesterday's arraignment, trump pleaded not guilty, and the first pretrial hearing is just over three weeks ago. that's where we start in the hour. let's first in first amendment scholar, rolando jones, and harry litman, and former congressman from florida, msnbc contributor, david jolley, it's good to see you all. i want you to break down buy the first amendment defense is wrong here. >> yes. we, the indictment rightly acknowledges that trump had a first amendment right to talk about, even to like about the election. the constitution does broadly protect and broadly guarantee that the government won't punish us for our political speech, even if it's false, but speeches routinely are used as evidence of other criminality activity that the government can and must punish. so, for example, if you were charged with conspiring to rob a bank, you couldn't invote a first amendment defense on the grounds you were exercising your free speech right to tell the getaway driver to come around back or the teller to stick 'em up. the supreme court has made clear that it's able to be punished, even though the main tool is speech. the ddoj here is going to argue that trump's case is the same. it will point out that the indictment here is for participating in a large-scale conspiracy, an electoral fraud, and for entering into agreements with other people who were a part of planning that criminal activity. we wouldn't expect that some of the evidence there would be communication, would be speech, but that wouldn't involve any imposition on anybody's freedom of expression. the doj is for sure going to want to be cautious here, and i think they have, recognizing it's a politically sensitive case, but a great body of first amendment doctrine and all of common sense teach us that you don't get a free pass to commit crime just because you chose to commit some of those crimes using some words. >> to this point about how first amendment protections would play a bigger role in jack smith had charged incitement, can you expand on that, and i wonder if you expect a super ceding indictment that would charge him with insurrection? >> an incitement chart would be a much more thorny first amendment matters. incitement is one of a very tiny number of categories of speech that have been carved out of the protection of the first amendment by the supreme court, and it's very, very narrowly defined. we use the term to -- the supreme court has defined it very specific, and it has to be the case that you directed your speech to inciting imminent lawless action, and that you were likely to incite or produce that action. it requires some evidence of what you meant to do, and also some evidence about timing, the immediacy of timing, all which is difficult to prove up, and quite constitutionally fraught. while we might ultimately see some incitement charges coming, you can see why the first amendment matter, jack smith chose to proceed in the way he did, with charges that really here in the current indictment don't touch on sticky first amendment issues of that sort. >> so, david, here's the thing. since this defense doesn't hold actual legal weight, i wonder if we should think of it more as a political argument, as the type of thing that is meant for trump supporters to peet on a loop over and over again regardless of the merits. >> i think you're exactly right alicia. we're all aware that trump is trying to do this thus the political system, but that doesn't hold any weight in the criminal system. he can convince as many republicans as he cares to that he has a free speech defense, but as we were hearing, it doesn't hold weight in the court. the other is this was a well coordinated effort on behalf of donald trump and republicans to get this message out there immediately. they have their talking point ready, it's been amplified by republicans on the hill, even at the highest levels of republican leadership. i think it indicates a second thing, which is donald trump and republicans are several steps behind jack smith and several steps behind where the nation nose this is good. if this is the best argument they have, it's so easy to penetrate, it does suggest that he's not up for the legal fight nor the court of public opinion. >> harry, there's another defense being circulated, if donald trump actually believed the claims that he was making, that could protect him, but it was like you are clairvoyant in 2022, saying this is not true. you used the call to brad raften berger. he talk to me about how what trump believes are not at issue here would ittens late from it so that is the principal point. it's also that we don't have to prove under the law that he's made. you make an agreement to do something unlawful lie rob a bank, end of story. it's a very lousy argument. this one, however, i think will be less an argument than an over-leaning seam might potentially hope to sway some jurors. it has both legal purchase that doesn't hold up, and then a kind of atmosphere that they hope does. >> david, i wanted to read you this quote from a former u.s. attorney, john fishhook, jr. quoted in the "wall street journal." a claim that his sfeech was protected by first amendment and acted in good faith, the two arguments could be at odds with each other. if you say, i'm a liar, and the first amendment lets me do that, that undercuts your good faith defense. talk about how this all playing out, david. >> i think they're using stale talking points in pushing this first amendment defense. they had this you had in case he was charged with conspiracy, but he wasn't. thee using the old talking points where they really don't apply. speech in service of a crime is not protected speech. we prosecutor a lot of people in this office who engage in criminal speech. there was a woman recently who we convicted of soliciting a hit map to try to kill her husband. well, she's in prison now. yes, you can lie to the world that you won the election in a landslide and it's not a crime, but you cannot pressure state officials to throw out ballots or finding over 11,000 new once. you can't create fraudulent voters, and you can't unleash a mob. these are all crimes. you can wave around the constitution all you want to your perp walk to jail. >> does the defense of he relied on advise from counsel, does that have a better chance of working? >> i think most defenses have a better chance of working than the first amendment defense that's been asserted here, because we have such a vibrant body of first amendment law that suggests speech that's evidence of other criminal activity isn't protected in this sort of way. i do think the dynamics will be interestingly overlapping. the free speech/first amendment defense is a defense i had some first amendment right to speak in a particular way, and the reliance on an attorney defense is a defense that i had a right to rely on other people's communications. they are also riddle with difficulties that i think folks will be poke holes at. >> as all of these theories are being workshopped, you have trump very active on social media, he posted -- if you go after me, i'm coming after you. i mean, i just wonder if those threats end up getting him in more trouble? >> it could. you don't need your jersey accent to understand this is the kind of things that's said at the badda bing. i don't think it rises to the level of a new crime. where i think it will matter is the three judges that have given him pretrial release without any major conditions, could impose a partial gag order on him. that will be problematic, because trump cannot abide by any such order. violating that order could get him a couple days in jail. that may be the easiest way to get him wearing an orange jumpsuit. he has to watch out. if he keeps doing this, that jack smith will request a partial gag order and he'll get it. i want to discuss what happened yesterday as we look to the first pretrial here at the end of this month. what are you most looking out for? >> i was really impressed yesterday -- the thing that was unusual -- unusual but not unprecedented, but the judge had already communicated with the magistrate and said we're going to tell all the lawyers we're going to said the schedule. the judge is already shaving off that week, showing she's focused on a schedule. it augers a shared commitment with the government to move this along quickly. as i say, she had to have directed the magistrate to say that. that really impressed me. what i'm looking for now is the kind of same chess game that they played in mar-a-lago. the d.a. will come out with a fairly early date and we'll see what trump tries to do and how much he tries to get away with in terms of time. the 28 we will have a trial date. that's big news. >> david jolley, i would tell you if you forgive telling me it sounds like groundhog day, but these yet again the republican party's chance, finally free themselves of a presidential candidate that has been indicted three times, likely a fourth times coming out of fulton county. you have republicans carrying his water on a first amendment defense that we all know doesn't hold. why not now? why not take the opportunity to say enough is enough? >> part of this is republicans have done it to themselves, because they have suggested that january 6th was nothing more than a tour of the capitol that got out of hand. it would be hard to say, because jack smith has brought charges, now we'll agree he's doing something wrong. so they put themselves in a box. these issues don't resonate among republicans right now, so i don't think anything takes down donald trump and the republican primary where where he we sit today. we haven't seen any evidence of it. i do think this question of how quickly this trial moves actually has an impact on donald trump's political argument, because it is in the interest of the nation and justice to move to a speedy trial, but if donald trump is in a position through the court of public opinion to suggest he's not had time to mount a fair defense, that prosecutors had two years to bring this evidence, and now there's supposed to be a trial in the next six months? i realize that might be a reflection of the criminal justice system, but i think politically it's a hard spot for the nation. donald trump is a former president who has been charged with crimes that could send him to prison. he's likely the nominee for the presidency again. we may want this to take as long as possible so there are zero questions about how justice is applied in this case. there's a tension there. donald trump will look for the vulnerability, if you will, and use it for republicans, but also possibly for general election voters. i only have about a minute left, i'm curious for someone that's a scholar on this specific issue, the damage that's been done to the understanding of the first amendment, the longer you have donald trump, his legal team, republican allies out there pushing a misunderstanding, a purposeful misinterpretation of what the first amendment protects and does not. >> yeah. i think this is a really good and important question. our first amendment rights are among our most sacred and among the most valuable and among the most central to our democracy. it isn't wrong to subbed in such a sen tiff case as they we should have our radar up, a heightened awareness of the ways that political speech and these sorts of accused crimes intersect. the nuance that's required to make sure that people understand you can't just mouth the words "freedom of speech" and this them be an all-purpose excuse for criminality is a difficult amount of nuance to convey. it's particularly difficult in circumstances in which we're getting sort of a firehose of misinformation on this front. keeping it front and center and make sure we talk about what the doctrine protects will be really important going forward. thank you all. ahead manhattan district attorney was the first to indictment donald trump, and then jack smith. now a fourth indictment could come any day now. what we are learning about what fani willis will make her move. later, my exclusive interview with the biden/harris campaign manager. and what to do when your chief rival is accused of trying to overturn an election. for ron desantis, it may be a new low when it comes to violent rhetoric. more "deadline: white house" after a quick break. don't go anywhere. adline: white" after a quick break. don't go anywhere. d. that's my boy. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ new projects means new project managers. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today. we moved out of the city so our little sophie whose resumes on indeed 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. some people just say there are already now three indictments against the former president. they argue that even if there were crimes committed here in fulton county, a fourth indictment isn't worth all the work that could -- that would come with it. to people who say that, what would you say? >> i took an oath. the oath requires that i had follow the law. if someone broke the law, i have a duty to prosecutor, and that's exactly what i plan to do. >> fani willis making it abundant think clear, there is no mercy rule. and so we wait for new potential charges. here's fani willis one more time on how the federal indictment affects her case or not. >> reporter: have you read it? >> i i have. >> reporter: anything surprise you there? >> no. >> are you coordinating? >> i'm not going to comment on our investigation at this time. obviously we're concentrating on georgia, and things that impacted georgia. >> reporter: does it have any bearing on your investigation at all? >> i'm not sure i understand the question. >> reporter: does it affect what you're planning to do? >> no. >> reporter: okay. "the atlanta journal constitution" reports that official expect her to announce her decision twn two weeks. added security in fulton county. barricades are already up. next week streets around the courthouse will be closed to traffic. joining us, tia mitchell. harry and david are back with us. tia, give us an idea of where we are. you're as collude in as anyone. what are you hearing? >> where we are right now is waiting for the announcement. it appears based on what district attorney willis has said, they're ready to go. they have pretty much wrapped up their side of things. the grand jury may have perhaps already made some decisions or have meetings coming up, so now it's just a timing game. as you mentioned, we think perhaps in the next couple weeks we'll hear something from the district attorney based on the grand jury as decision. >> tia, this week we also learned that she had received a number of threats, many of them overtly racist and she described those threats yesterday. take a listen. >> all typical racial slurs you can imagine. they're very grotesque things. we're on family television. i don't even know i like to say one of them slave whore is one of them, and i've been called the n-word i don't know how many times. >> how are people feeling there? >> in fulton county, the city of atlanta is pretty democratic. most people are waiting with anticipation, wondering what the decisions are going to be, who, if anyone, is indicted all the way up to former president trump, and they're anticipating perhaps a circus atmosphere of trump supporters that may not just be from the immediate area, but might travel in from other places. when you're talking about the people attacking d.a. willis who have concerns about her investigation, they may not be the same peep who are her constituents, but they may be supporters of president trump. we know that support is nationwide, even, quite frankly, world wide there are trump supporters. >> harry litman, there was a legal update, that a motion to was rendered unnecessary because of a judge's ruling on mopped in an earlier motion by trump's team. a lawyer said on a filing on thursday they intended to appeal monday's ruling by the conspiracy court judge, robert mcburnie. harry, helped us understand the maneuvering. are they just throwing something at the wall and seeing what sticks? >> this is the same maneuver they have done several times, and once with success. they basically go to another court and say reach down to this start and start mucking around and try to impose supervision. the georgia supreme court already said no way, and judge mcburnie said, a, no way, and b, the other case, by the way is moot. i'm deciding and there's nothing left there. would it necessarily keep trump from doing another hopeless legal motion? but that's the idea, he can't make another court to try to jump in and stop things. he'll next show up when he's arraigned in fulton county. >> harry, i want to go back to the sound at the top we heard when fani willis was being asked questions. talk us through how the separate indications and if they track. was there anything that caught your attention? >> yeah. well, i heard a kind of tone. i heard a basic arms-length motion, making it seem she's not in communication a., and i would say it's unusual. it's one thing to not coordinate investigations, but when you're bringing cases, i think most parallel investigations and cases in state and federal system would coordinate, if for no other reason to avoid tripping each other's feet in the field with dual statements by the same witness which a good defense attorney can rhobar inconsistencies. i haven't heard, but it's been clear from jack smith, too, who 'been very tight to the press. we'll see if it runs into practical issues. at special grand jury recommended 15 defendants, not to mention trump himself. so there's a practical reason for trying to coordinate better than they have so far. we'll see if that happens once the charges are actually unveiled. >> putting aside this question how many indictments become good or bad for donald trump, i think there's something about a state-specific case, especially when it comes to fake electors. you had seven states where democrats can go to the voters and say this gheit didn't want your votes counted. you went out, made your decision, you voted. there was a former president and co-conat who decided they did not like the way you voted. maybe at a national level, that argument doesn't hold, but when you go state by state and said your democrat sit, your vote was in jeopardy, i think that can break through. >> elections are won state by state. that's the way the electoral college works. one of those charges is that donald trump conspired to disenfranchise voters. if you're in georgia or one of these states where donald trump tried to disenfranchise you, take away your vote, that is a personal matter. that could be something that the biden camp, though they are tepid around how to run, that's a question of leadership, and a message about american values. that's where this college dar of all of these trials dolls come in. i think it's fairly safe to resume a trial wouldn't occur in mob, but this message of disenfranchising voters, you are exactly right, it's a message that's easy to understand and could resonate with voters who say, i don't want donald trump in the white house. >> tia mitchell, my friend, thank you for making time for us. when we return, part of my exclusive interview with the new campaign manager for the biden/harris campaign, julie chavez rodriguez, and the big question -- how do you campaign against an opponent opponent that's been indicted. t an opp o that's been indicted slowly. (fan #1) that was josh allen. (fan #2) mmhm. (vo) for a limited time get nfl sunday ticket from youtubetv on us. a $449 value. plus, get a free samsung galaxy s23. only on verizon. first, there's an idea and you do something about it for the first time with godaddy. then before you know it, (it is a life changer...) you make your first sale. small business first. never stopped coming. (we did it!) and you have a partner that always puts you first way. (no way!) start today at godaddy.com. ♪ before planning the wedding your bad hip was really acting up. then, you heard about mako robotic-assisted hip replacement. it starts with a ct scan to pinpoint the problem. that becomes a personalized, 3d plan to guide your doctor during surgery. mako can help lead to better outcomes, like less pain and shorter recovery times. the lifetime of a hip implant is limited, and revision surgery may be required. individual results and recovery times vary. risks of surgery include pain, infection, heart attack, stroke, death, and other serious risks. ask your doctor for important safety information. to find a doctor who uses mako visit makocan.com 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. as donald trump responded to the news he would finally experience consequence foss his actions, biden has stayed out of the fray. i spoke with julie chavez rodriguez for her first interview, and i asked her about the strategy. it's about making sure we talk about the issues that matter most. we know the court cases will continue to move forward and take that progress, but we're making sure we talk to voters about lowering prescription drug costs, lowering energy costs, really focus on what matters most to them right now, and continuing to again ensure they understand the choices in front of them and the contrast of the extremism we are seeing from trump, from desantis, from sort of the entire field versus what we're delivering right now for the american people and investing in our communities. you can catch move you are that interview tomorrow 6:00 p.m. eastern, "american votes" right here on msnbc. for more, let's bring in professor of african american studies, eddie glaud, and david jolley is also back. they will be campaigning against a thrice indicted president trump. we'll be talking about extremism, confidence versus chaos. i wonder what you make of the decision of not to engage on the trump indictment. >> we're not running against an indicted candy. what you're running for is democracy. this is my worry. we can't treat this as if it's a norm at political presidential season. we haven't seen this kind of campaign since, in my view since 1860, the campaign of abraham lincoln versus brekovich. the stakes are that high. the other side seize it an existential for those that feel like, in their view, defending the soul of the country by turning to bread-and-butter issues. how do i say this? you don't respond to a superstorm the say wait a minute as a regular storm? you're not running against indictment, are you running for democracy. the president has to make that case clear l. you at least to me. >> there's the urgency around democracy, eddie, and urgency around the unique nature of donald trump. i'm sure you saw "the washington post" of obama's concerns about donald trump's political strengths, including an intensely loyal following, a trump-friendly conservative media ecosystem, and that trump could be a more formidable candy. i wonder if you think, eddie, the democrats are specifically concerned about the candidacy? >> i think they're worried. i don't know if it's adequate, but i know they're worried. as i said earlier, i think we have to understand the existential threat to the policy, the existential threat he represents. in that context, we need extraordinary political leadership. we need political leadership to incite a kind of response on the part of 9 citizenry. the contrast has to be made in relation to policy. what we are facing, right, is the very fate of the country, and i think that has to be expressed very clearly and forcefully. not just simply extremism versus competent -- chaos versus confident and the like, and that is not hyperbole. >> of course, i great in the existential threat that eddie lays out there, but i think there's an immediate challenge for the biden campaign. they have an actual record to run on. in a normal environment, they would talk about job growth. they would talk about historic investments and infrastructure. even just on that piece, there is a clear disconnect between what this administration has done and what voters are giving them credit for. that, it seems to me, they know they have to address that core piece before they move on to everything else. >> joe biden needs to address after of this. this is an election like no other, that democracy is on the line. the best candidates in american history are the ones that can effectively communicate. i think this is an opportunity to achieve that by suggesting the contrast is this -- when entrusted with the powers that the american people would give to a president, what did donald trump do with it? he's promising retribution, to appoint people to seek revenge. he engaged in behavior that's left him with charges. that's how donald trump used the power the american people gave him. for joe biden, when the american people gave him power, he set about to lift up the economy, to create ladders of opportunity, education, health care and labor, and work on behalf of a country struggling coming out of covid. even when it came to his own child, he stayed out of the criminal system. the contrast between true american leadership and joe biden and selfish leadership is a fairly easy one to make. it presents the future of democracy, but does so in a way that's very digestible for an american public in voters that ultimately has a cast next november. >> the future of democracy with a republican candidate who wants to relitigating 2020. when we return, we'll turn to the republican race. with his main rival, ron desantis is going on attack against federal workers? vile comments, after a quick break. workers? vile comments, after a quick break. the chase ink business premier card is made for people like sam, who make- everyday products, designed smarter. like a smart coffee grinder, that orders fresh beans for you. oh, genius! for more breakthroughs like that- i need a breakthrough card. like ours! with 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more. plus unlimited 2% cash back on all other purchases. and with greater spending potential, sam can keep making smart ideas- a brilliant reality! the ink business premier card from chase for business. make more of what's yours. you founded your kayak company because you love the ocean- not spreadsheets. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire ♪ tourists tourists that turn into scientists. tourists photographing thousands of miles of remote coral reefs. that can be analyzed by ai in real time. ♪ so researchers can identify which areas are at risk. and help life underwater flourish. ♪ 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. ♪ (tony hawk) skating for over 45 years has taken a toll on my body. only pay for what you need. i take qunol turmeric because it helps with healthy joints and inflammation support. why qunol? it has superior absorption compared to regular turmeric. qunol. the brand i trust. tired muscles and joints were keeping me from doing the things i loved most. not anymore. blue-emu gave me my freedom back. it supports healthy muscles and joints. shop our expanded family of products at major online retailers. a man, his family, and his tractor, penny. these are the upshaws. and this is their playground. there's a story in every piece of land, run with us on a john deere tractor and start telling yours. the ex-president turns to increasingly rhetoric. ron desantis is struggling to keep up. his new strategy? turning to violent language to discuss cuts to the federal workforce saying over the weekend bureaucracy, you know, we'll have all these deep state people, you know? we're going to start slitting throats on day one and be ready to go. it's the second time he's used violent imagery in the past week while discussing federal employees, this times talking about armed forces. according to "the washington post," the governor also mused about the possible need to the defense secretary to slit throats while discussing changes he would make as president. eddie it will be alarming in this environment, it feels particularly alarming, as though we have crossed the chasm where this is just standard fair. >> it's irresponsible, these selfish little men who seek power will end up getting people killed. i mean, we just have to be clear about it. people have already died because of january 6th, because of little men who cling to power. we need to understand that. the receipt riggs is really tied to what we used to think of as the fringe of our politics. waco, the bundys. these folk who are critiqing the overreach of the government. now it's morphed into a deep state. there's a constellation of critique that shall i say constitutes a through line that ends up with ron desantis, the nonsense. they little men spouting this rhetoric will get folks hurt. we need to be clear about that. >> davidsh are, it would be easy to miss today, but ron desantis said the 2020 election was not stolen. what do you think about his sudden embrace of the facts, a messaging pivot you might call it? we've been waiting for that acknowledgement. >> yeah, i think it's a reflection that nothing is really working, so the risk of going a bit further, maybe you try it, maybe it's worth it. he used to like to say that florida had incredibly safe eleblgz in the 2020 election. that's been at odds with donald trump, so i think he may still go there. the question is, where does he spend his resources? it won't be what chris christie, will hurd and others are doing. he will remain it culture warrior and this dark figure on the stage. these words he's not repeated twice. those are the despicable words he will not walk back. it's easy to walk up his failings as being bad at retail politics. that's not this. this is a person that's dark, paranoid and angry, and angry, somebody who has now burnished that image of such darkness that the contrast with donald trump, who gave us the american carnage speech, makes the former president look like sunshine and rainbows. ron desantis is going to have a hard time losing this image he's created. >> i guess what strikeses me in this moment, this was the campaign that was supposed to be going for a reset. reintroduce us to ron desantis. so is this the reboot? a darker, broodier, more violent version? i thought we were supposed to be getting more of a policy wonk who was going to do more retail politics. >> well, no, it's just like rebooting your cable box when it doesn't work. you get the same damn thing. so it's just who he is. i think this dark, brooding figure, right, who in some ways is kind of indicative of not only an element of the republican party, but a large segment of it -- we could see him for who he is. and so the reboot was just trying to figure out, how do we rebrand? but it's still the same product. i think we need to be clear about that. >> i'm just so struck by the fact that we all keep waiting for this moment where one of them decides, hey, i'm looking at the same polls you are all looking at, i recognize that i will not be able to win this race the way that i have been trying to win it, and now it is time to say the truth, to call donald trump out for what he is, and that is not the reboot that we are seeing from any of these guys. eddie gloud, david jolly, as always, thank you for your time. we'll be right back. 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®. i will be a travel influencer... hey, i thought you were on vacation? it's too expensive. use priceline, they've got deals no one else has. what about work? i got you. looking great you guys! ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ hey, dad. i got an a on my book report. that's cool. and i went for a walk in the woods and i didn't get a single flea or tick on me. you are just the best. -right? i'm great. -you are great. oh, brother. this flea and tick season, trust america's #1 pet pharmacy. chewy. tennessee lawmakers expelled by republicans for joining gun safety protests this spring won back their seats. representatives justin pearson and justin jones, along with representative gloria johnson, dubbed the "tennessee three" in april after the school shooting in nashville sparked protests at the state capitol. they faced expulsion votes for participating. johnson's failed by a single vote, which she said "might have to do with the color of our quin." the two justins had. been reinstated by local government officials but still had to run for their old seats, which they won back last night in landslides. jones tweeted shortly after his victory was predicted, it was just beginning. we'll be right back. let innovation refunds help with your erc tax refund 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. the first time you made a sale online with godaddy was also the first time you heard of a town named dinosaur, colorado. we just got an order from dinosaur, colorado. start an easy to build, powerful website for free with a partner that always puts you first. start for free at godaddy.com 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. ♪ thank you for being with us. "the beat with ari melber" starts right now. >> thank you so much. welcome to "the beat." i am ari melber. new developments, including the suspicious claim by trump's defense later in a new coup case. >> we didn't do is send in the tanks. >> send in the tanks, yeah. we'll get to that news in a moment. first, as we mark the end of this historic week in america tonight that brought defendant donald trump's third arraignment this year -- just think about this as we start the hour. the new york case on his finances, which may not even bring jail time if convicted. then there was the more serious federal