leaving from washington, i am washington steel in for my friend jen psaki. she's wrapping up a well- deserved vacation and will be with you next week. we have a lot to cover tonight, so settle in. i do want to begin with a headline. trump employs images of violence as political fuel for re-election fight. you might be thinking, yeah, i saw this over the weekend. after all, donald trump posted a video on his social media site depicting president biden with his hands and feet tied up in the back of a pickup truck. at the same time on that same site, trump not only lashed out at the judge presiding over his new york criminal trial, but also at the judges daughter. so, yeah. i would say he is employing images of violence in his re- election fight right now. folks, that headline is not from over the weekend. it's from september of 2020 -- almost four full years ago. and the fact that it very well could have been published today should serve as a stark reminder that donald trump has always been this guy. he has always been the guy who glorifies political violence, who embraces it to rev up his base. he has always been the guy who operates out side of the typical norms in politics, business, and law, addresses, spins, and twist those systems into pretzels any chance he gets. and he has always been the guy who breaches protocol more times than he has abided by it. but just because he's done all these things before doesn't mean we should normalize it, or even be numb to it. manhattan d.a. alvin bradsher isn't becoming numb to it. no, he is not. late today, district attorney brad once again urged them to push back on his behavior. he wants the judge in the criminal hush money case to expand the gag order to also protect family members of trial participants. he writes that trump's dangerous and violent and reprehensible rhetoric fundamentally threatens the integrity of these proceedings and is intended to intimidate witnesses and trial participants alike. and he points out that there is no constitutional right to target the family of this court. the defendant knows what he is doing, and everyone else does, too. and we all know that is very true, because we seen it with our own eyes. trump has brought violence to our politics, and he has brought disorder to our legal system. he has turned every courtroom he enters, and there have been many, into a circus. using hallways like a soapbox to spew outrageous and inflammatory lies. he is, in effect, putting his trials on trial. he has intimidated witnesses, violated gag orders, and has relentlessly attacked anyone holding him accountable, including, again, judge merchan and his daughter, who is a private citizen. at the end of the day, we know everything we need to know about donald trump. we know who he is. and yet, despite all this bad behavior, these judges are still giving him the benefit of the doubt as if he were an ordinary defendant. no one else -- no one else -- could ever get away with the crap that donald trump gets away with. he is acting like a visceral animal, in politics, business, and law. that is a constant. that is one thing we know that is not changing. so enough is enough. the system now needs to adapt to the thing in front of it before it is consumed by that very thing. and on that point, have some breaking news. judge merchan has just cited with district attorney bragg a few moments ago. he expanded the order to protect members of the court and that the d.a. office. she is the former acting assistant attorney general for national security at the justice department. also with us is former federal prosecutor, and my buddy, glenn kershner. let me start with you. the d.a. has just come back with this ruling moments ago. i know he's been focusing and scouring over the paper here. tell us what you find in this. what should we need to know about what the judge has done? >> predictably, judge merchan expanded the gag order to include family members of the judge and the court staff, of the prosecutor's office . that is wonderful. donald trump is laboring under a hat trick of, shut up, because there are three gag orders that have been in place over time. the judge with the d.c. federal prosecution, judge koran in the new york civil trial, and now judge trance seven in the -- i don't call it a hush money case. it's the 2016 election interference case that includes hush money payments that were then covered up with false business records. has it done any good? has it helped? you just said a minute ago, donald trump is putting his trial on trial. is putting the criminal justice system to the test, and i think the system is failing. the reason i said that is because, you just read in part the first sentence from the motion that was filed, and it reads defendants, dangerous, violent, and reprehensible rhetoric fundamentally threatens the integrity of these proceedings and is intended to intimidate witnesses and trial participants alike, including this court. to this prosecutor, the only sentence that makes sense coming after that assertion is therefore that people are moving for pretrial detention. >> listen, we have four criminal cases, four jurisdictions, there are different rules in every jurist action. but the fact that no judge and no prosecutor has stepped up actually put a strop to trumps dangerous rhetoric is a real problem. >> that's were glenn put his finger on the pulse of what really irritates the heck out of me about all of this. because that sentence should follow the beginning of that. what is your take on the judges expansion of this gag order, and how do you see other judges and other trials that trump's is before sort of assessing and dealing with this ruling. >> i think the reason he expanded the gag order was less about his daughter and more about the message that trump's gets if he doesn't expand it. and more about the message that potential jurors get if he doesn't expand it. i think he is now very worried. and this is something that the d.a. raised in their papers, very worried that people are going to be extremely reluctant to service jurors to have any witnesses. they're going to start, you know, become reluctant, and maybe even be nervous about telling the truth on the stand, because they feel like they are targeted. as well as their families. so to me, this was the judge saying, look. i've got to take this step here to take a message that the administration of justice will not be impinged by this conduct of donald trump. he also says, we are not in a david and goliath situation here where the government is all-powerful, because trump himself has a substantial motive as any. >> let's pick up on that bully idea, because what donald trump's lawyers have argued is that he has the constitutional protection of free speech to say these things, to go after his daughter. how does that factor into this particular ruling, and is that an element that really prevents what glenn says should happen next from happening? >> there's no question the defendant has first amendment rights, but those rights can be constrained and you are in a courtroom facing a trial and criminal case and in a civil case. the supreme court has been very clear about this, that is the obligation of the judge to ensure that the defendant's behavior won't impact the administration of justice, and that could be through things like gag orders. it's few other restraints, too. you have to ensure that the defendant gets a fair trial, but that also means the public and the government get a fair trial as well. and i think one of the things that glenn has pointed out, and that we talked about, you know, in other shows, is that the judges, even when they've issued these gag orders, -- that was a civil case, so that was different. they did not actually make those part of the conditions of release, and required mr. trump to sign that he understands his conditions have now been expanded. if he violates them, his release can be revoked. instead, the remedies here are things like contempt of court for violating a court order. that can result in time in jail, so it's not toothless, i think for those of us were former prosecutors, it's unusual that these restrictions on speech were not just incorporated into the conditions of release. >> donald trump will violate this gag order in three, two, one -- i mean, when that happens, what happens? you don't have, you know, the defendants on the side saying, i acknowledge all this, and this can happen to me. how do you see this playing out when that happens, because you know it will? >> financial fines, and, you know, who cares? there were minor fines put in place with the civil case when he violated the gag order. i agree with mary. in theory, you could be held in contempt, you could be confined to a brief period of time, but i go back to the fundamentals of the law. the law ordinarily says when you were a defendant on pretrial release, particularly in serious felony cases, and donald trump has four serious felony cases, if there is clear and convincing evidence that you pose a danger to the community or even one person in the community, you can be detained pending trial to neutralize that threat. >> and i just push on that point ? you pose a danger to the community. they hear that, they are thinking, this guy is a violent actor. he someone who has harmed someone and is now being prosecuted. this is, in one sense, you know, a situation where there is no physical harm. it's just donald trump running his mouth and saying crazy's tough that may or may not result with some idiot out there picking up, you know, some action. how does that get squared by the court in a situation like this, where that language, at least intuitively to someone who is listening to it from outside of the system, would hear, well, that may refer to someone who has shot somebody or done some physical harm to someone. >> so let me rely to what one of the appellate court judges said not two blocks from here during the gag order argument to the d.c. federal circuit court of appeals. when donald trump's lawyer made that point, a minute. he's not responsible for what his supporters do after he post something. and the judge said, wait a minute. there's a clear pattern here. donald trump post the name of a witness and threats ensue. he knows this. he can't disavow it. it's what he intends by posting the names and photos, not to mention he was seen holding a baseball bat mid-swing at the prosecutors had. so let's not say, well, these aren't crimes of violence. donald trump is all about violence. he is just using his words to accomplish his evidence. >> and so what does that mean for average joe and jane out there, who is a potential juror in one of these trials? and they are seeing this, they are hearing this, and i you really get what glenn is saying about the judge sort of anticipating that to say everything is off limits now. family, court clerks, all of that. does that really give some solace to a potential jury? or should i put something else in my coffee? >> that's what judge merchan is trying to do. the end of his order warns the defendant -- the defendant is hereby warned that any violation of this order will result in sanctions, which is contempt sanctions. what is trying to do is send a message that i do take this seriously. don't be worried, joe and jane, potential jurors, because we will take action. but i don't know if that's good enough, because we will see what donald trump does. to your point in the opening about violence and to the clients point, i think what we are on now is just a slow or not so slow development of, you know, a long-range incitement to violence. because we have the photos of president biden hogtied and kidnapped in the back of a truck. we had these incendiary violent remarks about witnesses and prosecutors and judges. and this is all about, you know, getting his base ready to take action. and you know, unfortunately, our law doesn't protect and site meant to imminent violence, but that violence, he wanted to come. that's why he's doing it. i think there's a high likelihood it will come, and imminence is really hard to judge with a man like donald trump. >> all right. thank you guys for very much for being here at the moment it all pops. really appreciate it. coming up, more breaking news. donald trump is just posted his bond in this new york civil fraud case. justin snell is standing by, is a former assistant attorney general in new york and he joins me in about 60 seconds. try dietary supplements from voltaren, for healthy joints. “i did just pay 60% less for my ticket with the gametime app.” “it's the best place to get last-minute deals on tickets.” “i guess i'm just a better fan than you.” “(crowd cheering) i've got to get the gametime app.” “download the gametime app and use promo code viva to get $20 off your first purchase.” >> we've got more breaking news to bring you this monday evening. donald trump has posted a bond in the amount of 100 $75 million in the civil fraud case in new york that he is planning to appeal. it was provided by the california-based company nye insurance. joining me now is justin snell, the former assistant attorney general for new york who led the office his investigation into trump university. he is also the author of the book taking down trump. 12 rules for prosecuting donald trump i someone who did it successfully. tristan, thank you very much for joining us. i know you're just pouring through the filing, but what stands out to you, and what are you finding? >> well, first off, i'm still trying to get information, just as you are. i really, really hope that that's 100 25 million and not 175,000. >> right. >> 175 million was already in my view way too low. i think the appeals court watched this badly by allowing him to get off the hook, letting him, you know, be able to post much less and give him more time to do it. you know, as i said, i think it's a can to taking 18 i was going to lose a basketball game by 40 points and giving them five more minutes to play and lowering the hoop from 10 feet down to 6. it shouldn't have happened, and now we see where it gets us. >> just to clarify, it is $175 million. so where does this take us down in this appeals process. what does it look like, what should we be expecting? >> look, there was always a chance in this situation that the court would lower the amount that trump would have to pay. there's also a chance that they could vacate or overturn the judgment entirely. i think the odds of that are lower. i think there is an absolute mountain of evidence supporting the finding of fraud in this case. it is possible -- and now i will say it looks likely that the appeals court will lower that award down from $464 million down to something that i still hope is going to be more than 175 million. we have to remember something here, michael. every dollar that trump is being asked to pay now is a dollar he shouldn't have been lent to begin with. and would not have been lent were it not for all of his lies. >> how does this play out with other folks out there in the financial markets who are looking at this whole process, given that there are other scenarios in which trump could be held liable? how does this $175 million bond win the judgment when it was $454 million it reconciled? what is the rest of this story with respect to the difference between what was -- what was awarded versus what what he has to put up for bond. >> look, i think anybody who is looking to lend trump money or underwrite anything for him right now has got to be looking at this and saying, what next? it is not a great situation for him overall. if you have other different loans outstanding with him, how well is he going to be able to actually repay these. i think that ultimately, he's not going to win this appeal. you might get it lowered, but i don't think he's going to win. i don't think is going to win the appeal against e. jean carroll. i don't think that's happening. again, that could get lowered a bit. i don't think it's going to get lowered all the way to zero or anywhere close. so if you lend money to donald trump, especially given his track record, i think that might not have been the best idea. >> put that money to some other uses. like all things with donald trump, how long do you think this is going to take ? is there something that, you know, we should be looking at being dragged out, or is this something that could get turned around pretty quickly? >> yeah. donald trump's biggest weapon when he is trying to evade justice -- i talk about this a ton in my book, is delay. ultimately, what are all these distractions? the clown car full of lawyers. what is he trying to do here? he's just trying to throw sand into the gears of justice. try to actually stop it from happening, and that he hopes that this is going to cause other things to break his way. and in the context of the election, it's hoping that it's going to allow him somehow to win and then be able to wave some sort of magic wand and monarch or dictator his way out of all of this. so i think he is going to try to delay these appeals for as long as he can. critically, i think the ag's office should be trying to seek expedited review of this case, as donald trump is already moving money around. he moved $40 million out of the trump organization to pay private legal costs that he had. a tax bill, but some of the money he owns to e. jean carroll. he did that against a court order, in violation and basically away from the eyes of the court ordered monitor. so there's already a clear track record here that donald trump is the financial equivalent of a flight risk. he's trying to make this money disappear. as a result, the ag's office should say, we need to move faster before all of this money is gone, and the right of the people to this money is frustrated. justice is frustrated. >> because he is a financial flight risk in that regard, he does have these assets out there that we also have talked about over the last couple of weeks. where does that money come from? what is the collateral, do you think, that's behind this $175 million bond? because i'm sure, you know, the folks who posted it got attached it to something. what does that look like? >> look, there have been a lot of reports that underwriters did not want to use his properties as collateral. we don't know exactly how this is working. it could be the properties, it could be revenue streams from the properties, it could be cash that he has on hand. my understanding is that he is not allowed to do anything that commits the stock that he has and this new truth social public company stack, that that would be -- that i would actually be against his lockup. he's not allowed to actually get rid of all that stock for 6 months. and i don't believe that he's allowed to have anything and use that as collateral, either. it's possible that some other folks who understand that trump legal saga would be able to weigh indifferently on that. but my understanding is that he cannot encumber that stock. so some combination of all of those things, we don't know. it's a mystery as to really why anybody would, given the human wreckage that he has created, with all of the vendors and business partners that he screwed over, the as well, you would think that people would think twice before lending him or underwriting him a nickel. but -- there you go. >> as with all things, tristan, follow the money. that's what you need to do in this situation. take you so much for coming along with us tonight. coming up, new comments from trump's former defense secretary could be indicative of a broader trend in the republican party, and one that the biden campaign actually can take advantage of. president obama's former campaign manager david cluff is here to break it all down for us. and he joins me next. we will be right back. back. we planned well for retirement, but i wish we had more cash. you think those two have any idea? that they can sell their life insurance policy for cash? so they're basically sitting on a goldmine? i don't think they have a clue. that's crazy! well, not everyone knows coventry's helped thousands of people sell their policies for cash. even term policies. i can't believe they're just sitting up there! sitting on all this cash. if you own a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more, you can sell all or part of it to coventry. even a term policy. for cash, or a combination of cash and coverage, with no future premiums. someone needs to tell them, that they're sitting on a goldmine, and you have no idea! hey, guys! you're sitting on a goldmine! come on, guys! do you hear that? i don't hear anything anymore. find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com. business. it's not a nine-to-five proposition. it's all day and into the night. it's all the things that keep this world turning. the go-tos that keep us going. the places we cheer. and check in. they all choose the advanced network solutions and round the clock partnership from comcast business. see why comcast business powers more small businesses than anyone else. get started for $49.99 a month plus ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card. don't wait- call today. >> i said i believe he's a threat to democracy, and we should be very mindful of that. >> so you will vote for biden? >> well, you know -- >> but what? >> are not there yet. i'm definitely not voting for trump. >> you'll still have to explain to me, sir. i respect you so much. take you for your service. i just don't understand smart people who don't don't get binary. how can you not be there after what you just said? >> there is no way i will vote for trump. every day that trump does something crazy, the door to voting for biden opens a little bit more. >> that's a slow opening door. >> okay, can we talk? you know it's bad when your own defense secretary says he is definitely not voting for you. and mark asper is definitely not voting for trump, and he's not alone. in fact, a new political analysis of this year's primary results show that donald trump's weakness with republican voters goes beyond the highly educated suburban areas that have swung blue over the past decade. they found that there is also a significant block of voters who did not want trump in more ex- urban red leaning counties, making it clear that while independence and cross over voters have boosted nikki haley and some primaries, a chunk of true republican voters still wish for someone else to be the party's nominee. but as politico also notes, the skepticism of trump doesn't mean biden has an easy road. so the big question for the president is, if he can turn anti-trump voters into pro- biden voters. david cluff was the campaign manager for barack obama's 2008 campaign and he also served as a senior adviser to president obama, and he joins me now. so good to see you as always. so just how deep -- how deep is this republican break from trump in your eyes? is it real? and is it something that biden can take it vantage of? >> well, michael, i would say it is deep enough. >> that's honest. i like that. it's good. >> and i think it's bigger than we had in '20 and bigger than we had back in '16. we probably knew most republicans who were opposed to trump. there's a lot more now. the way i think about it, biden won that state narrowly by about 20,000 votes with about 1,630,000 votes. let's say there's more third- party this time. maybe you need 1.6 million. biden is probably guaranteed -- some of that will be young people who aren't sure they are going to vote. some of that will be, you know, true independent. but there's going to be a big trunk that are republicans. and so in the six or seven states that determine the presidency, there clearly is a bigger swath of target voters that were available to biden when he won a '24 '16. that could not be a bigger deal. it's not all the votes you need to win a battleground state, but the great thing is, there's a lot of republicans like esper and others who can be the messengers. whether they, you know, volunteer to do so directly or indirectly, that are much more powerful than the biden campaign asking for votes. i think there's enough target voters out there, and i think there's enough good message and messengers to reach those votes. >> here's the rub as i see it in some respects. do you think the democrats underestimate the republicans ability to basically hold their nose and vote for trump? you hear the narratives out there that republicans do come home, and they do have a tendency to come home. because for them, it's not so much voting for donald trump as it is voting for the party. so how do you see cracking that particular part of the shell to breakthrough, and in the process of doing that -- is there a tendency, or maybe even sort of a troubling narrative where you overestimate the number of republicans you can actually pick up? >> well, this can seem very nerdy and boring, but politics is about candidates and messaging. but you know it's about math. a good campaign knows exactly how many votes they need to win a state and they know where those are going to come from. if the biden campaign were to overestimate the number of republicans they can get, i don't think they will. almost all republicans who didn't vote in the primaries are going to come home to trump. but you got a pool of voters out there, very sophisticated data and modeling and research. you can understand who is coming home, no matter how they vote in the primary, and who is actually open, either not voting, as esper fumbled around with, but ultimately voting for biden. i think you have to look at it is, how do you get a win in these battleground states? i think that's a small piece of the pie, but it's an important piece of the pie. particularly when i think biden is going to have all the challenges in the world of maximizing his voter turnout with young people. if you can do slightly better with republicans that he did in '20, and might help mitigate a little bit of leakage with young voters. >> david, you are one of the few political guys, professionals that i talked to that when i walk away from asking questions like the ones i just did, that i actually go, okay, he gets it. so i do appreciate that. here's the other side, though. trump likes to turn his legal troubles into politics, so let's do that. let's turn them into politics, because just in the last half hour, yet a gag order expanded against him, and posted the $175 million bond. so in this new environment, how do democrats use this kind of thing, this kind of issue about the vulnerabilities legally that trump has politically? >> well, i think that -- i don't want to overstate this, i think most american voters are seeing something about trump's legal problems. i think for those republicans you just talked about, and independents who don't want to return to four years of narcissism and corruption and circus, it's helpful. i do think democratic voices probably need to do a better job of explaining what these are, because trump and his allies are trying to say, we are the victim. these are shady business practices that no other business in america can get away with. you know, this is for paying off a star he was having an affair with. he's been credibly accused. i think you have to remind people. we talk about democracy, you can't shorthand it. you got to explain why that means, and you have to do the same thing with these cases. i think it will rally, you know, his base, you know, to the extent that he seen as a victim, but we see he's having real difficulty raising money, in part because he's diverting it to his legal case. and you know, turnout at the republican primaries has not been what you might think if people aren't enthused about him. again, i think it will help him rally the court, which is about 25% of the country. i think for everybody else, it's just another blip on the wagon. how many more can the wagon take? and at the end of the day, that's how i see this. are there enough people out there, either thinking about not voting are truly deciding between biden any third party to just say, i can't do another four years of this. and then it's the biden campaign's job to convert those people, and some of them are the republicans we talked about in the beginning of the show. >> democrats, get the bricks on the wagon. all right. we appreciate you. thank you so much. of next, somehow a devastating and deadly bridge collapse has become political for some members of my party. i will explain why when we come back. back. and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. options start at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate-lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information, and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling, so call now for free information. >> the white house announced today that president biden will travel to baltimore on friday to visit the site of the key bridge collapse. that comes after the president called on congress to put up the money needed to not only clean up the disaster, but to rebuild the bridges health. and let's just say the response from some in my party -- well, it's been less than enthusiastic. >> it's kind of outrageous immediately for biden, the idea that he's going to use federal funds to pay for the entirety of it. he doesn't refer to it as the american taxpayer dollars on anything. the first reaction -- in fact, the only reaction, just seems to be to spend. >> it's outrageous, but not to be outdone, kendra's woman nancy mace blamed the bridge collapse on the green new deal. he claimed that biden is still trying to pander to wealthy shipping companies and insurance agencies. yeah. let's look at the fact. and the fact is, congress should act quickly to handle one of the worst bridge collapses in the country's history, much as they did in 2007 after a deadly bridge collapse in minnesota. but to hear some of these republicans in congress talk about the tragedy in baltimore, well, it's almost as if it should matter to the country at all. and i can't say i'm surprised, given what donald trump has said about baltimore in the past. he's called the city the worst in the nation, a disgusting rat and rodent infested mass, no human being would want to live. residents are living in . folks, if you remember, those comments were directed at the late elijah cummings, the former congressman who represented baltimore seventh congressional district for over 20 years. so while it is notable that donald trump has been silent about this tragedy, well, guess what? it's just not surprising. in fact, i'd say it was asked acted. he has yet to offer any condolences or express any sympathy for the victims. he has not issued a statement even acknowledging the basic facts of what happened. and as someone who likes to boast about being a real estate mogul, calling himself a builder, you would think trump would jump at the opportunity to talk about it. or maybe even, heck, just blame the accident on joe biden. but even his campaign wouldn't respond to politico's request for comment. so look. trumps silence about this tragedy in baltimore says a whole lot about his unique contempt for the city and its residents. it's clearly trickling down to his allies in congress. and if he returns to the white house, it's hard to see him helping baltimore and its recovery in the wake of this tragedy. but we can certainly see him renaming the bridge after himself. we will be back after a quick break. stay with us. us. what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and >> it's official. abortion access will be on the ballot and lord of this fall. the supreme court issued a ruling a few years ago approving a ballot measure that, if passed, will guarantee floridians the right to an abortion before viability, which is about 24 weeks. however, as with allstate rulings, it can't be that straightforward. the state supreme court also upheld florida's 15 week limit on abortion today, which triggers a more restrictive six week limit that will go into effect within 30 days. so in other words, floridians will face a six week abortion ban in their state until november, when voters will get to decide whether to enshrine protections for up to 24 weeks. joining me now is florida state representative. she worked with planned parenthood in florida for a number of years before getting into politics. representative, thanks so much for joining us. i'm assuming you see today as a victory for advocates of reproductive rights. you expect this ballot measure to passing your state in november? how does it feel the ground right now? >> well, i have to tell you, the energy is incredible. people are motivated now that we have abortion on the ballot this november. but of course, the six week abortion ban is going to be devastating. in 30 days, florida will have a near-total abortion ban impacting our residents, but also women to the south you come to florida for access to care. the closest option for us will likely be virginia. when have to navigate the on the ground crisis and also staying focused on victory in november. >> that is a powerful statement that the closest access will likely be virginia. so then this broadens us out a little bit. because you have this big senate race in your state with rick scott running for re- election, and then the presidential race between donald trump and joe biden, how much does this decision change the political landscape ahead of november in terms of not just the narratives, but how voters are going to look at these campaigns? >> i think what is so unique about abortion access, michael, is that regardless of political affiliation, we all know someone who has had an abortion. i've seen so many republican women in my own state and across the country sit up and say that their party has gone too far, that these bands are extreme, and they are supporting codification, rejecting political interference into our personal lives. and so i can't speak to what this will mean for some of these top ticket races. what i can say is that we need to secure 50% on candidates, and 60% when it comes to ballot initiatives. in order to win, needs to be a broad coalition of folks of every political identity and background. >> to that point, the biden campaign told nbc news that it believes it has a chance to win florida. and that abortion will be a key factor in helping make inroads in the state. so in that regard, is florida winnable? both at the senate level, as well as the federal level with the president? >> as someone born and raised in florida, i am proud to say that florida is always worth fighting for. we need all boots on the ground. we need residents to vote and be ready to ensure that we not only could have -- we help ensure that we have elected officials that reflect the same values. >> it's interesting, because the group that was leading this effort to get abortion on the ballot this november collected well over 910,000 validated signatures of registered voters in florida. at least 150,000 of those signatures came from registered republicans, and something i've been saying for a while, which you is a native floridian know to be true, republicans also are very much aligned with the effort to keep abortions as an access opportunity, healthcare issue for a lot of republican women. how does that change the political dynamic, do you think? >> that is so well said. again, when you need access to reproductive rights, when you walk into a clinic, nobody's asking for your party i.d. and so i do think regardless of whether we decide to become a parent, choose adoption, or and the pregnancy, that's a decision between you, your family, your doctor, your faith, and not politicians. that belief transcends political lines. i'm very hopeful we will see those 150,000 republicans signed on, we will see that number grow and support this ballot initiative come november. >> florida representative. thank you so much. we will be back folks right after a quick break. they with us. us. clinically proven to help reverse the four signs of early gum disease. a new toothpaste from parodontax, the gum experts. you're probably not easily persuaded to switch mobile providers for a ne your business.om but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. all on the most reliable 5g mobile network—nationwide. wireless that works for you. for a limited time, ask how to save up to $830 off an eligible 5g phone when you switch to comcast business mobile. don't wait! call, click or visit an xfinity store today. >> that does it for me tonight. jan psaki will be back from vacation for next week's shows, and be sure to join me, alecia menendez, every saturday and sunday from 8:00 to 10:00 eastern for the weekend on msnbc. for now, it's time to hand this thing over to rachel maddow. that evening, rachel. >> at evening, it's so nice to see you there in that chair. how does it feel being here on prime time at night? >> the pressure is enormous, but i'm having fun. i'm going to leave all the breaking news to you, my friend, because it was breaking there for a moment. >> we arranged for all that to happen during your our. it's a form of hazing for you. you came through. you're in the green, don't worry. don't worry. and thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. really happy to have you here. right off the top, there has been breaking news in the last hour or so.in in a couple of the legal cases involving former president donald trump, one of these we have been watching for a few weeks. he lost a big fraud case against