between his spouse and conservative viewpoints an telling lies to the american public >> tonight, former fox anchor, gretchen carlson, on what need to happen for change at he former network plus, another shady real estat deal at the supreme court, a the chief justice dismisse calls for oversight. then, riveting testimony fro the woman accusing donald trum of rape. but we learn from each - date on the witness stand. and congresswoman katie porter on the maga vote to slas funding for medicaid veteran childcare, and more. all in starts right now. >> good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes. tonight, the supreme court o the united states is under a cloud of scandal it all started earlier thi month with republican feel tha conservative justice, clarence thomas, was acceptin undisclosed gifts from right wing billionaire thomas accepted gifts includin luxury vacations worth literally hundreds of thousand of dollars, and this really, truly special painting from man named karlyn crow, who has well, interests before the court. at least ideological ones. you can see him there on the right, sitting next to thomas. crow also bought property from thomas and what appears to hav been above market value, including, get this, the house of the justice's mother, where she now lives rent free. with crow as her landlord. but it doesn't end there just yesterday, we learned another conservative justices, neil gorsuch, has potentia financial disclosure issues of his own. according to a new report from political, google search has triggered for nearly two years to sell a colorado property he partially owned. just nine days after he wa sworn into the supreme court justice in 2017, wouldn't yo know it? he found a buyer not just any buyer, a guy name brian duffy, who's the chief executive of one of th nation's largest law firms which, of course, does extensive business before th supreme court. according to federal financial disclosure documents reviewe by politico, gorsuch mad between 250 and $500,000 fro the deal, but crucially, he di not disclose who the buyer was or that the buyer had business before the court -- national investigative correspondent at politico brok this gorgeous story and join me now heidi, let's set up just the basics of this transaction here, what had happened and what the conditions were. >> right, this was in 2017 and a few months before justic gorsuch was sworn in, we wer told that bryan duffey, who' the head of greenberg prague made an initial offer on thi home that gorsuch had been trying to off-load for about two years. it was then, when the new york times reported in march of tha year, chris, that gorsuch was, indeed, one of the co-owners it was two months after that i nine days after gorsuch wa sworn in that he finally finds a buyer. that buyer happens to be the ceo of one of the biggest la firms with a pretty robust practice, supreme cour practice, but for the court. so, you know, i reached ou when i saw that this happened, this timing, was just one bi coincidence or what exactl happened here? i did speak with mr. duffy, he told me that he did become aware of who the owner was throughout the course of this, but it's still unclear exactly when that happened like i said, there was this bi new york times story in march. this, then, went through in may, so it was two months befor that gorsuch actually wa identified as the owner of thi property here is the problem, chris there's no problem here, technically. there is no violation, no laws were broken, and according t ethics experts, that is th problem, that this doesn't violate anything that you ca have a transaction like this take place with this timing an with someone with such interes before the court and have it b completely opaque. >> yeah, so that's interesting to me. he didn't own this outright, i was a partnership, and there were some entity created to be the owner of that, that entity then sold it, then dispersed the profits to the people that were part of the partnership and in dispersing them, it ceased to exist, basically and so, in a very, ver technical level, he leaves the buyer blank because he just go the money from the partnership dispersing the money and everything is officially by th book, from the standards o what the disclosure requires and yet, we know nothing about the fact that one of the heads of the biggest law firm bought property from one of the supreme court justices >> you broke it down reall well, and here's what's goin to surprise most america people is that there is nothin wrong with this because th supreme court is the onl branch of the u.s. governmen and actually stands in contras to many of the higher courts i other western countries, i that there is no enforceable ethics code. we have that for the executive branch, we have it for congress not for the supreme court. this is becoming a red hot issue now with revelations about justice thomas, all th way going back to what happene with his wife and the text messages around the januar insurrection, chris. but now as well with these disclosure rules because thi type of an arrangement may hav really been flagged by a ethics enforcer in those other branches of u.s. government. we don't have it in the suprem court and for people who car about the integrity of the court, they say this is an example of why you would wan to have that code, because the you wouldn't have thes questions of disclosure and of what exactly happened with thi transaction, and why it went down around this particula timing, and with these two particular parties, with the head of a law firm here with s many cases that wound up going before the court >> yeah, in the case of harlan crow, you know, the offense -- didn't think it was a party -- that actually was kind of party in he had brought ideological interest before the court. in this case, it's just clear, -- big litigator, they've had 1 cases before the supreme court since gorsuch has sat on them. he's ruled in their favor eigh of those 12 times, although, you know, again, he's an ideological conservative that would likely be the case. we don't know, in the absenc of real estate deal. the whole point of this stuf is to remove these perceptions of corruption and dependence which, of course, we are stuck with because they've decided not to do anything about their ethics heidi przybyla, great reporting, thank you for sharing with us. >> as heidi pointed out, it is not entirely clear if justic gorsuch actually violate anything ethics -- in the financial disclosures it appears he did not, right by sort of the letter of the rule, he was disclosing what h had to disclose. and in that sense, it's less cut and dry than what justic clarence thomas has received from harlan crow, right? where he pretty clearl should've disclosed that and just chose not to, but that' the problem. i mean, fundamentally, this is one third of the america federal government one of the three branches an american people absolutely hav a right to know if nine of the most powerful judges in th country, the nine most powerfu judges in the country, not the most powerful people in th country, have financial ties in the past, ongoing, like a guy who is your mother's landlord that could cause, a the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. right now, the justice regulate themselves, when it comes to ethics. nice word, if you can get it even though, you know, judge being bribed is one of the like, central canonical acts o corruption that you look up fo a corrupt state. happens all throughout history all around the world, all th time, right? you don't want judges to get bribed people tried to bribe them all the time and in corrup societies, corrupt governments they do get bribe. so, there is a reason to b vigilant and it's perfectly legitimate, as an oversight undertaking, for one of the other branche of government to make sure tha their vigilant on this that, of course, is why th senate judiciary committee wants to hear from chief justice john roberts last week, committee chair dic durbin said justice roberts letter requesting either his testimony or the testimony of fellow justice quote, there's ample precedent for sitting justices of th supreme court to testify befor congress, including regardin ethics he is right. back in 2011, then justice stephen breyer and anthony scalia, you see them there testified before the senat judiciary committee on the rol of the court in american life, including the questions of ethics >> i think there are several different things i think one is what money yo can take or can't take, for th most part, whether the reporting requirements and som of the general ethic requirements that are, you can't sit in cases, those ar statutory, and i think the bind as period i've always thought so >> the real key to the distinctiveness of america i the structure of our government one part of it, of course, i the independents of th judiciary. there is a lot more. >> chief justice justice roberts doesn't feel like he needs a testimony. so, yesterday, he responded to the senate request with if you will forgive me for opining, a offensively dismissive letter. he attempts a half-worde attempt to gusty up his define refusal to cooperate by citing past president, except guess this all of the president he cites, include examples of past chief justices cooperating wit congressional investigations testified with court congress. he referenced chief justices william howard taft, charles evans hughes, who, guess what? testified before the senat judiciary committee and -- who testified multiple times i the house. he then had ways away thei testimony as being about, quote, mud vein topics mud mundan topics he also -- not secretary about th president testifying t congress noting, quote, no president has ever testified before the senate judiciar committee and only three presidents, 1862, 1919, an 1974, have testified before an congressional committee. okay, but it's worth pointin out that despite wrappin himself in a lofty language of the judiciary president, i am judge, let me see what president says, the only precedent he cites our chief justice is actually doing it then he doesn't actually say anything else. never makes an affirmative argument for why he won' testify or can't what's really left unsaid in the letter is basically a kind of constitutional hardball the chief justice effectivel argues, i'm not going to testify because you can't make me what are you going to do that is the question what are senate democrats goin to do about it senator sheldon whitehouse is democrat of rhode island who serves on the judiciar committee and has been pushing for supreme court ethics refor for years, and he joins me now senator, perhaps i took more offense to this letter than should've. maybe i got too worked up abou it how did you receive the letter from the chief justice replyin to your committee's invitation to testify >> well, two things stood out. the first was he felt oblige to attach a document to hi letter it was a five page, i would say, memorandum about judicia ethics that all nine justice and apparently had signed, a if that was going to solve the problem. and what was noticeable abou that, one, clearly they ar feeling some real pressure i they feel they have to put a addendum like that on to the letter, to tell the world, w take ethics seriously, and the unbelievably, the actual gap i their ethics is not that there is no ethics code. there is a judicial code o ethics not like there aren't statutes there are statutes it's the dammed no process for investigating or enforcing the code and the statutes, as to themselves they don't even mention that problem, let alone cure it i all the pages of their memorandum so, i mean, that's kind of sen the associate back legal work, coming from the chief justices of the supreme court >> that also seems to me there is a kind of deeper principle, to deeper principles one is a principle that is a cornerstone of the - american legal tradition, whic no man can be a judge in his own case that has been cited, if i'm no mistaken, by the chief justice himself in supreme court decisions he has handed down and yet, this clearly seems to be the case here, that they ar judges in their own case we judge whether we violated ethics, which is, again, nic work if you can get it i'm sure everyone would like that set up. but that seems insufficient on its face >> indefensible, i think actually, when you look at every other official in th federal government, all of the other judges who wear robes in the federal judge federa judiciary. nobody enjoys that kind of impunity and this is not som recent rule, even be a judge i your own case. it's so old, it's in latin [speaking non-english] this goes way back this is a core principle o justice that they are just slouching. >> there is also a question of the remedy and what it would mean, constitutionally, right? you have, i think, a judicia ethics bill that you've writte that what attempt to address some of this, right? >> yes >> if i'm not mistaken, yo know, when you hear that scali sound where he talks about the independence of the judiciary, there's a little preamble in chief justices letter, if recall correctly, where he sor of says the same thing, whic seems to imply a kind of constitutional hardball, which is, as a constitutional matter we are independent, and yo can't regulate our ethics. >> well, first of all, think about why it is the court need to be independent. a court needs to be independen so that it can be impartial. the real value here is impartial justice. and independents is a mechanis of shoring impartiality. now, they are using thei independence as a device t protect obvious partiality, to exempt themselves from ethics, rules, and statutes. so, there's kind of contortionist quality to tha argument >> let me ask you about th state of your committee. this was a voluntary invitation, but right now, one of th democratic senators on you committee, diane feinstein o california, has taken ill. she is unable to be in washington for committee votes it means the democrats don't have an outright majority on the judiciary committee. there are many people who thin this is a bad situation, there have been calls on you colleague, senator feinstein to resign. to the extent that she i unable to carry out her duties do you understand why people are making that call is that affecting th committee's work >> well, i think it's slowin down some judges, where ther is a pure partisan vote, because you have to use device to discharge the judges vote from the senate, from the committee up to the senate it takes extra time. and then on other investigativ questions, whether or not we have enough votes for subpoena is a different question. that, to, and up in the senate if it's challenge, so it would be, i think, better and things would run more smoothly, and will run more smoothly, one da and returns. but in the meantime, we ar pushing forward. we are continuing to do th investigation into the court's ethics shenanigans, and we are continuing to clear judges >> senator sheldon whitehouse, he sits on the senate judiciar committee, which just received a brush-off from the chief justice, thank you for joining us tonight coming up, new reporting o just why tucker carlson wa fired by fox news, as tucker himself, breaks his silence fo the first time we will tell you what he had t say and we will be joined here might former fox news host gretchen carlson, right in the studio, right after this studio, right after this sam who make...? ...everyday products... ...designed smarter. like a smart coffee grinder - that orders fresh beans for you. oh, genius! for more breakthroughs like that... ...i need a breakthrough card... like ours! with 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more... plus unlimited 2% cash back on all other purchases! and with greater spending potential, sam can keep making smart ideas... ...a brilliant reality! the ink business premier card from chase for business. make more of what's yours. how to grow more vibrant flowers: step one: feed them with miracle-gro shake 'n feed. that's it. miracle-gro. all you need to know to grow. how to grow delicious herbs: step one: use miracle-gro potting mix. that's it. miracle-gro. all you need to know to grow. when it comes to reducing sugar in your family's diet, the more choices, the better. that's why america's beverage companies are working together to deliver more great tasting options with less sugar or no sugar at all. in fact, today, nearly 60% of beverages sold contain zero sugar. different sizes? check. clear calorie labels? just check. with so many options, it's easier than ever to find the balance that's right for you. more choices. less sugar. balanceus.org i was stuck. unresolved depression symptoms were in my way. i needed more from my antidepressant. vraylar helped give it a lift. adding vraylar to an antidepressant... ...is clinically proven to help relieve overall depression symptoms... ...better than an antidepressant alone. and in vraylar clinical studies, most saw no substantial impact on weight. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, as these may be life-threatening, or uncontrolled muscle movements, which may be permanent. high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, weight gain, and high cholesterol may occur. movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. stomach and sleep issues, dizziness, increased appetite, and fatigue are also common. side effects may not appear for several weeks. i didn't have to change my treatment. i just gave it a lift. ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save. i've never been healthier. ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie shingles doesn't care. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today. we moved out of the city so our little sophie could appreciate nature. but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like? well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity... and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? what, we have a ton of mulch. give your small business one tech solution that checks all the boxes.on. it's all here with the comcast business complete connectivity solution. peace of mind with cyberthreat security. the power of the largest, fastest reliable network. plus, save up to 75% a year with comcast business mobile. the complete connectivity solution. from the company powered by the next generation 10g network. get started for just $49 a month. and ask about an $800 prepaid card. >> it has now been two day comcast business. powering possibilities™. since fox news unceremoniously dumped their 8 pm host, tucker carlson. we just heard from him from th first time in a video posted t twitter tonight, carlson share what he has learned from takin a whole 48 hours away from tv. not voluntarily. didn't take any shots at fox only a mysterious forces tha want to silence him. >> when honest people say what is true calmly and without embarrassment, they become powerful at the same time, the lawyer have been trying to silenc them shrink and they becom weaker >> we are not going to play th whole thing because really, wh needs to hear it notably, tucker never mentions his former employer and he seems to have a good reason fo that rolling stone reports that fox news executives have in thei possession a dossier of allege dirt on tucker carlson they are ready to deploy should he attack the network i the wake of his departure. sources say the file include internal complaints regardin workplace conduct, wit disparaging comments about management and colleagues, and allegations that created a toxic work environment according to new reporting tonight from new york times, - on the eve of the dominion defamation trial, fo discovered new texts sent by tucker one of which was, quote, particularly offensive, adding to the concern at the top of the company. now, we've heard some of the stories of allegations directl from tucker's former producer, abby grossberg, who worked for him, who appeared on thi network yesterday to talk abou the sexism lawsuit that sh filed against fox for a hostil workplace. of course, there is a long history of toxicity that grossberg describes at the network. back in 2016, you migh remember host gretchen carlson sued longtime fox ceo, roger ambles, for sexual harassment. that kicked off a cascade of similar accusations that ultimately led to ailes' resignation. now, gretchen carlson is speaking out about tucker' firing, writing in an opinio piece to the daily beast it's, quote, meaningless without rea change at fox news and gretche carlson, former fox news anchor, who opened the floodgates in the fight to expose harassment at the network, joins me now cofounder of the organizatio of - good to have you here. >> thanks for having me, chris >> well, what do you think o all of this? >> what's happened in the last couple minutes first of all, let me be clea that there is no relatio between tucker carlson and gretchen carlson >> it's funny, i should've noted that in my copy, but yes zero >> i get that all the time o twitter. >> an accident >> very quick to say absolutel not. look, i'm not surprised a hall of what has transpired here, but i think it's interesting that there's so much focus o what he may have said abou executives i actually think that the abbe grossberg lawsuit and he claims of continued misogyny and sexual harassment at a network that says they've clea up their acts since my case, i actually think that that's paramount in this whole thing. i think that had a lot more to do with why he was fired tha anything about dominion. >> we should say that her, you know, her allegations are just sort of textbook, i can't sa those allegations are true just allegations, she filed lawsuit. our textbook hostile workplace allegations. and they come on the heels it's not just your case. i mean, i was going back through the records here and there have been multiple multiple lawsuits, often settled, sometimes involving talent, sometimes involvin executives, over and over, and over, and over in that company around, specifically, an atmosphere of sexual harassmen and a hostile workplace. >> yes, but the interestin thing is that after my case, and after the firing of roge ailes, and so many other women came forward, fox made a big point of saying that they ha changed their culture. but i have two things to say about that the abbey grossberg lawsuit an her claims apparently prov that is not the case and number two is if they have changed so dramatically, why d they continue to still silence me and not allow me to get out of my nondisclosure agreement, which i have demanded that the do so? i mean, if they've changed then what are they nervous about, with regard to having full transparency in me bein able to on my own truth? >> you settled with the compan and signed a nondisclosure agreement, but you can't speak about your time there, right specifically about your case this has obviously been a tool that has been used not just at fox, but lots of places, and i fact, there's been a sort of push for some reforms to that, in the wake of kind of the metoo movement >> thanks our organization, -- oasis, we've been spearheading that moving. the past two bipartisan bill last year, one to eradicat nondisclosure agreements for sexual misconduct, pre-dispute cases in the workplace the other, to eradicat something called for arbitration clauses, which i the other way that you silence bad behavior at work on the first day of work, is 1 clauses, you have no idea what you signing. then something bad happens t five years later, for al practical purposes, you ar screwed because you've signe already that you will go to th secret chambers to adjudicat your claims. >> as i think we're seeing, an again, i can't speak to whethe abby groceries allegations are true fox denies them. it's also key, particularly, i a place, like, fox is a repeat offender in this respect there have been multiple settlements, multiple lawsuits we are now in 2023, where we have another one we have it on the heels of what's the largest defamatio settlement or the second largest, well, the largest settlement in all-time what do you think about th reverberations of the dominion lawsuit, on top of the reporting we have tonight that possibly texts that were discovered in the course o that lawsuit reportedly with the straw that broke the camel 's back? >> i think they're all interrelated because how do yo not had this spectacular discovery of dominion an unearthing all of these tax, much more information, you wouldn't then be giving more ammunition to smartmatic i their case you wouldn't then be givin more ammunition to abb grossberg and what she alleges happened, right? so, they're all intertwined. so, you could argue that the murdochs finally said, you know, enough, because tucker carlson has his fingerprints in all of these different areas. i still think, though, that he case, because they said they'v cleaned up culture there, still think that that on supersedes anything else >> you know, cable news is a word business, but one of th things that we know that folks at fox as a matter of public record are obsessed with our ratings. they are totally obsessed with them, to the extent that the have these minute by minute, they've got these, you know, folks who are sitting in editorial meetings telling the you have to do this. in fact, that was the origin if you listened to dominion' theory of the case in that lawsuit that settled, it was the challenge that was comin from newsmax and oan in th aftermath of the election, the were going from fully on the big lie. fox was sort of one step in, one step out, that kind of got fox to go along with it. well, last night, newsmax di five x, their normal viewers >> yeah, but that happened before >> i'm saying, they're back in the same place that got them there. >> right, so two full year later now, they have the sam threat because people have alternatives, right? for the longest time, fox wa the only conservative outlet now you have oan, newsmax, who apparently are going to go all in, no pun intended, for being completely right wing, right so, the people who want to tea the rhetoric of tucker carlson are now going to go over t these outlets. but that was the fear that was placed before fox two year ago. so, they're back to the same place now. >> i mean, there's something perverse and fascinating about them, right? i think our intuitions are tha monopolies are bad and competition is better, right like, competition is a goo thing. there should not just be one person selling shoes, ther should be three people selling shoes. in this case, when competition starts to ramp up, what do the compete towards? >> exactly, but i also believe that if this was strictly abou dominion, that they would've gotten rid of more people. they may still, but why was it only tucker carlson, right because plenty of other host were talking about the sam lies and the executives knew about the lies, and stil allowed it to be on their air. >> in fact, there are othe hosts in the dominion filing who are more specifically bein called out by the executives who are more specifically, you know, you seem to be endorsing -- is one example on fox business who seems to both be able to say in public and in private to be endorsing this theory. nothing happened there >> what i call out in my op-ed is that if fox really wants to have a genuine commitment to journalism, albeit with conservative point of view, bu at least truce, then the really have to clean house completely because what has typically happened at fox is when you ge rid of a bill o'reilly, you pu a tucker carlson in there, and they get even higher ratings right? >> why would they want that didn't want to do that, they want to make money. >> right so, -- >> they never wanted to do that >> they have a busines decision to make because i think there has been a complet shift in the old fox and the fox of the last 5 to 7 years >> i'm skeptical on that >> well, in this one way, abou specific - >> right, there is les control. roger is not controlling anything, yes, yes >> one could argue - >> the horses are buckin against the right. >> one could argue it's rudderless ship, that's how it got to this position one could also argue this ma not have happened under the ol regime >> that, i think, is a interesting one. ails, for all of his - false had a keener sense of ho to keep things out of th danger zones, like the 800 million dollar defamatio defamation danger zone tha they ended up with the op-ed you mentioned is i the daily beast. it's titled, firing tucker i meaningless without real chang at fox news. gretchen, carson, great to hav you here thank you so much. >> i want to go to the phone that jim remembering, he's a - who helped break this news story about tucker carlson's text messages. jim, nice to have you on what did you learn in your reporting about this apparen trove of previously unknown tax, at least the executive >> well, chris, thanks for having me and what we ar reporting tonight is that, and this was surprising to us, tha on the eve of trial, the dominion trial, the fox boar of directors found out what wa in these unredacted text messages and became incredibl concerned. i say i'm surprised becaus they had not seen it previously by the way, we also ar reporting that some senior executives have not seen som of this unredacted materia before this is right on the eve o trial. the board moved to start towar a potential internal investigation of tucker, but bringing in an outside firm to do it. and that's right as they'r negotiating settlement and it sets the path towar tucker's ouster, because the concern is that these redacted messages, should they ever become public, will be eve more embarrassing than the copious amount of informatio that was already out, and lead to other exposure and perhap in other cases >> yeah, there's a few lines i don't have the piece right i front of me, but there is on line where you say - along the lines of, offensive, crude texts, even over and above the racist comments he had made on air. then there is another referenc to, like, one specifically particularly offensive tex that the times has not seen, but executives saw this, there is a kind of mcgovern quality in this like, there's some, you know mystery box of, like, the most offensive stuff that is more offensive than the stuff you already know this is the story. >> well, i got to say, i would love to be able to report bu who is in that message if i ge it i get it but all we can say, and believ me, reporting we'll continue - i'm sure not at this new organization, but we still thought we need to report that much, because this one email really upped the stakes from the board and from executives. you know, we will try to figur out what was in it, but that one email was an extra kind of push on everything >> what do you think, i mean there's been a bunch o different theories here. and again, one thing that think is just so level set her is the places run by a 92 year old media mogul whose, you know, fired people for 60 years an thinks nothing of it like, it could just be that, you know, the boss was jus sick of it and decided to ca you, right >> well, yes and no. because look at the dominion case, okay tucker carlson is not a majo part of the substance of tha case dominion was pointing to 2 defamatory statements. only one of those statements took place on tucker's show. yet we have been talking s much about tucker throughout this whole case because hi emails have produced so much more trouble so, right there, we ar starting to get a cost-benefit analysis of how much trouble tucker carlson - that's a big deal. if you have future cases, now, okay, how profitable is he so, you see rupert murdoch as businessman, he's about money. can i say one other thing? >> you can, jim. >> well, thank you all of these explanations, people are pointing to this as if they're different stories about what happened here i think all of the reporting among all the news organizations, and none of i contradicts, it's no contradicting itself i think was putting together a picture of what happened and there are a lot of thing involved in. it we're writing about one thing, a major thing, but it's not the only thing tucker carlson was the only on accountable, this is ruper murdoch. he expects accountability when he expects -- so, he gives you a free hand but tucker carlson went to far. >> all right, jim ruttenberg thank you so much for joinin us on show notice with tha breaking news. still ahead, the woman who accused donald trump of sexual assaults takes the stand today or our reporters in th courtroom joins me right her with all theet dails, next with all theet dails, next i think i'm ready for this. heck ya! with e*trade you're ready for anything. marriage. kids. college. kids moving back in after college. ♪ here's to getting financially ready for anything! and here's to being single and ready to mingle. who's ready to cha-cha?! i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now, there's skyrizi. ♪♪ with skyrizi, most people who achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months... had lasting clearance through 1 year. 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. ♪nothing is everything♪ talk to your dermatologist about skyrizi. learn how abbvie could help you save. the promise of america is freedom, equality, but right now, those pillars of our democracy are fragile and our rights are under attack. reproductive rights, voting rights, the right to make your own choices and to have your voice heard. we must act now to restore and protect these freedoms for us and for the future, and we can't do it without you. we are the american civil liberties union. will you join us? call or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today. your gift of just $19 a month, only $0.63 a day, will help ensure that together we can continue to fight for free speech, liberty and justice. your support is more urgently needed than ever. reproductive rights are on the line and we are looking at going backwards. we have got to be here. we've got to be strong to protect those rights. so please join the aclu now. call or go to my aclu.org and become an aclu guardian of liberty for just $19 a month. when you use your credit card, you'll receive this special we the people t-shirt member card magazine and more to show you're part of a movement to protect the rights of all people. for over 100 years, the aclu has fought for everyone to have a voice and equal justice. and we will never stop because we the people, means all of us. so please call or go online to my aclu.org to become a guardian of liberty today. ♪♪ alex! mateo, hey how's business? great. you know that loan has really worked wonders. that's what u.s. bank is for. and you're growing in california? -yup, socal, norcal... -monterey? -all day. -a branch in ventura? that's for sure-ah. atms in fresno? fres-yes. encinitas? yes, indeed-us. anaheim? big time. more guacamole? i'm on a roll-ay. how about you? i'm just visiting. today writer e. jean carroll u.s. bank. ranked #1 in customer satisfaction with retail banking in california by j.d. power. took the stand in a new york city courtroom under oath testified i am here because donald trump raped me. it is been nearly three decade since carol says trump attacke her in a department stor restroom, and nearly four year since trump first accused he of lying about the encounter today for the first time, sh got to take the witness stan under oath, and told the jur quote being able to get my day in court, finally, i everything to me ilya marritz was in th courtroom, he covers the trump legal cases -- here reports for propublica. it's good to have you on the table. there's no cameras here, i was fooling is fairly wrappe actually, just what was it lik for after all this time, she's on the stand telling you story. >> it's an incredible importan day as well, because this jury has been selected because they are people who don't follow th news closely they didn't know all of th stuff that you just recounted, this for your saga that were supposed to do with all of the news closely are following e. jean carroll first coming forward to tell her story then the litigation this happened here's a jury of six men, thre women, they're hearing it from her most for the first - as she is leaving, he's coming in, they recognize each other, they know each other casually, he says he needs her hel buying a gift for a woma friend, he doesn't say who i is, she agrees to help and hav the fun flirty kind of adventure moving through the store up and up until they get to the lingerie section on the sixth floor, and that's wher she says donald trump locked her in a changing room and raped her. she described all of that with a lot of dignity and composure and, this was really her chanc to tell the story for the firs time and establish her as credible, believable sympathetic witness. >> she keeps sayingin hi account of it that she knows who donald trump is, he know her because she at that poin had a tv show, right she was actually working for a trail. >> yes she was on tv every afternoo for, and then i think it repeated at 11 she said, it was actually forerunner of an s&p see as sh explained it that's right, this cable network. her boss was roger ale and i turned out to be precinct agai because roger ailes had to tal about the time he was friend with donald trump in a tape wa shown in court today of roge ailes interviewing donald trum to show this kind of chumm vibe between them. carol said that one reason she and come forward with her stor at the time it was she was fearful she could be fired because roger ailes was friend with trump >> she said, i would never report something like this roger ailes would've fired me. he was friends with donald trump and they played that - >> exactly >> she talks about the actua assault. and, i found it -- her peaking this picture o this - she's had kind of like out of ron come out of a movie. she's having a sport interaction with the famou donald trump and she's thinkin yourself, this is great. is a good story, right at one point the lawyer so something like, well you'r flirting with him. she says, yeah and then it just turns >> so the word flirting came up, and it's really interestin repeated ways throughout the proceeding because, afterwards she is so angry at herself for following him into the changin room he didn't drag her in, h didn't put a gun in her head a she describes it, she followed him in and that's when h locked her in and she felt, fo years afterwards, that learnin and being spontaneous an having fun with the man is wha got her in trouble she says she has not had a romantic relationship sinc that day, she hasn't had sex since that day, so it ha profound personal consequences for her. she has not had a romantic lif since that day >> wow, that's really intense. >> yeah. >> i find something just remarkable about her choosin to tell the story when she did and then just pursuing it to the ends of the earth. it's not like it was easy to get there tonight. >> yeah. one of the - she didn't break temporary much, but particularly in th afternoon as her attorneys try to sort of asked her about the consequences for her and als somewhat to inoculate he against cross-examination whic will happen tomorrow, she di hear up a bit and she talked about having my day in court i everything and you know, it's 28 odd year later, it's going to be difficult case just becaus there is no video, there is no forensic evidence, it's he word against his, an definitely she will be - everything she says will b picked apart she doesn't even know what yea it was, much less what's wha month. it's gonna be a challenge, but to see a 79 year old woman in very composed way tell her story and come forward was unlike i've seen in cour before >> she says, i lost my reputation, nobody looked at m the same oh my god, the force of hatred coming up at me was staggering this is why she came out wit it and donald trump cultural liar she said that he was a hoax, and it was a liar. donald and his son hav continued to talk with the case, and today the judge had some stern words for joe tacopina donald trump's lawyer. >> that's right. on two occasions, he wanted th trump legal team and in th morning we learned that trum had posted to a social network trump social, calling her -- saying that she was lying, calling this lawsuit a scam, and the judge said i believe - words the effect of, pleas warn your client there could b a very significant additiona legal consequences if he continues in this vein then in the afternoon, we come back, and eric trump has poste to social media something alon the same lines, and the judg luis kaplan says you are sailing into harm's way. that's right, stealing i harm's way what is so striking about this is that earlier this month, was at the trump arraignment o criminal charges, the judge in that case warrants both lega teams, but we know he is warning trump's legal team i particular, to avoid words tha could incite violence or civil unrest then, yesterday, this judge ha words that are almost the same and again, right away, we hear from trump on social media his lawyers can't control him, and the more less admitted tha in court today >> this is a judge of many years, a sort of, very well-known judge kaplan says i i bring your she was talking t trump lawyers today, i'd b having a conversation with a client there are some relevant united states statutes here, an somebody on your side of to be thinking about that. that sounds pretty serious >> it seems like he is thinkin about something beyond contempt, maybe obstruction, i'm not a lawyer, i don't to say, that he's going there that quickly, it feels significant >> that was fantastic, thank you so much for sharing that i appreciate it still become, house republicans promised to push the economy over a cliff unles they can cut services an millions of americans rely on. congressn makatie porter joins me on what comes next afte this but do i have to give up sweets? if you work out a diet plan, nothing is off limits. you dropped it! i don't know if i can afford all these prescriptions. we've got discount programs, you've got options. i'm just glad i have you to talk to about this. that's what i'm here for. the cgm, still getting used to it. let's take a look. when you need to talk diabetes, our pharmacists are here. with powerful, easy-to-use tools power e*trade makes complex trading easier react to fast-moving markets with dynamic charting and a futures ladder that lets you place, flatten, or reverse orders so you won't miss an opportunity dude, what're you doing? i'm protecting my car. that's too much work. weathertech is so much easier... laser-measured floorliners up here, seat protector and cargoliner back there... nice! out here, side window deflectors... and mud flaps... and the bumpstep, to keep the bumper dent-free. cool! it's the best protection for your vehicle, new or pre-owned. great. but where do i---? order. weathertech.com. sfx: bubblewrap bubble popped sound. [music “this little light of mine”] in the world's poorest places, children with cleft conditions live in darkness and shame. they're shunned, outcast, living in pain. you can reach out and change the life of a suffering child right now. a surgery that take as little as forty five minutes and your act of love can change a child's life forever. please call, scan or go online to give a new smile. thousands of children are waiting. ♪ ♪ why are there two extra seats? are we getting a dog? a great dane? two great danes?! i know. giant uncle dane and his giant beard. maybe a dragon? no, dragons are boring. twin sisters! and one is a robot and one is a knight. and i'll be on the side of... the octopus. rawr!!! the volkswagen atlas. more room for possibilities. introducing astepro allergy. now available without a prescription. astepro is the first and only 24-hour steroid-free spray. while flonase takes hours, astepro starts working in 30 minutes. so you can [ spray, spray ] astepro and go. >> we have lifted the debt ceiling, so nobody would worry about whether the debt ceiling is going to be lifted, we di it the democrats have not the president wants to mak sure the debt ceiling is going to be lifted, signed this bill >> all right, that was how speaker, kevin mccarthy, sounding a little cocky toda after his bill to raise th nation's debt ceiling in exchange for massive spendin cuts passed by just two vote which, you know, means a win it has zero chance in th senate, it did not stop th republicans from cheering. now, the bill who's spending cuts would be borne, in part by tens of millions of americans on food stamps medicaid, to name just to bi programs the gop majorit targeted congresswoman katie porter, is a democrat of california was once the - she's also 2024 senate candidate and author of the ne book, i swear, politics is messier than might mean event. she joins me now congresswoman, you voted against this i imagine. what do you think of it as a plan >> well, it's a terrible plan. it's important for people to understand that the debt ceiling and our future spendin our two totally differen things raising the debt ceiling i about deciding to pay off th bills that we have already incurred it's about past spending and the budget negotiation about the future are about wha we're going to do tomorrow so, think about it this way. it's like someone said, if you this is what kevin mccarthy is basically saying he is saying, if you don't agree to live on half the food that you ate last year, we wil also stop paying your mortgage and you will be foreclosed on. all you're going to wind u then is both hungry an homeless that is really what he's tryin to do with this, is hijack our basic fiscal responsibilities, in order to hold all americans hostage to produce his draconian spending cuts. >> on those cuts, i mean, so correct me if i'm wrong, and i know, i may have lost a thread here, a little in the weeds. they don't actually, like, the just give top lines, right they don't actually spell ou what all the cuts are. they're kind of, like, these cuts have to happen and they'r either going to be, like enormous across the board cuts or if they're targeted, they will be doubly enormous than the targeted stuff, like foo stamps or medicaid >> right, they're basicall across the board cuts. so, we will see cuts to lots o things that i think ultimately republican's would not have th political will to cut. so, we are talking about cutting our aid to foreign countries, including place like israel. talking about cutting programs for veterans, we are talking about across the board everything except, of course you know, the defense budget they are going to talk about cutting. so, i think ultimately, this kind of across the board strategy is just a bluff to tr to gain political leverage against democrats and presiden biden. >> the president, of course, has released his budget an it's a very different vision it would expand the child ta credit, casts caps insulin a $35 a month, it would help states expand childcare options, there are some executive actions on the care options as well increased pell grants. paid and medical leave, minimum tax on billionaires. i mean, that's likely not to happen either, with kevi mccarthy as house controllin things how do you see the path forwar between these dueling visions? >> there's definitely going to have to be a negotiation here. republicans have control of th house, as you point out, s this is going to be differen than last congress, when president biden was able t pass the budget that reall reflected his full agenda. but what i'm going to do and what i think people on bot sides of the aisle in congress republican or democrat, should do, is look at each of the lin items in the budget and as ourselves, is this a investment of tax dollars that will return dividends to our economy and our country fo years to come? so, expanding the child ta credit does exactly that it's an investment in ou future workforce, it's money well spent investing in things like insulin makes it cheaper ultimately, for health care, because it reduces highe health care costs, caused by people who don't have insulin. and so, i think the goal her is to look at each expense i think it's appropriate for democrats and republicans to take a lot of responsibility for every taxpayer dollar. but it is not to just come u with kind of this across the board political gains an leverage >> okay, so there's a weir situation right now that goe the following way. the debt ceiling breach is a forcing mechanism to make deal, right? and the gop uses it as a kin of hostage situation, right? the economy will blow up unles you negotiate, you give us wha we want. and until people start to frea out about it, the, it does not work as a forcing mechanism. people tend to think the problems will be solved, s it's not happening there's a little fear that we, are like, sort of coasting towards oblivion because kevin mccarthy can barely, barel delivered this vote on a thing that's not an actual, real mill it's basically a messaging bill, and he could barely get majority on that like, his ability to actuall deliver the votes for that whe the time comes, are you worrie about that, about actually breaching the thing? >> well, i think that's wher democrats have the upper hand, which is that ultimately, th onlyway mccarthy is probably going to get there to pass a budget that biden will actuall sign is if we come up with something that enjoys some bipartisan support so, very clear that kevi mccarthy does not have control of his congress. this is not speaker pelosi, in which every vote is counted an double counted, triple counted as with his own election a speaker, it seems that mr. mccarthy puts things on th floor and hopes for the best today, he got lucky. i'm not so sure he will next time >> i mean, i think he had th votes today. they climbed down on their they upset the corn lobby. they upset the ethanol people, some ethanol cuts, and we al know that one of the mos important things in america' welfare for corn, which is a big and important north star for american policy making i want to ask you a question about your state senate seat that you are running for, dian feinstein. she's the current senator, she's 89 years old, if i'm not mistaken and is currently ill, supposed to attend to her senate duties that happens, of course, two members of congress in the tim illness, for whatever reason but there's some concern, give her age, that this aid last fo a long time and that the state of california, with its tens o millions of people, should hav to representatives in th senate do you think senator feinstein should resign? >> well, i think the way t think about this is as you suggested, to understand tha senator feinstein situation an the problems and challenge that it poses are not really that different from th challenges that are posed when we have a senator who has child and might be out for a couple months recovering we just had senator fetterma getting health care that h needed and so, i think the goal her is for congress to modernize to have a plan for what to do, for short term, when we have people who have health questions. we don't know what the lon term prognosis is for senato feinstein. and i think that, you know this will rule that the senate has, which is that the apparently can't replace peopl on committees without th entire senate consenting, is just a terrible rule o procedure. >> congresswoman katie porte up in california, thank yo very much, appreciated >> thank you >> that is all in on thi wednesday night. senator bernie sanders wil join me tomorrow night we had some breaking news to get into the show tonight. alex wagner tonight, start right now. good evening, alex