special prosecutor jack smith's investigators asked gradually witnesses in washington d. c. how drunk rudolph giuliani was when he was advising donald trump? it is a crucial, legal question for the trump defense team who have already said they intend to use and advice of counsel defense blaming everything donald trump did on the advice he got from lawyers including the one who, to me, looked and sounded drunk every time he spoke publicly about the presidential election in 2020, and on january 6th. we will discuss the finer legal points of drunk legal advice later in this hour, after we begin with a sober assessment of the breaking legal news of the day in georgia. at 2 pm today, federal judge steve c. jones issued an order to both sides of the case after hearing a full day of testimony yesterday, and defended mark meadows motion to move his criminal trial from fulton county courthouse, in georgia, to the federal district court, in georgia. judge jones ordered fulton county district attorney fani willis and mark meadows criminal defense lawyers to each file a brief by 5 pm on thursday, answering exactly one question that the judge has after that hearing. would a finding that at least one, but not all, of the overt acts charged occurred under the color of meadows's office, be sufficient for federal removal of a criminal prosecution? we will get the answer to that question in a moment from our legal experts. less than an hour after the federal judge issued that order, district attorney fani willis filed a motion asking georgia state court judge, scott mcafee, to clarify's ruling, granting defended kenneth chesebro's motion for a speedy trial. district attorney willis said, the state of georgia respectfully six clarification from the court as to whether the courts intention was to sever defended chesebro's trial from the other defendants further if the courts intention indeed was to sever defined chesebro's trial from the defendants because defended chesebro has not filed a motion to sever, and because the court has filed no hearing on a motion to sever, the state of georgia respectfully requests that the court set aside its scheduling audit to the extent that the order states at this time these deadlines do not apply to any codefendant. the state of georgia for the respectfully requests that the court set a deadline for any defendant wishing to file a motion to sever, allow the parties, including the state of georgia, sufficient time to brief the severance issue. the state maintains its position that severance is improper at this juncture, and all defendants should be tried together. judge mcafee has scheduled the speedy trial for defendant chesebro for october 23rd last then two months from tonight. defendant sydney powell, one of the eight lawyers who are criminal defendants in the case, as also filed a motion requesting a speedy trial. leading off our discussion tonight is gglenn kirschner, former federal prosecutor, and the host of the justice matters podcast. he's an msnbc legal analyst. also with us, amy lee copeland, criminal defense attorney and former georgia federal prosecutor. glenn, let's go to what's happening in the federal court with judge jones asking that one seemingly simple question. that is, if one of the things that mark meadows is accused of, just one piece of what he's accused of, if one of those was done under the so-called color of his job, does that mean the mark meadows case must be removed to federal court? what is your answer, if you have one -- it looks like it requires some study to get a real answer to that. what is your answer as of tonight to that question? >> so, lawrence, the only definitive answer is we don't know. here is why i say that. the judge would not have posed the question if there was controlling authority. in other words, if there was an appellate court that had wrestled with this previously, had authored an opinion because then the judge wouldn't have to ask the question. the judge might do, what i've had judges do to me, you know, mr. kershner, defense attorney, i have some questions about this one case that seems to support what the defense is seeking to do -- remove his trial from state court to federal court. i would like the parties to weigh in on whether this is controlling president. for example, the judge didn't say that. the judge basically said, i don't know the answer to this. i am asking both parties to brief it up. there are two ominous parts of the same sentence, lawrence, as i read this order. the one ominous part is when judge jones says, what if one but not all of the acts fall within the scope of mark meadows official duties? i think we could draw a reasonable inference so we could tease out of that, that the judge may already have concluded that any number of acts charged against mark meadows are well beyond the scope of his official duties. second word that i think is a bad word for mark meadows, is he said, if i do find one act was within the scope of mark meadows official duties, is that sufficient for me to transfer the case from state court to federal court? not, am i required to do it, but does it give me the discretion as to whether i want to do it or not. i don't think there's a good read on this note for mark meadows, but i do think the judge's decision is still unwritten. it is still an open question. >> just to go over the language of the law on removing a case like this, it says it can be removed for any officer of the united states, in an official or individual capacity for or relating to any act under color of such office. amy lee copeland, i'm looking at that phrase, or relating to any act. so, it seems like there's some real hope for mark meadows in the language of this stature. >> lawrence, it's a low standard. he has to show it's more likely than not these three things are true, that he's a federal officer, he was acting in connection with that office, and he raises a colorful, federal defense. when i was in law school 31 years ago, i had a law professor that said, all the time, when you ask or anything, she would say, i don't know. it used to frustrate me to know and that having practiced as long as i have, a lot of questions are answered simply with, i don't know. i applaud judge jones for essentially saying in an order he doesn't know, and he wants some clarity about it. i will tell you, in civil matters, apparently, there is some case law out of other areas that says, if one claim is removable, then all claims are removable. that doesn't really seem to apply to federal cases. it may all depend on the difference between an overt act, a criminal act, towards the finish line, not necessarily criminal, and a racketeering act, which is the meat and potatoes of reclaim, which is -- we -- and what [inaudible] >> glenn, there is reason for mark meadows lawyers to be helpful. here is a judge raising this question of, is one sufficient? they will clearly argue that one is sufficient, then they will go to the indictment and tried to pick out the one, the incident in the indictment that they say is arguably something he did in the regular course of his job, therefore, because there is one there they can point to, then this definitely should be moved to federal court. >> yeah, but i think there's a fundamental challenge for mark meadows here, and for judge jones. it seems like he is struggling in earnest to make sure he makes, not only the right decision, but a fully support-able decision. one way or another, it is likely to get appealed. he's getting his ducks in a row by asking the parties for input on this question of law. here's what i see is the fundamental challenge. let's assume half a dozen things mark meadows is accused of doing and that rico indictment handed down by fani willis, that it can be viewed as within the scope of his official duties as chief of staff, but let's assume six others are not, and let me use the hypothetical to drive the point home. let's assume donald trump asked him to go out to shoot somebody on fifth avenue, and he did it. nobody could argue that is within the scope of his official duties as the chief of staff, even if a number of the other overt acts were within the scope. what does that mean? it means i would assume, because i don't know the precise answer, that, maybe, the entire case does get transferred to federal court. it certainly doesn't get dismissed. it gets tried in federal court, and based on the available evidence, it looks like a conviction is the likely result. >> amy lee copeland, it does seem mark meadows will want -- if this decision goes against him, he will want to appeal it. >> i think you are absolutely right about that, lawrence. give him some time, if nothing else, and if it's against him, he has every reason in the world to want to appeal it. whether or not it's an appealable order is a good guess. i would think that it's conclusively determining the issue, and it would affect his rights, and in that way it could go up in what's called an interlocutory or intermediate appeal. >> i'm really copeland, we need your georgia expertise to untangle what is going on in the speedy trial situation, which suddenly just became, maybe, not so speedy. district attorney willis saying, to the judge, wait a minute, you have, in effect, with your scheduling order for one trial, for one defendant, severed that defendant without there being a motion to sever. district attorney willis is saying, we have to all get back together in court and talk about this. >> that's exactly what she is saying. the statute does give the judge the discretion to sever it, as long as he's not violating the law, or making it a fact, he has the discussion to separate. notice in the hearing, the hallmarks of a legal system. that's what i think miss willis is saying. we want to be heard on this before you do it. mr. chesebro as filed a demand for a speedy trial. under georgia statute, if he isn't -- the trial hasn't begun before the end of the term of court, which here, i think, is november the 6th, he would be entitled to an acquittal. regardless of what happens, because mr. chesebro has made this demand, it looks like he is going to have to have a trial within the next two months. >> glenn, it sounds like distributor any willis wants to get some organization here on the question of how many people are going to be in the speedy trial? there's another defendant now asking for a speedy trial. district attorney willis is saying, as of now, i want all of the defendants in the speedy trial. she is asking the judge to think about two things at once, a speedy trial and severance, and, therefore, if you are going to sever, create a deadline for motions to sever so we can get donald trump's motion to sever. everyone else's motion to sever in the court, considered at the same time. >> yeah, and i agree that the judge has not really taken up the question of whether severance on the facts and the law is warranted. what he has done, assuming he sticks with his order that chesebro and, presumably, powell, now that she has demanded a speedy trial, will go to trial in october. it's what i would call a de facto severance. i will tell you, lawrence, i continue to be impressed by district attorney fani willis who proves time and again that she doesn't even own a pair of kid gloves. she said, i am prepared to go to trial against 19 codefendants. i don't know if she's going to hold it in a stadium, i do know that having handled large-scale r. i. c. o. trials in the courts of washington, d. c. , u. s. marshals always told us, six defendants is the limit. that is the most we can provide courtroom security for. we had to batch our defendants together. we did three r. i. c. o. trials against six defendants, and one defendant. pros and cons for the defendants who go first, and defended to go second or third. i can't wait to see if a 19 codefendant trial actually happens, what that is going to look like. >> amy lee copeland, i think we have strong doubts about seeing that version of the trial down there. it also strikes me as district ernie willis saying to the judge, not so fast. let's keep everything organized here. i think distracted tierney willis acknowledges the possibility of severance and speedy trial for some of the severed defendants. let's get it all right. let's find out right now everyone who wants to be severed, and anyone who doesn't. >> that's right. it was a very polite way of saying, excuse me, i need to be heard on this. this is a relatively new job. she's been out of law school for ten years. he knows what he's doing, but i think she wants to make a record, lawrence. she wants to be heard on this. she wants to make sure that he understands what usually it takes to sever defendants, and what this consequences are. as somebody who thinks the legal branch is the most transparent of the three branches of government, you know, i'm glad were having this discussion publicly, not in a courtroom, where it will be televised and the public could see what's going on. >> glenn, speaking of severing, if mark meadows gets moved to federal court, who else does? >> i think, potentially, other federal officers may go. i don't think the alternate electors will go because they're not federal officers. i don't think donald trump's lawyers will go because they may make an argument that they were working for a federal officer. it doesn't magically convert them into federal officers. so, it could be jeffrey clark, for example, because he was a doj official, maxima federal officer. i think his claim is probably far less robust than mark meadows claim. he really is somebody who's seen to have so far exceeded the scope of his official duties by corrupting and weaponizing the department of justice, and interfering in a state election. you know, once we get a decision in the mark meadows case, then you are going to see other defendants lineup to try and take their shot. >> amy lee copeland, i had my doubts about anyone who wasn't a federal employee being covered by this removal statute until i read it today. what it refers to, any officer, any officer of the united states, any officer, in parentheses, or any person acting under that officer, and we already have these fake electors saying, i was acting under donald trump, people in this case who have no federal employment affiliation who were saying they were acting under the direction of federal officers. >> that's what they are saying in their motions. i read mr. stills motioned the most carefully. what he says as he walked into a room, in the georgia state house, sitting there were attorneys, and attorneys told him that this was all perfectly legitimate. what i think is really interesting in this case, there were a total of 16 fake electors. four of whom walked out, i think, and i'm getting this, lawrence, from a filing in october of 2020, two in a special purpose grand jury. there were a number of people who remained. 12 people remained, only three of those fake electors when [inaudible] so i'm curious how the evidence is going to take out to them. yes, they are saying, we thought we were acting under the direction of the president of the united states. with them [inaudible] my gut is they get their cases removed because they were acting for candidate trump as opposed to the office of the president of the united states. that is where the rope is going to meet the road on that. >> we will see. emily copeland, and glenn kirschner, thank you for starting us off. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> coming up, donald trump is the first former president to face criminal prosecution only because richard nixon was pardoned instead of indicted after he resigned the presidency, partially because of the pulitzer prize-winning reporting of our next guest, the washington post's bob woodward. bob woodward's unique perspective on the united states of america versus donald trump's next. rsv is in for a surprise. meet arexvy. ( ♪♪ ) the first fda-approved rsv vaccine. arexvy is used to prevent lower respiratory disease from rsv in people 60 years and older. rsv can severely affect the lungs and lower airways. arexvy is proven to be over 82% effective in preventing lower respiratory disease from rsv and over 94% effective in those with these health conditions. ( ♪♪ ) arexvy does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients. those with weakened immune systems may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects are injection site pain, fatigue, muscle pain, headache, and joint pain. rsv can be serious. talk to your doctor or pharmacist about arexvy today. rsv? make it arexvy. it ain't my dad's razor, dad. ay watch it! it's from gillettelabs. this green bar releases trapped hairs from my face... gamechanga! ...while the flexdisc contours to it. so the five blades can get virtually every hair in one stroke. for the ultimate gillette shaving experience. the best a man can get is gillettelabs. somedays, i cover up because of my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now i feel free to bare my skin, thanks to skyrizi. ♪(uplifting music)♪ ♪nothing is everything♪ i'm celebrating my clearer skin... my way. with skyrizi, 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months. in another study, most people had 90% clearer skin, even at 5 years. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year, after 2 starter doses. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine, or plan to. thanks to clearer skin with skyrizi - this is my moment. there's nothing on my skin and that means everything! ♪nothing is everything♪ now's the time. ask your doctor about skyrizi, the #1 dermatologist-prescribed biologic in psoriasis. learn how abbvie could help you save. i brought in ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! uuuhhhh... here, i'll take that! woohoo! ensure max protein, 30 grams of protein, 1 gram of sugar. enter the $10,000 powered by protein max challenge. ♪ ♪ we're here today to set the record straight about dupuytren's contracture. surgery is not your only treatment option. people may think their contracture has to be severe to be treated, but it doesn't. >> president franklin delano visit findahandspecialist.com today to get started. roosevelt's second inauguration in 1937 was the first presidential inauguration to be held on january 20th, the new presidential inauguration day enacted by congress. prior to that, presidents were inaugurated on march 4th, the date set by congress for george washington's second inauguration, and every other presidential and are duration until 1937. this is a photograph of abraham lincoln's first inauguration in 1861 on march 4th. congress set the inauguration date as march 4th because that is the date, in 1789, that the constitution officially went into effect and became the law of the land, march 4th. on march 4th of next year, donald trump will stand trial in federal court in washington, d. c., on the charge of conspiracy to defraud the united states. donald trump is charged under a 1948 law on defrauding the united states, which was proceeded by a 19 09 version of the same law, which was interpreted by the supreme court in an opinion written by chief justice william howard taft in 1912 to mean, quote, to interfere with, or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft, or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest. joining us now is bob woodward, a two-time pulitzer prize -winning author and associate editor at the washington post where he has worked since 1971. his audio book, the trump tapes, because out now. bob, thank you very much for joining us tonight. i really appreciate it. as i look at this charge of defraud the united states, and its historic import, i am wondering what your perspective is on how that's being used in this case, in this prosecution, by jack smith? >> i think, lawrence, this is the most important case. there are only four charges. all the others have more counts, but there are only four counts in this. if you look at the indictment, it is all, the first 42 pages are built around that law of attempting or actually subverting a lawful function of government. of course, that lawful function of government is certifying who is the next president. even people who like trump, or don't like trump, yes, let's certify, let's decide who the next president is, and in this indictment, jack smith, and the grand jury have said, hey, look, the standard here, according to what you read, is dishonesty. much easier concept to understand for a jury. dishonesty versus conspiracy, or obstruction, which can wind up being a little bit abstract, and then you read through the indictment, and it is stunning. let's say trump decides, as he is entitled, to not take the stand. they've got all this testimony from ten key people saying, not just that they disagree with what trump said, about overturning the election, but they specifically told him, and that includes pence, the attorney general bill barr, and it includes pat cipollone, the white house counsel, and seven other people, and you go through the governor of arizona, the governor of michigan, sitting court justice in wisconsin. a jury can sit here and say, oh, this is what trump says. here is sworn testimony from ten people saying, oh, now, i told him that is wrong. the prima facie case of dishonesty we'll be right there for the jury to see. >> i agree with you that first charge is the simplest and clearest thing that donald trump is accused of. i want to read, for the audience, how it was presented. the second or third page of the indictment, it says, from honor about november 14th, 2020, through honor about january 20th, 2021, the district of columbia, and elsewhere, the defendant, donald j trump, did, knowingly, combine conspire, confederate, and agree with coconspirators known and unknown to the gradually to defraud the united states by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit, to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful, federal government functioned by which the results of presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government. what is so powerful about that, as a criminal charge, is we all watched most of that happen, most of it was happening, in many ways, out in the open. >> it was very public, and, also, the role of pence here is absolutely critical. he did what the constitution, and electoral count act said. he is agonized over it, he has been criticized. in the book, bob costa and i did peril. we describe additional pressure on pence, and here is donald trump telling him in that period before january 6th, that day, or the day before, i don't want to be your friend anymore if you don't do this. in other words, not certify biden as the next president. you lack courage. you have betrayed us. i made you. you were nothing. your career is over. so, now, put yourself in the role of a juror here. you see pence beleaguered, beat up, told by his boss, you know, i made you. i am not going to be your friend anymore. you are betraying me. clearly, it will be very easy for the prosecutors in this case to show what is in the constitution, in the electoral count act. now, you can't tell what a jury is going to do, but this, i think, is cleverly designed to make a juror coherent, that somebody on the jury can actually go, oh, this is dishonest. this is pressure. this is contradiction from all of these people, not just saying they disagree, but saying they personally told donald trump he was wrong. >> bob, the first version of these scenes we read was in your book, and now the special prosecutor's basically presenting versions of that too -- will be presenting them to a trial jury in washington. did it occur to you, as you are working on the book, that what you were writing was one of the first things the special prosecutors would be reading as they approached this case? >> you know, that certainly is possible. now, give credit to bill well, the former massachusetts governor, who i talk to you about this while costa and i were working on this book. he was handed the criminal division in the justice department, and the reagan administration. all of what had happened, that trump had done, he said to me, look, this is 18 usc, 371. subverting the lawful function of government. i remember thinking about that, talking to people, as we know, some of trump's greatest, biggest supporters, like senator lindsey graham, bailed out on him because they looked at all this evidence, and in fact, lindsey graham had his counsel on the judiciary committee at that time. lindsey graham was chairman, investigating all of this. leigh holmes -- he did an honest job of, is there anything to support this? he said, absolutely none. leigh holmes came to my house, and we laid out what the giuliani and other memos said. he said, there's just nothing here, not a matter of less here than giuliani, there is absolutely zero. >> bob woodward, thank you very much for writing the first draft of these scenes for us. thank you very much for joining us tonight, i really appreciate it. >> thank you, lawrence. >> thank you. >> coming up, who're going to believe about rudy giuliani's drunk legal advice, rudolph giuliani, or rudolph giuliani? that is next. made it smell like dave was in his happy place... ...the massage chair at the mall. but...he wasn't. gain flings with oxi boost and febreze. my most important kitchen tool? my brain. so i choose new neuriva ultra. unlike some others, it supports 7 brain health indicators, including mental alertness from one serving. to help keep me sharp. try new neuriva ultra. think bigger. detect this: living with hiv, i learned that 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. how can you sleep on such a firm setting? gab, mine is almost the same as yours. with fewer medicines. almost is just another word for not as good as mine. save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add a base. shop now only at sleep number. 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 >> who are you going to believe, rudolph giuliani or rudolph giuliani? >> i'm not an alcoholic, i'm a functioning -- i am probably -- i function more effectively than 90% of the population. >> the same rudolph giuliani told a reporter, wow, while he was drinking a bloody mary, i love scotch. i can't help it. all of the malts. part of it is cigars. i love to have them with cigars. i am a party here. rudolph giuliani's previous wives have a less than charitable view of him as a party or. one of the witnesses of the january 6th committee testified under oath that rudolph giuliani was drunk on election night, 2020, when he told donald trump to publicly go out there and declare victory, which donald trump did, knowing that it was not true. >> what was your observation about his potential intoxication during that discussion about what the president should say when he would address the nation on election night? >> the mayor was definitely intoxicated, but i did not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president. >> and we don't know his level of intoxication when rudolph giuliani said this. >> when i went to bed on election night, he was ahead in all those states, every single one of those states. how is it they all turned around? every single one of them turned around? is it more consistent with the plan to turn them around? since there are witnesses who say there is a plan to turn them around, and it's -- to say that it all happened, in every single state, my goodness, this is how you win cases in a courtroom. >> how drunk does your lawyer have to be before you stop following his advice? that is a question, a legal question, donald trump's current defense team will have to answer when he goes on trial on march 4th in washington, d. c.. rolling stone is reporting, in the questioning of multiple witnesses, smith's team of federal investigators have asked questions about how, seemingly, intoxicated giuliani was during the week she was giving trump advice on how to cling to power, according to a source, who has been in the room with smith's team. one witness's attorney and a third person familiar with the matter, some witnesses told smith seem they saw giuliani consuming significant quantities of alcohol, some told the special counsel's office that they could clearly smelled alcohol on giuliani's breath, including on election night. some have already told investigators they were directly aware of moments when trump had talked to others about giuliani's drinking, and trump spoke negatively about his then top lawyers alcohol consumption. nbc news has not independently confirmed rolling stones drunk lawyering reporting. glenn kirschner is back with us. glenn, how drunk does your lawyer have to be before you are defense based on advice of counsel completely collapses? >> it sounds like a set up for a punchline, lawrence. here's the thing, you know, reliance on advice of counsel can be a viable defense. think about one of the more ordinary circumstances. my tax lawyer told me i could take this deduction, and it turns out you couldn't take that deduction. it was illegal to take that deduction. you may very well have an advice of counsel defense available to you. i think, implied, there is a word that is implied, in the reliance on advice of counsel defense. it is reliance on advice of a sober council. you know, i think donald trump has an uphill climb here offering a reliance on the advice of counsel with a straight face. here is, i think, a more fundamental problem than rudy giuliani's possible intoxication when he's giving advice to his client. when i saw the first indictment come out, the january 6th indictment, and we learned rudy giuliani was one of the unindicted coconspirators, but pretty easy to identify him as one of the sixth unindicted coconspirators, even though he wasn't named. when i saw the georgia indictment come out, where rudy giuliani is a charged coconspirator of donald trump, there is no such thing as reliance on advice of coconspirator defense. i don't say that in a snarky way. if your coconspirator is your council, you really are deprived from arguing we were relying on the advice of counsel because you are being charged as being part of a criminal conspiracy with your council. i think whether drunk or sober, that dog isn't going to hunt. >> if rudolph giuliani takes the witness stand in his own defense, and this trial, is it relevant to ask him about his drinking? is there a line of inquiry that could be relevant? >> any criminal litigator will tell you the scope and breadth of cross-examination is wide, and judges can get in trouble for unduly curtailing cross-examination. absolutely, his level of intoxication, at anytime, relevant to a fact of consequence in the prosecution, is fair game on cross examination. the other thing you might want to start by cross examining rudy giuliani after he's administered the oath, and swears to tell the truth. your first line of crossed might be, well, to you, truth is not truth. isn't that right? he's got nowhere to go. you could play the tape. press play on cross examination. ruth rudy giuliani announcing truth is and truth, he would not make a compelling witness in his own defense. frankly, that's one of the reasons, lawrence, all along, i said, i don't even know that he is likely to be pursued as a cooperating witness. it would be really hard to clean him up sufficiently to present him to a jury. >> glenn kirschner, thank you very much for joining us tonight. always appreciate it. >> thank you, lawrence. >> coming up, president biden has done more things that previous presidents wanted to do than any other president. the latest one is reducing the cost of prescription drugs, pharmaceutical companies are now fighting joe biden on this one in court. senator amy klobuchar will join us next to fight back. each day is a unique blend of going, doing, and living. glucerna protein smart with 30 grams of protein to help keep you moving. uniquely designed with carbsteady to help manage blood sugar response. glucerna, bring on the day. amazon has great deals on everything kids need. instead of spending more, he spent less. seemed obvious. why would a person spend more money? he's eight and he gets it. i'm 10. well, that's less impressive. 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 it ain't my dad's razor, dad. ay watch it! it's from gillettelabs. this green bar releases trapped hairs from my face... gamechanga! ...while the flexdisc contours to it. so the five blades can get virtually every hair in one stroke. for the ultimate gillette shaving experience. the best a man can get is gillettelabs. 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 love my knix, i could not live without them. having period underwear makes life so much easier. i don't think i could ever go back to just using pads and tampons. just throw them in the laundry, it's super easy. k-n-i-x, knix. [ applause ] >> the day you get your clearchoice dental implants makes every day a confident day... a never-hide-my-smile day... a life-of-the-party day... a take-on-the-world day... a believe-in-myself day... a flash-my-new-teeth day. because your clearchoice day is the day you get your confidence back for good. a clearchoice day changes every day. schedule a free consultation. >> today is the start of a new deal for patients where big pharma doesn't hack in a blank check at your expense, and the expense of the american people. on my watch, health care should be a right, not a privilege, in this country. >> today the white house, president biden and vice president harris revealed the first ten drugs that will be subject to historic federal price negotiations and controls for the first time ever. medicare will have the power to negotiate prices directly with pharmaceutical companies by using a new law which democrats passed in congress last year without a single republican vote. the medications on the list include treatments for cancer and diabetes, and the program is projected to save taxpayers 98. 5 billion dollars over a decade. they agreed upon prices for the first round of drugs are scheduled to go into effect in 2026. several major drug makers, including merck and johnson & johnson, vile losses to delay these cost saving measures. >> we are here today with the firm belief the united states of america, no senior should have to choose between whether they are able to fill a prescription or fill their refrigerator with food, but -- yes. [applause] >> joining us now, democratic senator in klobuchar -- member of the senate judiciary committee. senator, i want to go to the pharmaceutical companies opposition to this, and they're going to go to court, try to delay it, kill it. what is going to happen in court? >> well, that's a good place to go, lawrence. they've tried to delay this against the will of the american people time and time again. they've spent hundreds and millions of dollars in ads, likely aarp end of the president stood up to that. they have three lobbyists for every member of congress, but we persevered and got a bill passed. what they're doing is bringing multiple lawsuits, major lawsuits, with major law firms, against the justice department in different courts in this land. i don't think they're going to win this. let me tell you why. they have this argument that, somehow, they should be able to get what they want. they got this sweetheart deal written into law, back 20 years ago, and they claim that means, i guess, forever, they get to pick whatever price they charge, 50 million seniors for their drugs under medicare. they don't have to be in the program. they don't have to sell their drugs to the 50 million seniors. of course they want to. so, it's an outrageous argument. if, under this argument, the government wouldn't be able to negotiate for doctors fees, or hospital fees, or reimbursements for other things. like what the va does, lawrence, they, rightfully, negotiate on behalf of the nations veterans and get much less expensive drugs. those are the kinds of prices we want to see for our seniors. >> let me ask the control room to do a split screen here. you don't need to see me, but it be good to see the senator and the list of drugs these ten drugs that are a couple of years away from being -- having the price controlled by medicare. senator, this strikes me as fragile. no republican votes for this whatsoever. why wouldn't the next republican president to do everything possible to stop this from happening? why wouldn't any republican senators and members of the house elected in the next election try to repeal it? >> well, that's a good question. that is why it's going to be such a big deal in the election. for years, including donald trump, people were climbing, oh, we're going to do something about pharmaceutical prices. this president finally has. this is just the first list of ten. there's going to be 15 more, and 15 more. 20 more. even on this list, we are looking at drugs like sirretta and deliquesced, nearly 5 million people take those drugs for all kinds of heart conditions. you've got diabetes, major diabetes drugs, you've got another one that treats arthritis and psoriasis. the list goes on. you will see more and more drugs. add to that limits on insulin cost, $35 a month, that is set, that is taking effect now. we've got three drug companies under pressure because of the medicare prices agreeing to extend that limit to people who aren't on medicare, the younger people as well. finally, you've got the free vaccines happening now for shingles, pneumonia, for our seniors. those are things, 2000 dollar limit on out of pocket cost, we can't afford to have those reversed. the seniors aren't going to go backwards, nor are the people of this country when it comes to drug prices. so, this will be a major issue in this campaign, especially when you've got the fact that joe biden, after years and years of inaction on this issue, totaling away, leading the bill on this, and finally, because of a president that stood up, we've been able to get this done. >> senator klobuchar, of course, as you know, the senate was working on this issue when i was working in the senate in the 1990s, and no one told us that we were going to have to wait 30 years. senator amy klobuchar, thank you very much for joining us tonight, i really appreciate it. >> great to be on again, lawrence. >> thank you. >> we will be right back. to sleep, so when our windshield cracked, we needed it fixed right. we went to safelite.com. there's no one else we'd trust. their experts replaced our windshield, and recalibrated our car's advanced safety system. they focus on our safety... so we can focus on this little guy. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ my father didn't know his dad. she knew that i always want to know more about my family history. with ancestry i dug and dug until i found some information. i was able to find out more than just a name. and then you add it to the tree. i found ship manifests. birth certificate. wow. look at your dad. i love it so much to know where my father work, where he grew up. it's like you discover a new family member. discover even more at ancestry.com ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ 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. nice footwork. man, you're lucky, watching live sports never used to be this easy. now you can stream all your games like it's nothing. yes! [ cheers ] yeah! woho! running up and down that field looks tough. it's a pitch. get way more into what you're into >> senator amy klobuchar gets when you stream on the xfinity 10g network. tonight's last word. the 11th hour with stephanie ruhle starts right now. now that this monster storm is forecast to be an extremely dangerous category four hurricane, when it makes landfall within hours. nearly half of florida is under a tornado watch as the western coast is already being battered by flooding and high swells. state troopers went door to door on the island of cedar key, telling the nearly 900 residents that they must. leave this community could be entirely cut off as a life-threatening storm surge hits the state