while the house freedom caucus is making radical demands and treating this like a political stunt, that saturday night deadline very real in terms of the harm it can cause for hundreds of thousands of americans. i am old enough to remember the last time that the government shutdown because republicans wanted something ridiculous. it was right around christmas of 2018. the federal government shut down because president trump demanded funding for a border wall that he never ended up finishing. and on capitol hill, it was a spectacle. but for 80,000 government workers, these antics and 35 days without a paycheck. >> that new life for ships enter in capitol heights its opening its doors to furloughed workers, providing donating food from grocery stores and church members. >> i'm with the department of commerce and yeah, four weeks, no check. >> many of the folks in this line have worked for the federal government for decades. >> 30 something years. and don't know what it is like to go without a check. that is how nicole feels. >> i think i carlock every day. >> and this mom who works with the irs. >> i got two sons and they know, i am standing in line for their foods, you know. >> you never thought you'd be here? >> never thought -- >> this time around, there are literally thousands of government workers who if republicans in congress refuse to fund the government by the end of this week, who will face potentially devastating financial situations just like that. yesterday, abc news interviewed a cafeteria worker at the library of congress, a woman named willie joel price. >> the government is going to go back and they are going to get paid. we are not going to get anything. we have to try to scrape by. you have to listen to the phone calls coming because you have not paid your bill, have not paid anything, and i've been there. i have been up on the sill for 42 years, i've been there. [crying] >> for workers like billy joel price, a shutdown means no work, and it means no pay. the money just never materializes. and then for another class of workers that we deem essential, it means that they don't get paid, but they still had to show up for work, and that will be the case for roughly 1. 3 million active duty u.s. military service members, again, if republicans in congress can't get their act together by saturday. now, they would get back there once this is all over, but it's unclear when this will all be over. the federal aviation administration can be looking at a double government shutdown this weekend, and that is because congress is also running up against that time to renew the law that allows the faa to function in the first place. that means the agency would furlough more than 17,000 workers and forced 25,000 to come to work unpaid. now, you might be taking, thousands of workers being forced to work without pay, that is ridiculous. why don't they just strike? well, for the answer to that, you also have the republican party to thank. >> let me make one thing plain, i respect the right of workers and the private sector to strike. indeed, as president of my own union, i led the first break ever called by that union. i guess i am i want to ever hold this office, who is a lifetime member of a union. but we cannot compare labor management relations in the private sector with government. government cannot close down the assembly line. it has to provide without interruption the protective services which is the government's reason for being. >> that was president ronald reagan in 1981, basically tried to have it both ways. thousands of air traffic controllers all across the country were on strike, demanding better pay and better working conditions, but rather than negotiating with those workers, reagan fired all of them. he literally fired 11,345 workers and banned them from federal service for life. now, the reagan chapter is relevant here because something that seems to have gone missing in the discussion about this potential government shutdown is that at its core, republicans are willing to hold the country hostage like this because the republican party broadly speaking is anti labor. you see that all the way from ronald reagan in the 1980s to republicans in congress today. the men and women who don't really seem to care about the impact their political stunts will have on hundreds of thousands of american workers. and that brings me to tonight. tonight, former president trump gave a speech to a crowd outside of detroit that included some autoworkers and a lot of trump supporters. it comes after president biden walked at the picket line which check-in members of the united auto workers union yesterday. even though what trump did tonight may look similar to what biden did, it is not. trump is holding this rally supposedly first union members at a non-union car parts manufacturing plant. trump, like ronald reagan before him, is trying to have it both ways. he is trying to make it seem like he is pro labor, but if you think back to when donald trump was in charge, he appointed an anti union secretary of labor. he appointed anti union members to the national labor relations board. he appointed tons of anti union judges, and then he celebrated when they clawed back workers strikes. here is not much of this evening, the candidate who tonight is trying to convince american workers that he is the one that is really on their side. >> i put everything on the line to fight for you. i've risked it all to defend the working class from the corrupt political class that spent decades sucking the life, wealth and blood out of this country. >> joining me now is claire mccaskill, former u.s. senator and msnbc analyst and my colleague and friend, joy reid. both of you are my friends. host of msnbc's the reid out. thank you for joining me on set, nonetheless. joy, let me get your reaction to donald trump saying, i've risked it all to defend the working class from the corrupt political class. >> it is amazing, isn't it. so you went back to what he did when he was president. you can go way back. i am old school. let's go back to the 80s. donald trump, his prestige building trump tower was built with non-union, mostly polish immigrant and in some cases, undocumented labor. those folks were underpaid and in some cases, not getting their checks. and when they complained, donald trump threatened to deport them. that's how he's always felt about labor. how does he feel about the labor who work at mar-a-lago, he got one of them to commit a felony. and he will probably go to prison for a very long time, walt nada, who is another lower paid, brown guy, non organized. he uses a lot of visas at mar-a-lago, like slow paid, brown labor, is not like to pay them a lot. he's not even good to the labor or force for donald trump and his organization, let alone what he did when he was president. he is always been anti labor. >> and yet, claire, he has the audacity, political cunning, i don't know you call it, to go to a non-union plant and say that he's put it on the line for the working class. donald trump, he'll do many things that normal people wouldn't, but there is some colonel of utility to him doing this, which is that he feels that his message is somehow resonant with the workers. >> we got to be real here. the bottom line is, a whole lot of white male, union rank and file voted for donald trump, not just in 2016 but also in 2020. he is a marketing guy. he is marketing to their a grievance, and they believe that donald trump gets them, that he somehow understands that they are working as hard as they can. they cannot afford to retire, on and on and on. bottom line is, what he did while president is a jaw-dropping anti union. he said he would save these factories. alex, those factors shut down in states with union labor. you know where they went? they went either to china -- >> overseas -- >> or they went to states where there are no unions. it went south. listen, i don't begrudge anybody who works hard for a living, and those people who take a shower after work, instead of before work, they have been the heart and soul of the democratic party. we need to realize that we need to do a better job communicating with them, because trump marketed to them, and it worked. >> against all odds, against the record, right? we all talked about it on our shows, joe biden on the picket line? that was not just another photo op, that was a line in the sand for an american president and a signal that the white house is taking this very seriously. >> i think clare makes an excellent point, because during the 2016 campaign, i traveled a lot, doing my weekend show, we went to pennsylvania and ohio and we did these focus groups. there was one in which we had six labor union guys, and four of the six were hard-core for trump. part of it was misogyny. they did not like hillary clinton, had all sorts of conspiracy theories about her, and were dead set against her. but to clare's point, it was a cultural connection with trump. what was on television, you turn on the local tv in those states, it was that man of steel act. i am obsessed with it, because the clinton campaign never answered it, and if you are a person who in some of these towns, the steel plant have been replaced by dollar stores, literally distillery in ohio. and you have ads on tv saying, those jobs can come back, we can bring back those steel jobs. we can put you to work again. they show all sorts of multi cultural people, but in speaking to the white working class guy, who already as resentment, who in his mind thinks it has something to do with mexico and illegal immigration why my job is gone. so i have a cultural connection to the guy who said that i can break the jobs back. he literally promised to bring auto jobs back to michigan, the jobs went. he promised to bring them back to indiana, the jobs went, when he was president. he did not do it, but he had that message that was actually effective. biden managed to get back and called back a lot of it because he actually is a pro union guy. >> explains biden's candidacy and a lot of ways, doesn't it, clare? biden's -- look at it, michigan, 2024 matchup. trump and biden are running even. michigan is kind of one of the states that you want to win if you are running for president. the fact that biden is the guy that can go, people will look at that and say how could they be neck and neck, after they -- same time, biden is a democrat who i think other democrats stink can't go toe to toe with trump and a place like michigan, precisely because the hold he has on the non-college-educated white working class apparently cannot be shaken, claire. >> i am not sure about that. >> or it seems, again, against the record of donald trump. >> i think the ad they put up is a good start. they put a contrast ad saying that donald trump did all these horrible things to work in people. here, joe biden actually delivered. that is great, but they will have to hit a lot harder. they will have to go repetitive and remind people, over and over again, and ohio, pennsylvania, and wisconsin, and michigan, he did not keep his word. and if they can really make it simple and repetitive enough, i think it will peel off some of those workers, because once they are confronted with a reality, they know that he did not keep those jobs there, they shut plants down. they know that they gave up contracts to china for electric vehicles. they know that. >> by the way, the biden campaign has bought that ad on fox. they are running that very ad on fox, which is really important. >> which is what you need to do. >> i think they have figured out some of the alchemy that the clinton campaign did not have and did not take donald trump seriously enough. it's why he won by very small margins in wisconsin, pennsylvania -- >> it's why biden won by small margins -- >> he was able to call it back. the other thing is if you look at biden's trip that he took to try to stand with those workers, to stand with the workers, historic. look at the crowd around him. working class does not mean just white voters. those other workers were men, women of every race. that is what the working class and riyadh it looks like. there are cultural forces pulling at the other way with the working class voters. and they have other concerns. they know that when donald trump, he did not keep that promise. oh, he kept his promises, he sure did not to workers. he was terrible for union workers. the last thing i'll say is that biden is being smart about pushing the idea of evs, making sure that we switch into this technology, but a lot of these jobs will be in those other states where people get paid less money. evs are popular now. biden's message that you deserve to get paid more, will also resonate in those states, where they are lower paid and non-union as well. >> what about the people of as of saturday may not get paid for their work, let's say federal workers, claire, because house republicans, in a mess of their own making, are now trying to pin this on joe biden. i think we have time to play this choice sound of the speaker of the house kamikaze blaming joe biden for the impasse that we currently find ourselves in. >> why don't you sit down, why aren't you sit down serious about making sure that the government does not shut down? the first thing to i would do is sit down with us. i want to sit down with the president to secure that border. the senate has not taken up the house work, so no, the president should step in and do something about it, otherwise, the government will shut down. >> wait, what? the president already sat down with speaker mccarthy, they ran i do, and now kevin mccarthy's people don't want to abide by it. i mean, and the broader context here, how damaging is a shutdown for republicans are now, clear? >> i think it's bad, and here is the problem with this guy. in order to keep the government from shutting down or to open to government backup, he's going to have to go to the democrats. that means he can't be speaker anymore. kevin, here is the thing, it will be painful. they're off the band-aid, confront those extreme people in the caucus and say take me out if you can, but i will do what is best for the country and frankly what is best for our party. but he seems like he is really a bad negotiator and a big coward. >> so how does it and, the thing that the shutdown is inevitable? >> i have always said, because i was there for many, many times, when the government which shut down, and ignored it. i have always said that they will figure out a way. this is the first time i don't think they will figure out a way. i think it will shut down. i think he will have to get democrats to open back up, safety stop marquee and the ripple effect will be huge. he is going to own it. he is going to open back up, and then i predict before we say trick-or-treat, we will be calling somebody else speaker. >> well -- >> and hakeem jeffries, the minority leader hakeem jeffries tonight said that all options are on the table. there is a chance that democrats push a discharge petition, wwpd. what would pelosi do? she would say i got that senate bill cooking over there, and he learned from her. he's ready to play. discharge petition, push through that senate bill, majority democratic vote, and that immediately triggers matt gaetz, who wants to be governor of florida, in favor of shutting down the government, saying, bye bye, kevin. you know who is the respeaker, if hakeem jeffries solves this, the real speaker is hakeem jeffries every anyway. apparently, is show biden, because according to the cabinet, joe biden is speaker. >> it might not be the house of can't for that much longer. >> hello. >> can you just stay for the whole hour, ladies? i know you can't. you have other things to do. clare and joy, my friends, colleagues and wise soothsayers, predictors, halloween that diners, thank you for your time and thoughts tonight. we have a lot more this evening, including the growing list of senate democrats calling on bob menendez to resign, and the non existent list of senate republicans doing the same. i will discuss the politics of all of that with the great steve kornacki, america sweetheart, which has been right here on set later this hour. but first, house republicans launched their impeachment inquiry into president biden tomorrow. their first step is figuring out why they want to impeach him in the first place. that is next. goli, taste your goals. >> okay, so, house republicans are kicking off their impeachment inquiry into president biden tomorrow with a hearing titled, the basis for an impeachment inquiry of president joseph r. biden, junior. in other words, they are holding their first hearing to figure out why they are having an impeachment inquiry. it as it stands, there are no new facts, no new evidence that links president biden to any wrongdoing. but republicans are moving full steam ahead and calling three witnesses. bruce dubinskiy, a forensic accounting expert, who is part of a fox news report on financial experts that republicans alleged belong to hunter biden. aileen o'connor, former assistant attorney -- of the justice department's tax division, who left office before joe biden was even sworn in, and jonathan turley, who republicans have called as a witness in several hearings, including donald trump's first impeachment and bill clinton's impeachment 24 years ago. joining us now is democratic congressman dan goldman, of new york. he is a member of the house oversight committee and former counsel in trump's first impeachment. congressman goldman, thank you for being here on the eve of what is sure to be a series of interesting events tomorrow. let me first get your thoughts on the witnesses the republicans are calling the committee to sit on. what are your expectations? >> you would think that the basis of an impeachment inquiry would be the eight month investigation that they have been doing, and that they would not have to have another hearing to talk about why they are having an impeachment inquiry. but, as you noted, and as you can see from these witnesses, there are no fact witnesses here. there is no one who has any direct knowledge of anything that president biden did. and that is intentional. because there are no witnesses who actually will testify that joe biden has done anything wrong in connection with hunter biden's business interests. so, this is a complete sham impeachment that they are trying to use innuendo, lies and gaslighting the american people into believing that there is actually evidence when there is not. and what we expect to do is democrats tomorrow's point out the sheer lack of evidence to justify an impeachment inquiry into president joe biden. not hunter biden. president joe biden. >> can you talk a little bit more about that? because democrats seem to have learned to ignore, though it may be a force -- to ignore the force at their own peril. because republicans have proven adept at spinning lies out of whole cloth. poisoning the groundwater with them, if you will pardon the mixed metaphor. what is a democratic strategy, for those of you who are sitting on the committee and are going to be in the room with these folks tomorrow? >> as you noted, i love the first impeachment investigation. and you will recall that we had 17 witnesses, fact witnesses who were deposed. and then we had public hearings with 12 fact witnesses with direct knowledge. that's what you do when you are fact finding. if you go to the judiciary committee, then you have a hearing on what impeachment is and the law. you don't start with that before you have your evidence of impeachment. and so what we will be focusing on is emphasizing that what they are saying and what they are basing this on is either complete lies or gross exaggeration and misinterpretation of the evidence that they have gathered. and to be clear, they have gathered a lot of evidence. they have taken a number of hours of many, many witnesses of testimony. they have gathered more than 12,000 pages of bank records and 2000 suspicious activity reports. none of it links to joe biden. and that is why this is a complete farce. >> you cite the volume of not evidence, discovery material, if you will. that has been amassed in all this, pointing to absolutely nothing with joe biden's fingerprints on it, if you will, or, in any way casting aspersions on the behavior of the president and the actions of the president. but i guess i wonder, does the mere fact that republicans can say, we are having an impeachment inquiry into joe biden, do the work for the purposes of the fox news echo chamber? and if that is enough, how do you really combat it? >> it may. i have asked to appear on fox tomorrow after, because i think it is important that their viewers here from the other side. and we are focused on the facts. and we are going to bring up those facts. i think there are many different ways of doing that. this whole thing appears to be premised on a completely debunked conspiracy that was debunked in the first impeachment by the senate, by the u.s. senators, republican senators, by the ukrainian president about this burisma nonsense when joe biden's only official action related to hunter biden actually was bad for hunter biden's business when that prosecutor general who was quote, under control, according to devin archer, their new star witness, who is hunter biden's partner and also on the burisma board when he was fired. so, this has been completely debunked but anyone who has any objective interest into facts. and it's our job to point that out. and if we will point that out tomorrow. >> good for you for going on fox. you've got to go to the center of the controversy, if you will. >> we will see if they let me on. >> i've got to ask you. you are in the house. and as it stands, it looks like we are barreling towards a government shutdown. there are some workers who are deemed essential who will continue to go to work. are the staffers on the oversight committee who are running these, as you say, sham hearings, are they going to be deemed essential workers? >> in true remarkable fashion, it appears as if the house republicans are going to deem their impeachment investigators as essential workers, when millions of americans working in federal jobs will not be paid, and even more millions will not get federal benefits during the shutdown. the fact that we are having an impeachment inquiry hearing two days before the house republicans are leading us to a shut is shocking. but it is a reflection of one thing. there is one person, a puppeteer down in mar-a-lago, who is controlling this extreme right maga party. and he wants joe biden impeached. he wanted it in 2019, with this insane investigation. he wants it now for his political benefit. and he wants the government to shut down, to make a distraction from all of his own legal problems. he's pulling the strings right now, make no mistake about it. and it's why we are barreling headlong into both of these ridiculous situations. >> wow. members of the armed services, department of congress, cabinet agencies not going to be working. but the inquisitors looking to impeach president biden deemed essential workers. that's as it all. congressman dan goldman, thanks so much for your time tonight. we really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> still to come this evening -- a day of reckoning is coming for members of the trump administration, who will be forced to answer, on the record, for the first time, about their roles in separating migrant children from their families. plus, a sitting u.s. senator pleaded not guilty in federal court today. but more and more of his colleagues are calling for him to step down. what happens now? the great steve kornacki joins -- hi, i'm darlene and i lost 40 pounds with golo in just eight months. golo has really taught me how to eat better and feel better. as long as you eat the right food groups in the right amounts, that's all it is. it's so simple and it works. golo was the smartest thing i ever did. >> this was the scene this morning outside the federal courthouse in new york, where new jersey senior democratic senator bob menendez was arraigned on charges of corruption and bribery. senator menendez and his wife nadine pleaded not guilty to all charges, and both were released on bond. the indictment against menendez includes detailed allegations that the senator peddled influence for the benefit of the government of egypt, as well as several new jersey businessmen, in exchange for gifts ranging from envelope of cash to stacks of gold boolean buillion -- and all 30 of them are members of senator menendez's own party. not a single senate republican has called on senator menendez to resign. joining me now to discuss why that is's america's sweetheart, msnbc's steve kornacki. the steve, of easily, there is a precedent that republicans don't want to set about taking out corrupt sitting officeholders. but there is also a cold hard political calculation here. can you talk more about why republicans think they have a shot if menendez stays in the city? >> if menendez were to refuse to resign, to continue in that position, and actually get the democratic nomination from -- that is a long shot, let's put that mildly. but it's not impossible, if he does run in certain things break their way. republicans have not won a senate race in new jersey in more than 50 years. >> yes. >> 72 was the last time -- they were very close in 2002, when there was a democratic incumbent, bob torisel toricelli -- democrats yanked him out of the race. they had a state supreme court ruling to do it, put in frank bergen, and won the race. republicans, i think, some feel like if menendez is the nominee for a term next year, that could be the natural ingredient to beat him. short of that, however, it's very hard to see a republican win in new jersey. >> so many of the calculations here are so far because the democrats hold the majority by one seat. and weirdly, bob an end as seems to have a lot of leverage here, right? he doesn't have to leave. chuck schumer has still not come out and said, you need to step down. and the democrats at first came out and said, you need to go. we're the most vulnerable democrats in 2024 -- >> yeah. you can see why democrats, especially if the u.s. senate level, especially in new jersey, don't want menendez around. in new jersey they've got state legislative elections coming up in a matter of weeks. there's fear among democrats there that this is going to hurt them in these legislative elections. in the u.s. senate, there's a fear that it's when her senators running for reelection next year by tarnishing the party when. it's going to hurt, potentially, they fear, at the presidential level -- republicans they could point to and say, hey, democrats you are coming after a, saying we had a corrupt party. look at what you -- you see the incentives here. but menendez, remember, survived a federal program action prosecution -- with basically the full and total support of the democratic party back then. he is truly, i think, shocked at the breadth of the democrats who have come out, including cory booker who -- cory booker, his colleague from new jersey, the last time around, booker showed up on the first day of that trial and sat right behind bob linda's in the courthouse as a show of support. and now cory booker is calling for him to leave. >> i think, by our count, 30 democrats in the senate democratic caucus have called for him to leave office, to step down. do you think, at this point -- what is the calculation here, if you are bob menendez? is there anyone who can say anything, at this point, who will convince him? he has been defined in every public statement he has made. he pleaded not guilty to the charges this morning. we were talking about this in the break. he's got to be speaking to democrats, i think, behind closed doors tomorrow. but is your expectation that he hangs in there? indefinitely? >> for the short term, yeah. he's a proud man, is a strong willed man. he is somebody who did what a lot of folks thought was impossible in the first place. he beat a federal corruption charges a few years ago, and got reelected. and so i think he thought, when this broke, when this indictment came down earlier this week, he thought, based on what had happened last time, that his party would give him room to maneuver here because of what he had gotten through and survive the last time. so, i think he's genuinely not just surprised. but i think he is angered by this public reaction from this party today. and i suspect -- i don't know -- but i suspect, at least initially here, the message from him is going to be, go ahead. call for me to resign all you want. you can't ultimately do anything about it. but i can keep the seat, and i can make things in a 51 to 49 senate, i can make things pretty difficult for you. so, that might be the initial posture. now, whether there is really an initial path beyond him, say, serving out the term, and actually a path toward seeking renomination in the party next year is a separate question. but in the short term, yeah. they can't get him out. they can call for him. but if he wants to stay, you can stay. >> wow. the ripple effects are unbelievable. steve kornacki, it's great to see you. we will be right back. hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. ♪ changing your habits is the only way that gets you to lose the weight. and golo is the plan that's going to help you do that. just take the first step, go to golo.com. make a splash with the ultimate pool party essential. blendjet gives you ice-crushing, big blender power on-the-go, so you can soak up the sun with a frosty beverage. enjoy 15+ blends before rapidly recharging via usb-c. and it even cleans itself with a drop of soap and water. stand out even when you're accidentally twinning with our kaleidoscope of colors. make this summer the coolest ever. order yours now from blendjet.com. this administration did not create a problem of separating children from their parents. it's giving the official line of family separation. she said it over and over. as border patrol, separated thousands of families who crossed the southern boarded into united states, at the direction of the trump administration. secretary nielsen said to the house, to the senate, to a room of white house reporters. no. there is no policy a separating families at the border. never mind the images, and sounds of toddlers and babies crying for their mothers and fathers after being taken from them, in the name of deterrence. attorney general jeff sessions denied the existence of a finally separation policy as well. >> the american people don't like the idea that we're separating families we never really intended to do that. >> since those public denials we have learned from exhaustive reporting by outlooks including, the atlantic, attorney general e family separation policy. he encouraged its enforcement. , the new york times reported that sessions once told a roomful of u.s. attorney, who questioned his orders to prosecute a dollars who crossed the border, since it meant separating families, he told those attorneys, quote, we need to take away children. and nielsen, for her part nearly literally signed the zero tolerance in police to do. being she signed the memo prosecute border crossers, knowing the children would be taken away from those parents. to this day, about 1000 of those children, remain separated, from their families. and for years, migrant families have been suing the u.s. government for taking away their children, yet so far the officials who help design and orchestrate and oversee, that policy officials like kirstjen nielsen, and jeff sessions, they have not testified on the record and any of these cases. but this week we learned, that is about to change in. a lawsuit involving three families who say their children, ages six, 11, and 13 were separated from them, a federal magistrate judge just ruled that former secretary nielsen, and former secretary sessions will be deposed. the judge wrote the two officials and unique personal knowledge of their own intent and making the zero tolerance policy. rendering their testimony in this case, essential. the date for the depositions has yet to be determined, but for the very first time. trump administration officials, will be forced to acknowledge the family separation policy. and explain their role in it. they will have to do so under oath, in a court of law. >> still to come this evening, first of trump's codefendants in georgia, get ready for their day in court we're gonna take though look at the latest legal wrangling's, and a preview of trump's defense strategy. that is next e strategy that is next the power goes out and we still have wifi to do our homework. and that's a good thing? great in my book! who are you? no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up to keep you online. only from xfinity. >> tonight, the judge presiding home of the xfinity 10g network. over the federal criminal case against donald trump and his attempts to subvert the 2020 election judge tanya chutkan, denied trump's request that she recuse herself from that case. we are still awaiting her ruling on special counsel jack smith's for a limited gag order to be imposed on trump. meanwhile, prosecutors in the georgia case against trump and 18 other defendants are raising concerns about the defense. today, fulton county district attorney fani willis asked the judge to issue a protective order on discovery materials, citing concerns over previous instances of doxxing. the district attorney noted, both in this filing and over the weekend, that her own personal information was leaked, including the home addresses of multiple family members. joining me now is melissa redmon, former fulton county district attorney, now officially an msnbc contributor. first off, the request for a protective order -- discovery materials have already been shared. is it strange or in any way unusual to ask for a protective order after the materials have already been shared with the defense? >> it is. you would expect that protective orders would be filed when the discovery is turned over, especially considering we saw in the hearing where we talked about, we have not got discovery yet, i'm giving it to you today. we haven't been the the deadline yet. that the state talked about needing a protective order, needing to protect that information. that was almost a month ago. >> yeah. >> so, we saw that maybe it was the protective order for the jurors that may have prompted them to remember that they did not actually file -- >> oops! >> -- the protective order for the discovery. there may have been some things that came out that was in the discovery and wasn't publicly available to say, you really need to -- to disseminate. >> what is clear is that d. a. wants to bubble wrap as much as possible given the unprecedented nature of threats and harassment she and her family members -- you know, grand jury members. doxxing. it's extraordinary. i would assume there is obviously, a risk in asking for a protective order after the material has already gone out, right? >> right. it will still protect the material that has not been made public yet. so, there has not been a lot that has been disclosed, that we know of, for many of the parties involved. it would still protect that individual -- judge mcafee can say, everything you have gotten from discovery, keep it for yourself. it's only for you to prepare for your defense. it's not for public decimation dissemination -- who the witnesses are. you don't want them to be harassed or intimidated, affecting their testimony at the eventual trial. >> when we talk about some of the witness intimidation and the evidence at hand, rolling stone is reporting -- and i will just flag that these are some unnamed sources, that trump is hoping to suppress the submission of the infamous phone call with brad raffensperger, as part of the evidence in d. a. willis's case. he's effectively saying -- and this is according to rolling stones reporting, which nbc news has not independently confirmed -- that he is saying that the taping of that phone call was illegal, that florida -- that there were some taping in florida. and in florida, it's a two party state, which means the taper and the tape be tapee have to give them consent -- >> possibly. if the court does determine that that phone call was an awfully taped, it was a violation of trump's expectation of privacy, then the court could determine that it should not be used against him. a couple of things that the d. a. could argue. number one, the state was not a party to that -- >> georgia, the state -- >> there is a third party recording. if you think of someone on their own acting as a party to a criminal conspiracy, and then one of them tells, or one of them turns over evidence of that conspiracy to the state, does that mean that the state can't use it? the other thing is that even if florida, you have to have an expectation of privacy. so, if that conversation takes place in a circumstance where the person doesn't have an expectation of privacy, then the state could argue that it's an exception to that two party rule in florida, if, in fact, there was recording in florida. >> the expectation of privacy. i guess you expect a phone call to be private when it is you and me chatting. but if it's you and me and seven campaign officials, a couple lawyers, and someone down in the georgia secretary of state's office, paralegals and whatnot, is there an expectation of privacy there? >> that would be the argument. the state would make the argument that there was no expectation of privacy. so, even if the conversation was in florida -- evidence in the trial. >> i've got to ask, just because we are still waiting to hear about whether jeffrey clark and the theory fake of actors or -- where is the strength of that movement at this point, as you see it? >> it's interesting. because, i thought that meadows had the strongest argument. and it's been about a week or so since that case was heard by judge jones. and so i think everybody anticipated that this rule would come down a lot faster, and we are at the same time frame, right about ten days, that ten days that took them to deliver the decision in the meadows case. but i think it is -- arguing that i am an alternate elector and not a fake elector, and i was performing federal -- makes me a federal agent is a long shot. >> long shot. okay. from your mouth to the judges, here's melissa redmon. thank you for your time. that is our show tonight. now it is time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell". good, evening lawrence. >> good evening, alex. the expectation i have in our conversations is -- >> are there other people listening? >> maybe, maybe. >> i think so. i think so. >> let's not talk anything about the company or coworkers -- >> we never do that. we are very aboveboard with all of our thoughts and feelings. >> thank, you alex. >> have a great show. >> prosecutors and defense lawyers were very busy in georgia today. but the most important legal development of the day came in washington d. c., where the judge in the case of the united the first time ended in a hung jury in 2017. when we first reported on the indictment of robert